i disagree strongly with something i just read(danh)

[dscoot 0]

dan harrington hand analysis. u have ak, flop kings. there is a club flush draw on board. fourth gives u three kings. fifth makes the flush. u have one opponent , and are first to act. he says that if u ARE going to fold to a big bet by your opponent , u should not bet your trip kings. he says if u ARE NOT gonna fold to a big bet by your opponent, you should bet. i say, your check/fold makes your opponent more likely to bet big, perhaps bluffing representing the flush. and in the long run this check will cause u to fold the best hand some times. i say bet, and then fold to his reraise if u are gonna put him on the flush. dan says to bet if u will not fold to the flush , i have not prob with this, although i would sprinkle in some checks, to get more chips when your opponent bluffs w/o the flush, since you are calling him anyway.any thoughts out there? dan? me?

[adammc 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

[dscoot 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

dan harrington hand analysis. u have ak, flop kings. there is a club flush on board. fourth gives u three kings. fifth makes the flush. u have one opponent , and are first to act. he says that if u ARE going to fold to a big bet by your opponent , u should not bet your trip kings. he says if u ARE NOT gonna fold to a big bet by your opponent, you should bet. i say, your check/fold makes your opponent more likely to bet big, perhaps bluffing representing the flush. and in the long run this check will cause u to fold the best hand some times. i say bet, and then fold to his reraise if u are gonna put him on the flush. dan says to bet if u will not fold to the flush , i have not prob with this, although i would sprinkle in some checks, to get more chips when your opponent bluffs w/o the flush, since you are calling him anyway.any thoughts out there? dan? me?

This is very situational and player dependent. I have not read H on H, but I believe you are oversimplifying the analysis. What hand do you put your opponent on at the river? A hand u beat? Is he calling big bets on all streets w/ nothing or a draw? If he has a King he will call a nice bet but you check will push and you probably cant call because of how the hand played out.

[dscoot 0]

dan harrington hand analysis. u have ak, flop kings. there is a club flush on board. fourth gives u three kings. fifth makes the flush. u have one opponent , and are first to act. he says that if u ARE going to fold to a big bet by your opponent , u should not bet your trip kings. he says if u ARE NOT gonna fold to a big bet by your opponent, you should bet. i say, your check/fold makes your opponent more likely to bet big, perhaps bluffing representing the flush. and in the long run this check will cause u to fold the best hand some times. i say bet, and then fold to his reraise if u are gonna put him on the flush. dan says to bet if u will not fold to the flush , i have not prob with this, although i would sprinkle in some checks, to get more chips when your opponent bluffs w/o the flush, since you are calling him anyway.any thoughts out there? dan? me?

This is very situational and player dependent. I have not read H on H, but I believe you are oversimplifying the analysis.

the setup is u are early in an online tourny, with no reads on any opponents. i havent reached h on holdem II yet, but around half of the book volume one is comprised of specific situations like these, some times he'll say certain people are agressive and certain are loose. im just a little dissapointed, thats all, when i saw it was 357 pages i thought, wow, im gonna get a lot of stuff, but in reality 100-150 pages are hands like these which are basically useful for someone who has played a total of 5 poker tournaments in their career, imo. also , the first chapter of the book he mentions twelve factors or so that should guide how u play each hand, and your hole cards are the twelfth and final factor and he implies only a small factor, yet most if not all of the book is devoted to "how to play a-8 from third position, 6-7 suited from 6th position......etc"

[Suited_Up 2]

Wow, you couldn't be more wrong about that book.It's not his fault you aren't getting what you should from it. But many of us have.Maybe you should finish it, then move on to 2, and then re-read them. Might not be really sinking in the first time around.Stop trying to analyze the book and just soak up the information, because it's ALL valuable.

[capthowdy981 0]

His point was, by betting into your opponent and he raises you, and you ARE going to fold to a big bet - basically what you're telling your opponent is, "I have a big hand!". So naturally he is going to think " he has a big hand, I'll raise cause I know I can get more out of him".By checking to your opponent he doesn't know your strength, so he'll sell it for what he thinks he can get out of it, and in most cases it will be less than your bet, PLUS his raise.So if you think you're ahead, lead into him, he'll raise, and you'll call and (hopefully) take own a big pot. If you aren't sure if you're ahead, go ahead and check/call because it's a cheaper and safer option than betting/calling a raise. Besides, you might **** yourself and get priced into having to call an all in, when check/calling would only cost 20% of your stack.

[dscoot 0]

i guess i only have one point to make and i'll try to make it clearly right now. harrington says to ask yourself , be4 u act first on river, whether u will credit him for flush and fold to big bet. harrington says, if you answer yes to this question, then u should check river.i'm thinking, checking the river may induce your opponent to bet big when he does not have the flush, so in essence u will be folding the river occassionaly with tthe best hand. i understand its not great to value bet , then fold to raise, as this is a tournament, but the value bet is only costing u like 1/5 of pot, but folding to his bluff will cost u pot + his river bet.

