Absolute 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 You call me lame for questioning what one of the most successful tourney players over the last few years would have done? Give me a break. Gus CALLED...CALLED an all in with 10 8 suited against Antonio Esfandiari's 7-7. Great "read" I guess, but downright aggressive to the Nth degree. Aggression late in the game is typically what gets you first place cash. You, sir, are lame.Comparing yourself and your plays to Gus Hansen?Maybe you should send him your "revolutionary idea" and attach with it your comparison to him?I'm sure he would have a good laugh. Link to post Share on other sites
wrto4556 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I don't know which is worse.Your ideas about poker.Or your play.You should think about finding other hobbies.I quote so I don't have to retype it....ah, what the hell....I don't know which is worse, either.Your ideas about poker.Or your play.You should think about finding other hobbies. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 2, 2005 Author Share Posted March 2, 2005 You call me lame for questioning what one of the most successful tourney players over the last few years would have done? Give me a break. Gus CALLED...CALLED an all in with 10 8 suited against Antonio Esfandiari's 7-7. Great "read" I guess, but downright aggressive to the Nth degree. Aggression late in the game is typically what gets you first place cash. You, sir, are lame.Comparing yourself and your plays to Gus Hansen?Maybe you should send him your "revolutionary idea" and attach with it your comparison to him?I'm sure he would have a good laugh.If your goal is to be the best, aren't you supposed to compare yourself to the best? Moron. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 2, 2005 Author Share Posted March 2, 2005 I don't know which is worse.Your ideas about poker.Or your play.You should think about finding other hobbies.I quote so I don't have to retype it....ah, what the hell....I don't know which is worse, either.Your ideas about poker.Or your play.You should think about finding other hobbies.I may not be a great poker player but at least I don't steal from my friends, and at least I can spell better than a 7 year old.Wrto, you used to be a decent guy on here, ever since you came back after your one week hiatus for cheating, you've been a real un-provoked a$$. What gives? Link to post Share on other sites
wrto4556 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 what gives?Your comment that his forum is for good players, not doctors. Link to post Share on other sites
Absolute 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 apparently this forum is also for dillusional, defensive, and weak poker players.as for the cheating thingget over it you little girl. Link to post Share on other sites
KDawgCometh 2 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 apparently this forum is also for dillusional, defensive, and weak poker players.as for the cheating thingget over it you little girl.agreed. Isn't it a little hypocritical for JFarrell to be raggin on WRTO on something small like the cheating thing that happened, notice the past tense used in what I said, when JFarrell has admitted to being an anti-semite which to me is much much worse then anything WRTO has said or done Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 2, 2005 Author Share Posted March 2, 2005 apparently this forum is also for dillusional, defensive, and weak poker players.as for the cheating thingget over it you little girl.agreed. Isn't it a little hypocritical for JFarrell to be raggin on WRTO on something small like the cheating thing that happened, notice the past tense used in what I said, when JFarrell has admitted to being an anti-semite which to me is much much worse then anything WRTO has said or doneI never said I was an "anti-semite", you just inferred it from one comment I made. Once again, I am not against Jews. And is stealing from your friends really better than being an anti-semite anyway? Jeesh.And WRTO...I didn't say the forum wasn't for doctors, I said it wasn't for dumb doctors. Dumb doctors should save their money for other things like leather interior in the cars, and an extra vacation per year. Someone who plays that bad should never sit at a NL table with $700. If they do, then they're overpaid. It's all basic deduction. And I never said anything about Vet's, so don't get your panties all in a bunch, kid. :dance: Link to post Share on other sites
wrto4556 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 apparently this forum is also for dillusional, defensive, and weak poker players.as for the cheating thingget over it you little girl.agreed. Isn't it a little hypocritical for JFarrell to be raggin on WRTO on something small like the cheating thing that happened, notice the past tense used in what I said, when JFarrell has admitted to being an anti-semite which to me is much much worse then anything WRTO has said or doneI never said I was an "anti-semite", you just inferred it from one comment I made. Once again, I am not against Jews. And is stealing from your friends really better than being an anti-semite anyway? Jeesh.And WRTO...I didn't say the forum wasn't for doctors, I said it wasn't for dumb doctors. Dumb doctors should save their money for other things like leather interior in the cars, and an extra vacation per year. Someone who plays that bad should never sit at a NL table with $700. If they do, then they're overpaid. It's all basic deduction. And I never said anything about Vet's, so don't get your panties all in a bunch, kid. :dance:Who are you to say who this forum is and isn't for.J, you sir, are an idiot. You will not get any attention from me anymore. Link to post Share on other sites
