Jump to content

too much heads up....and daniel slow rolls lol


Recommended Posts

Williams played aggressively and had DN visibly frustrated -- something I haven't actually seen before. But the level of play wasn't jaw-dropping to me.Williams was aggressive and picked up a lot of pots where DN had nothing. That's good. He was also aggressive when DN had huge pairs and gave a lot of his chips away. That's bad. Williams wasn't making many great reads, he was just being hyper-aggressive. I'm not saying he played poorly, just that it wasn't altogether impressive. I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why would you complain about a great, nay epic heads up battle?I though most of the hands played themselves, really. I was kind of bored by it.
That's exactly what I think of the majority of your posted hands, Smash. They all seem to play themselves. "T3off in MP2, easy fold". There are several elements in NL hold'em that aren't relavant or even available in limit hold'em, but I don't believe the reverse is true. Therefore, I believe NLHE to be a much more complex game than LHE.I've seen you make many comments about NLHE, which have been way off. That really suprises me, given your seemingly strong grasp of poker in general.I thought the final table was excellent last night, lots of subtle and even blatant things going on. Daniel showing that Q of Diamonds to Josh was perfect. It had Josh off of his game the rest of the night. He even mentioned it in the exit interview with Shana, which shows the importance, not only of the play itself, but of the mind games going on there as well.
This was one of the most disappointing WPT in a longgggg time. Possibly since it's inception.Limit and NL are two TOTALLY different games. Do you play limit?
Link to post
Share on other sites

smash, would you have preferred non-standard passive play? Folding when you are raised? Only raising when you have the nuts? That would have been really exciting! This is NL Hold'em we are talking about. What would have been exciting to you? I have always thought you were a jerk but this thread proves you are also an idiot. When we see you at a WPT final table maybe you can start spewing bs on forums, but until then keep quiet.Good post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly what I think of the majority of your posted hands, Smash. They all seem to play themselves. "T3off in MP2, easy fold". There are several elements in NL hold'em that aren't relavant or even available in limit hold'em, but I don't believe the reverse is true. Therefore, I believe NLHE to be a much more complex game than LHE.Yeah, it's not, you're wrong.I've seen you make many comments about NLHE, which have been way off. That really suprises me, given your seemingly strong grasp of poker in general.I imagine you jsut didn't understand them. This is unsurprising.I thought the final table was excellent last night, lots of subtle and even blatant things going on. Daniel showing that Q of Diamonds to Josh was perfect. It had Josh off of his game the rest of the night. He even mentioned it in the exit interview with Shana, which shows the importance, not only of the play itself, but of the mind games going on there as well.You're right, it's the Caddilac of Poker! Pot limit takes more skill to do well at than Limit, NL takes more luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
Link to post
Share on other sites
smash, would you have preferred non-standard passive play? Folding when you are raised? Only raising when you have the nuts? That would have been really exciting! This is NL Hold'em we are talking about. What would have been exciting to you? I have always thought you were a jerk but this thread proves you are also an idiot. When we see you at a WPT final table maybe you can start spewing bs on forums, but until then keep quiet.Shut the fuck up.Thanks.Oh, and good post.
cool sneeky with the fuck. i'm impressed for once
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
since when have you offered that much in the way of strategy to the forum either. Two pair beating running trips anyone? So what if he's relativly new to the poker scene, that doesn't mean you need to make a compleltely obnoxious post. Hoyt vs Philly Dilly Willy wasn't heads up, it was the entire final table and Phil finished third, keep p the good work JFarrell you continue to show how smart you are
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
My thoughts exactly. Well said
Link to post
Share on other sites
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
Phil + Hoyt werent heads-up, get your facts str8. And I agreed with the poster, and I'm not new to the game at all. I just think these were 2 of the best heads-up matches televised in a long while, thats all.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
since when have you offered that much in the way of strategy to the forum either. Two pair beating running trips anyone? So what if he's relativly new to the poker scene, that doesn't mean you need to make a compleltely obnoxious post. Hoyt vs Philly Dilly Willy wasn't heads up, it was the entire final table and Phil finished third, keep p the good work JFarrell you continue to show how smart you are
Dude you HATE me, KDawg.....D.amn. It's like seeping from your skin.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker. The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza. The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT. watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
since when have you offered that much in the way of strategy to the forum either. Two pair beating running trips anyone? So what if he's relativly new to the poker scene, that doesn't mean you need to make a compleltely obnoxious post. Hoyt vs Philly Dilly Willy wasn't heads up, it was the entire final table and Phil finished third, keep p the good work JFarrell you continue to show how smart you are
Dude you HATE me, KDawg.....D.amn. It's like seeping from your skin.