[dscoot 0]

By checking to your opponent he doesn't know your strength, so he'll sell it for what he thinks he can get out of it, and in most cases it will be less than your bet, PLUS his raise.

this is very true. but not all opponents will value bet river. some will bet big with flush, some will bet big with worst hand. by checking / folding to big bet u are gauranteed to be folding the best hand at least some of the time

[Fluffdog87 2]

dan harrington hand analysis.    u have ak, flop kings.  there is a club flush on board.  fourth gives u three kings.   fifth makes the flush.  u have one opponent , and are first to act.  he says that if u ARE going to fold to a big bet by your opponent , u should not bet your trip kings.   he says if u ARE NOT gonna fold to a big bet by your opponent, you should bet.  i say, your check/fold makes your opponent more likely to bet big, perhaps bluffing representing the flush.  and in the long run this check will cause u to fold the best hand some times.  i say bet, and then fold to his reraise if u are gonna put him on the flush.  dan says to bet if u will not fold to the flush , i have not prob with this, although i would sprinkle in some checks, to get more chips when your opponent bluffs w/o the flush, since you are calling him anyway.any thoughts out there?   dan?  me?

This is very situational and player dependent. I have not read H on H, but I believe you are oversimplifying the analysis. What hand do you put your opponent on at the river? A hand u beat? Is he calling big bets on all streets w/ nothing or a draw? If he has a King he will call a nice bet but you check will push and you probably cant call because of how the hand played out.

i completely agree with you on this one. :wink:

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.

ANy time you want to make a last longer bet verses Dan H, let me know.

[stonecrow 0]

wow, im gonna get a lot of stuff, but in reality 100-150 pages are hands like these which are basically useful for someone who has played a total of 5 poker tournaments in their career, imo.  

I disagree with everything you just said. Even with your hand example to you described in the OP and your thoughts on it.If anything the hand analysis has greatly helped my own game and made me a better player. In what regard? It's taught me to really think about my hand and teach greater discipline over my game by making good laydowns as opposed to the old way of just calling and then being like "OMG i can't believe u played that!"With regards to the hand you posted? I agree with Dan saying that if you are going to fold to a big raise then check. If your opponent has the 'nads to make such a move hats off to him. Most of the time if villain was to make this sort of move and put his tourney on the line he has you beat anyway. If you bet out and he folds? You just take your bet back and grab the pot, gaining nothing from your bet.This is of course based on villain making a large raise. If he makes a medium to small raise then u can just call it. I dont know the hand anaylsis # your referring to though..reads are important as well.

[loxo 0]

HOH is a great book!Enough said.

[dscoot 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.

ANy time you want to make a last longer bet verses Dan H, let me know.

lol. had u posted this 5 months ago, and i took u up, id have won.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.

ANy time you want to make a last longer bet verses Dan H, let me know.

lol. had u posted this 5 months ago, and i took u up, id have won.

What fine results oriented thinking.. my offer stands for the next wsop

[dscoot 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.

ANy time you want to make a last longer bet verses Dan H, let me know.

lol. had u posted this 5 months ago, and i took u up, id have won.

What fine results oriented thinking.. my offer stands for the next wsop

solid! im a little drunk right now, but honestly , i doubt i will be able to satellite my way into main event next year, (tho that is my plan) --- last year i freerolled, but if im in, i will shoot u an email, if not to actually bet at least to brag and let u know i won.

[Eric Smith 0]

loli don't know if i'd bet on something like that. It's kinda a toss-up. Any chump that can play cards can make it farther than harrington in the main event. the feild is friggin crazy. I'd bet on harrington winning heads up tho. but you guys have fun w/ you bets. i'd be sweet if harrington personally knocked out this dscoot guy lol

[adammc 0]

Due to the volatility of NL heads up play, I would actually lay dscoot better odds to beat him heads up then to win a last longer bet in the wsop ME. Your sample size of... 1 (one, uno, 1), provides no proof of your ability to play poker. Erin Kanter made the final table. Once. Congratulations on your stellar finish though. By the way, if you are going to fold to a big bet no matter what, your read is that he has it. So leading into it would be retarded. The size of the pot, the odds layed on the call, and your read would all play a huge factor in the exact situation described. There is a reason he is a published poker author. And a reason we debate the finer points of his writing on an internet forum.

[Eric Smith 0]

Your sample size of... 1 (one, uno, 1), provides no proof of your ability to play poker. Erin Kanter made the final table. Once.

lolyour multilingual explanation of the number one made you look smarterand i see what your saying but i think it's the other way around. Hellmuth got knocked out on the 1st day in the main event this year. Now, if you pick any random nub from the feild he played that day, i think hellmuth has a sweet chance of winning heads up. can i get a witness?