Briguy 0 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Bad doctor's shouldn't play poker? WTF? I want as many underqualified, overpaid, simpleton, sons-of-a-senator, Granadian-schooled, poor-playing doctors at my table as is humanly (and humanely) possible! Ka-Ching! Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 2, 2005 Author Share Posted March 2, 2005 apparently this forum is also for dillusional, defensive, and weak poker players.as for the cheating thingget over it you little girl.agreed. Isn't it a little hypocritical for JFarrell to be raggin on WRTO on something small like the cheating thing that happened, notice the past tense used in what I said, when JFarrell has admitted to being an anti-semite which to me is much much worse then anything WRTO has said or doneI never said I was an "anti-semite", you just inferred it from one comment I made. Once again, I am not against Jews. And is stealing from your friends really better than being an anti-semite anyway? Jeesh.And WRTO...I didn't say the forum wasn't for doctors, I said it wasn't for dumb doctors. Dumb doctors should save their money for other things like leather interior in the cars, and an extra vacation per year. Someone who plays that bad should never sit at a NL table with $700. If they do, then they're overpaid. It's all basic deduction. And I never said anything about Vet's, so don't get your panties all in a bunch, kid. :dance:Who are you to say who this forum is and isn't for.J, you sir, are an idiot. You will not get any attention from me anymore.I don't need your attention. You're the one who needs attention, with your poker blog, and the fact that you "left" this forum after getting caught, only to come back a week later. I have no right to say who this forum is for. Doesn't mean it's going to stop me from doing so. Link to post Share on other sites
Metro 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 I'm puzzled. What's the difference? I'm creating the opportunity to advance or retract, while she's calling the same opportunity. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but seriously, how is one bad, yet the other good? Oh, is it because you don't like me? I seriously hope you're above that superficial nonsense, for your kid's sake.The difference that strikes me here is that she is already guaranteed to make the money. Regardless of whether or not you take the pot, she will still have the shortstack that is about to be blinded out covered.And if that's the case, I'm not sure why you'd play poker for money in the first place.I play poker for money in order to make a profit. $9 is profit. -$11 is not. $39 is more profit, but I am in no way guaranteed $39 regardless of winning this pot or not. Entering this hand, you are not playing for $39. You are playing for $9 or -$11. Winning the pot might help you along in your quest to finish 1st, but it in no way guarantees it.Once you make it into the money, then every hand becomes playing for $39, since you have already hit the profit barrier. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 3, 2005 Author Share Posted March 3, 2005 Entering this hand, you are not playing for $39. You are playing for $9 or -$11. Winning the pot might help you along in your quest to finish 1st, but it in no way guarantees it.Once you make it into the money, then every hand becomes playing for $39, since you have already hit the profit barrier.It's not about simply "this hand", it's about the potential that can arise from "this hand", both winning and losing. Implied odds."Once you make it into the money"...show me a tournament champion from the last two years that has eeked his way into the money, then gone on to win.If this is your strategy, you'll need a he.ll of a lot of luck to ever get first. It can happen, but not of your own volition.Poker is about making correct decisions at every possible opportunity. The less correct decisions you make during the course of the tournament will require more of a dependency on the luck factor. Link to post Share on other sites
Absolute 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 And is stealing from your friends really better than being an anti-semite anyway? Jeesh.Yes it is. Much better. Link to post Share on other sites
ghoti7four 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 Wow... I was actually on the fence about your initial question. I even think I was going to agree with your move all-in. Then I remembered something that made me realize this question probably doesn't have an answer... Poker is always situational--for example... While I agreed at first with your play as I read further I remembered that I hate everything you think or say. Therefore, I disagree with you by default. To take the point further if I was playing in a game with you god knows what I'd do or what anyone else would do... I think you undermine any reasonable statistical poker analysis and enter into some special case where people playing with you must attempt to determine what neurotic, self-aggrandizing, ridiculous move your going to make next. Maybe it works out well for you wtf do I know? However, I doubt it--I think probably your acting like a spoiled child isn't in the long run that profitable. How can we help you critique your hands when you think like a starving monkey?--Also stealing from your friends is bad as is anti-Semitism I don't really see a point of comparison. dumb. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 3, 2005 Author Share Posted March 3, 2005 Wow... I was actually on the fence about your initial question. I even think I was going to agree with your move all-in. Then I remembered something that made me realize this question probably doesn't have an answer... Poker is always situational--for example... While I agreed at first with your play as I read further I remembered that I hate everything you think or say. Therefore, I disagree with you by default. To take the point further if I was playing in a game with you god knows what I'd do or what anyone else would do... I think you undermine any reasonable statistical poker analysis and enter into some special case where people playing with you must attempt to determine what neurotic, self-aggrandizing, ridiculous move your going to make next. Maybe it works out well for you wtf do I know? However, I doubt it--I think probably your acting like a spoiled child isn't in the long run that profitable. How can we help you critique your hands when you think like a starving monkey?Wow, do you realize that...like 17 of your 29 posts are directed towards me? Would you like a poster? I have two to choose from...one is me with a fake beard, wearing a suit and a monacle staring into space (it's black and white)...and the other is of me wearing nothing but a pair of my girlfriends short-shorts in South Padre Island a few years back when I won a $5 bet from my brother. (It was college, I needed the money). I can send them both if you like? Incidentally, recent exit polls show that the black-and-white poster is actually more arousing in females ages 18-35. I'm not sure what the statistics are for males in your age group, but I have no doubt that these posters will stimulate your arousal. Link to post Share on other sites
ghoti7four 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 yes please... 1 of each.forward to.Alipi Naydenov3000 Woodrow WayAtlanta, GA 30319 Link to post Share on other sites
pawnstarr 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 Farrell was a 75% favorite to double up, who wouldn't take that in tournament play?The player who realizes that their relative standing in the tournament is the same if they fold - and wants to make more profit over time. The need to "double up to win" is best realized long before the bubble. If you get to the bubble and ONE hand pops or make bling - you're stuck with your position and how you managed time prior to that hand. Link to post Share on other sites
RonBurgundy 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 as a wise person once said:"mathematically, making the money is infinitely more profitable than not making the money."might seem passive, and i know ur down to 5 BB, but the short stack is down to less than one, and if your stealing so often, you could surely steal some blinds after he went out. I limp or fold. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 3, 2005 Author Share Posted March 3, 2005 Farrell was a 75% favorite to double up, who wouldn't take that in tournament play?The player who realizes that their relative standing in the tournament is the same if they fold - and wants to make more profit over time. The need to "double up to win" is best realized long before the bubble. If you get to the bubble and ONE hand pops or make bling - you're stuck with your position and how you managed time prior to that hand.Say what??? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest XXEddie Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 as a wise person once said:"mathematically, making the money is infinitely more profitable than not making the money."might seem passive, and i know ur down to 5 BB, but the short stack is down to less than one, and if your stealing so often, you could surely steal some blinds after he went out. I limp or fold.both of these options are stupidlimping with less than 10xBB is just stupid and folding A10 with 5xBB is...well, STUPIDER you need to be playing to win. If the 75% chance of him winnig occurs he is in good position to possibly even take 2nd even 1stfold, and youre trying to get 3rd, not 2nd or 1st Link to post Share on other sites
RonBurgundy 0 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 as a wise person once said:"mathematically, making the money is infinitely more profitable than not making the money."might seem passive, and i know ur down to 5 BB, but the short stack is down to less than one, and if your stealing so often, you could surely steal some blinds after he went out. I limp or fold.both of these options are stupidlimping with less than 10xBB is just stupid and folding A10 with 5xBB is...well, STUPIDER you need to be playing to win. If the 75% chance of him winnig occurs he is in good position to possibly even take 2nd even 1stfold, and youre trying to get 3rd, not 2nd or 1stLimping is fine he was in the SB. He didn't know he was 75%, and A10 is no lock. Its less than 2 to 1 against 32o. Playing to win is great, but even if he doubled up he would only have 10xBB. Take the $9 by folding, and play another SnG. Going out the hand before a player being forced to go all in is stupid. STUPIDER than folding A10 under 5xBB in this situation. Link to post Share on other sites
JFarrell20 1 Posted March 4, 2005 Author Share Posted March 4, 2005 If I paid for this SNG with the last $11 to my name, I would have folded. However, losing on the bubble in an $11 SNG isn't going to break me. The potential, in this case, I believe, outweigh the negative of busting out on the bubble.Since this wasn't my last $11 to my name, I was playing for first. Link to post Share on other sites
KDawgCometh 2 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 here he compares himself to gus hansen Link to post Share on other sites
bigkg 0 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 here he compares himself to gus hansenas much as i hate these threads, they are funny. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now