Has nothing to do with hate. Where do you get off dimissing someones opinion of what (I agree) were two excellent heads up matches? You disagree so you tell him he's a newb and has nothing to offer the forum? What nerve! Then you tell us what you thought was a better heads-up battle, and point to a match-up that never happened since one of the two players finished 3rd!!!Show us your overall tournament results by referring us to your entry at Cardplayer's or Hendon Mob's tournament results database. Oh you haven't cashed at any major tournaments?? Well then please never post anything about tornament poker again since you obviously have nothing to offer.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only been awe-struck by two heads up matches in televised poker.  The first was watching Phil Ivey outlast John D at the Plaza.  The second was watching Doyle proverbially sodomize Watkins on the WPT.  watching those events has genuinly inspired me to be a better player.
These were both recent events which leads me to believe you're relatively new to the game, which leads me to believe that you have little to offer in the way of strategy yet to the forum.But we were all beginners once. It's ok.What about when Hoyt B*$ch-slapped Hellmuth last year??
Your statement is silly, because hole card cameras are relatively new, so of course any events we discuss are also going to be relatively new. Using that information to discredit my abilities as a contributor to the forum... let me just say, excuse me if I don't take your comment seriously.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude you HATE me, KDawg.....D.amn.  It's like seeping from your skin.
no, I really don't becasue that would be giving yourself way too much credit. I like to point out bullshit when I see it, and your ridiculous statement was full of it. Who are you to say that someone has no value to the forum when your value is very little itself when you make those types of statements. For you to think that I actually spend time thinking about you is very selfcentered too, the reality is I coldn't care less about you and I'd be pretty upset with myself to be thining about some faceless mane on a message board when I'm out doing my thing. Get a life dude and stop making an utter ass of yourself it stopped being funny a while ago
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really impressed with David Williams' play. He kept Daniel out of synch for much of the heads up play. I counted at least three times where he check-raised on a total bluff. But he took it a little too far on one hand where Daniel was too invested to fold and ended up doubling Daniel up. It was a critical error, though not nearly as moronic as Josh Arieh's meltdown. As for the pocket Queens against A2, there's not much William's could have done there. He just ran into a big hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's exactly what I think of the majority of your posted hands, Smash. They all seem to play themselves. "T3off in MP2, easy fold". There are several elements in NL hold'em that aren't relavant or even available in limit hold'em, but I don't believe the reverse is true. Therefore, I believe NLHE to be a much more complex game than LHE.Yeah, it's not, you're wrong.I've seen you make many comments about NLHE, which have been way off. That really suprises me, given your seemingly strong grasp of poker in general.I imagine you jsut didn't understand them.  This is unsurprising.I thought the final table was excellent last night, lots of subtle and even blatant things going on. Daniel showing that Q of Diamonds to Josh was perfect. It had Josh off of his game the rest of the night. He even mentioned it in the exit interview with Shana, which shows the importance, not only of the play itself, but of the mind games going on there as well.You're right, it's the Caddilac of Poker!  Pot limit takes more skill to do well at than Limit, NL takes more luck.
If you think I am wrong about NLHE being more complex than LHE, then explain why, don't just tell me I'm wrong. I'm truly interested in your thoughts on why you think LHE is more complex than NLHE, so I would appreciate it if you would explain this as opposed to just rudely dismissing my opinion and making sarcastic remarks.Why do you imagine I misunderstood your comments on NLHE and why were you not surprised? Granted, I've only been studying NLHE deeply for about 18 months, making me quite the fish, but I have come to realize just how complex that game really is on many levels. We do agree on PLHE, as I feel that is complex as well, although it's fairly obvious the limits you have there too, especially in relation to table position.I think the fact that you can 4-5 table LHE ring games and make a profit is proof enough that the hands play themselves. It's also proof that you do have a grasp of LHE poker, but I highly doubt you could 4-5 table final 6 NLHE tournies and have decent results. I believe your logic here is flawed.I do agree that there is an element of luck involved in NLHE, but the same can be said about all forms of poker. Daniel might have been the luckiest tournament player in 2004, but I doubt it. He was Player of the Year in both WSOP and CP and I believe the majority of the events, which qualified him for those titles were NLHE.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would you complain about a great, nay epic heads up battle?I though most of the hands played themselves, really.  I was kind of bored by it.