[AshleyC 0]

Harrington on Hold'em is an incredible book, truly excellent. It taught me more about poker than anything I've ever read or heard.However, I agree with you on this point. Betting is what is sometimes called a 'defensive bet', it stops you being bluffed out of the pot, i.e. if you bet you're in effect saying 'i don't have a flush' so could get bullied out of it. A defensive bet prevents this as your opponent who may or may not have a flush may think you are value betting a flush. They are unlikely to raise unless they have the nut flush in which case you can fold knowing you were beat.

[oumarch110 0]

dan harrington hand analysis. u have ak, flop kings. there is a club flush on board. fourth gives u three kings. fifth makes the flush. u have one opponent , and are first to act. he says that if u ARE going to fold to a big bet by your opponent , u should not bet your trip kings. he says if u ARE NOT gonna fold to a big bet by your opponent, you should bet. i say, your check/fold makes your opponent more likely to bet big, perhaps bluffing representing the flush. and in the long run this check will cause u to fold the best hand some times. i say bet, and then fold to his reraise if u are gonna put him on the flush. dan says to bet if u will not fold to the flush , i have not prob with this, although i would sprinkle in some checks, to get more chips when your opponent bluffs w/o the flush, since you are calling him anyway.any thoughts out there? dan? me?

This is very situational and player dependent. I have not read H on H, but I believe you are oversimplifying the analysis.

the setup is u are early in an online tourny, with no reads on any opponents. i havent reached h on holdem II yet, but around half of the book volume one is comprised of specific situations like these, some times he'll say certain people are agressive and certain are loose. im just a little dissapointed, thats all, when i saw it was 357 pages i thought, wow, im gonna get a lot of stuff, but in reality 100-150 pages are hands like these which are basically useful for someone who has played a total of 5 poker tournaments in their career, imo. also , the first chapter of the book he mentions twelve factors or so that should guide how u play each hand, and your hole cards are the twelfth and final factor and he implies only a small factor, yet most if not all of the book is devoted to "how to play a-8 from third position, 6-7 suited from 6th position......etc"

Though the beginning is pretty straightforward and simplistic, I applaud the fact that he covers all the bases. Assumes nothing. The books quickly starts to build on itself...and Volume II is a masterpiece.Hang in there...its really worth it.

[Socrates 0]

To the OP - I don't think you'll get a lot of support going against HOH from either this board or the poker community including pros. Most have said this is the most complete and well written book that covers everything from basic concepts to the most complex. Unfortunately, I would argue that if you were just given those scenarios as he puts them in the book and had to provide answers, I'd be willing to bet you'd have a failing score the first time around. Its really easy to look at the answer and say "well yeah" - but its unlikely that you have the same type of complex decision making process (or nearly as good) as DH.

[SapphireTiger 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

**** this STUPID argument.Forget whatever the hell the OP posted...this argument is STUPID. Just because someone hasn't won 18 brazillion WSOP bracelets doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to critique analysis of a pro. It's GOOD to discuss analysis and possibly disagree even with the PROS. Theories and analysis of poker have not ended and stupid arguments like these don't make any sense.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

censored this STUPID argument.Forget whatever the hell the OP posted...this argument is STUPID. Just because someone hasn't won 18 brazillion WSOP bracelets doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to critique analysis of a pro. It's GOOD to discuss analysis and possibly disagree even with the PROS. Theories and analysis of poker have not ended and stupid arguments like these don't make any sense.

I agree.. but what does this have to do with me trying to get a braggart sucker into a sucker bet?and, when the guys posted the quote you have about, said braggart responded this..0. but ive only entered once, and made the top 70%, while action dan has likely entered 20 times.Such an answer suggests that he thinks he is better than action dan, and I want some action on THAT.about the orginal point, and his right to argue it.... um.. what was the point? All I know is a last longer bet against action dan is + ev for me

[NoSup4U 0]

Yes, I have a thought. How many WSOP final tables have you made? That is all.

censored this STUPID argument.Forget whatever the hell the OP posted...this argument is STUPID. Just because someone hasn't won 18 brazillion WSOP bracelets doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to critique analysis of a pro. It's GOOD to discuss analysis and possibly disagree even with the PROS. Theories and analysis of poker have not ended and stupid arguments like these don't make any sense.

Was thinking the same thing. 75% of the posts in this thread show no clear understanding of the OPs original comment/question. The first person to grasp that he's talking about blocking bets was like 2 posts ago.I guess everyone that flamed him for disagreeing with HoH doesn't believe in blocking bets huh? Oh wait, DN likes blocking bets....Anyone that wants to actually understand a post before flaming, feel free.Mark