That's exactly what I think of the majority of your posted hands, Smash. They all seem to play themselves. "T3off in MP2, easy fold". There are several elements in NL hold'em that aren't relavant or even available in limit hold'em, but I don't believe the reverse is true. Therefore, I believe NLHE to be a much more complex game than LHE.I've seen you make many comments about NLHE, which have been way off. That really suprises me, given your seemingly strong grasp of poker in general.I thought the final table was excellent last night, lots of subtle and even blatant things going on. Daniel showing that Q of Diamonds to Josh was perfect. It had Josh off of his game the rest of the night. He even mentioned it in the exit interview with Shana, which shows the importance, not only of the play itself, but of the mind games going on there as well.
This was one of the most disappointing WPT in a longgggg time. Possibly since it's inception.Limit and NL are two TOTALLY different games. Do you play limit?
Actually, Scrabble and NLHE are two TOTALLY different games. LHE and NLHE are the same game with one having no limit on the amount you can bet. This is what makes that particular game much more complex, even though they are the same game. This is so elementary, can't believe there is even an argument here.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what makes that particular game much more complex, even though they are the same game. This is so elementary, can't believe there is even an argument here.Really?So I guess Pot limit is thus less complex than NL because there are limits on what can be net on each street in PL but not in NL.You're a fool.Limit is *much* more complex than NL *expressly because* of the way betting is structured.This is so blatently obsious and apparent it's painfull to think someone could have ever missed such an obvious truth as you have and nearly unbelivable that anyone could possibly be slow enough to think the opposite were true.Please tell me you're joking or arguing it out of spite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what makes that particular game much more complex, even though they are the same game. This is so elementary, can't believe there is even an argument here.Really?So I guess Pot limit is thus less complex than NL because there are limits on what can be net on each street in PL but not in NL.You're a fool.Limit is *much* more complex than NL *expressly because* of the way betting is structured.This is so blatently obsious and apparent it's painfull to think someone could have ever missed such an obvious truth as you have and nearly unbelivable that anyone could possibly be slow enough to think the opposite were true.Please tell me you're joking or arguing it out of spite.
Well, I may not understand why PLHE is more complex than NLHE, but that doesn't make me a "fool". A fool wouldn't even be posting, reading and studying poker, they would just sit down and give their money away. It's slightly annoying to listen to you continuously call people names and berrate them as you do. I've seen you do it so many times and I know you've even been asked not to do it anymore on this forum, yet you continue to do it.Why did you need to add, "You're a fool" to your response? My opinion may be uninformed or misguided, but that's why I come here, to learn and share my experiences so others can learn.I started a new post about this and I'd really like to hear your wisdom regarding this issue. I also think it may help others understand the differences of the games as well.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Smash...i rarely ever post on this forum, but you are totally wrong if you seriously think that limit is more complex than NL. (BTW, pot limit is much closer to NL than limit....so dont bring it in to argue your point.)Limit is a mechanical game...you almost always have to showdown the best hand. NL has so much more to it. I dont want to get in to how its more complex because it is so blatantly obvious. I think you can get a computer to play extremely solid limit (nay, perfect) , but you can never create a computer who can master NL.Smash...are you serious that you think limit is more complex?ITS MECHANICALNL is so much more.You should try playing some...its a good game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Limit is a mechanical game...you almost always have to showdown the best handHi, you have no idea what you're talking about. Try playing higher limits, perhaps.The rest of your post also made no sense and isn't worth responding to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off don't know how you can even think that DN slow rolled there. An all in bet with the tourney on the line it isn't necessary to call within 5 seconds considering that the board was relatively dangerous as well.I thought the show was relatively good. But still found some of the play relatively reckless and not well thought out. Such as Arieh trying to bluff on the river and Wiliiams's putting DN all in on the flop with Q7 when DN was already pot committed.As far as limit poker compared to nl.Limit is much more of a mathematical game then nl but I dont think you can really say which is more complexed. Sidenote: Smash was wonder what limits you play?And the difference between PL and NL is is fairly minimal as it is a rarity to see bets greater then the pot in most NL games and even when you do the bet normally isn't much greater.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"The straight-forward, somewhat mechanical nature of Limit Hold'em means that most of the time you'll have to show down a hand."--Supersystem page 354.You were rudely saying?
limit was played much differently back when the first Super System was written. If you actually took the time to read that section, you'd notice that there s only one blind that is in play
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did take the time to read the section, and there's no need to belittle me, no matter how big it makes you feel.Smash is saying something is so blatantly obvious that only an idiot would fail to recognize it. It ISN'T obvious, and it isn't even necessarily true. I don't dislike his opinion, I dislike his attitude, and I also dislike yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...