JimD82

so not a whole lot has changed I guess. I used to do pretty well on party. I guess that's definitely the best place to 2/4 it. I'm in the process of building back there. I'm close to clearing a 120 dollar bonus on stars i never cleared and I have over 300 bonus dollars on UB that I might shorthand 1/2 for next. I'm very comfortable with limit HE but I do get burned out from time to time. I'm thinking I should play some omaha8 to mix it up every now and then. Anyone know where there are good games for that?

I cashed out my BR about 5 months ago and paid some bills. I left 150 incase I ever wanted to make a comeback. I've made it back to 400 over the last 2 weeks and still have some longstanding bonus money on stars and UB. My question arises out of the fact that I've seen a lot of advertising by sites I never played on because the games sucked. But I'm wondering if any sites have become better to play at as a result of advertising. I'm looking to get back up to a 2k working BR and play 2/4 for some extra spending money, as I don't have time to get more serious than that. So wh0ring is still

there are more good players now because there are more people playing poker. there are more bad players now because there are more people playing poker.it is probably harder to win at the highest levels now because there's more talent. i'm talking about the levels where even rich recreational players generally don't play at.i think the more interesting question is what will happen if poker's popularity declines. i think in that case it will be a lot harder to make money because poker will lose a lot recreational player. however, the whole thing will eventually correct itself because when o

there are more good players now because there are more people playing poker. there are more bad players now because there are more people playing poker.it is probably harder to win at the highest levels now because there's more talent. i'm talking about the levels where even rich recreational players generally don't play at.i think the more interesting question is what will happen if poker's popularity declines. i think in that case it will be a lot harder to make money because poker will lose a lot recreational player. however, the whole thing will eventually correct itself because when o

there are more good players now because there are more people playing poker. there are more bad players now because there are more people playing poker.it is probably harder to win at the highest levels now because there's more talent. i'm talking about the levels where even rich recreational players generally don't play at.i think the more interesting question is what will happen if poker's popularity declines. i think in that case it will be a lot harder to make money because poker will lose a lot recreational player. however, the whole thing will eventually correct itself because when o

Depends on the game. Heads up at the end of a tournament is different than a cash game since one person busts it's over. Because you said you're playing heads up for 4-5 hours a night I'll assume you're asking about cash game strategy. Like the answer to most poker questions, it depends. More specifically, it depends on two factors: The first is the relation between the max buy-in and the big blind (i shouldn't have to say always buy-in for the max). If the big blind is large relative to the max buy-in it becomes more worthwhile to win a lot of pots pre-flop. More importantly, the struc

what do you tell a woman with two black eyes? :twisted: nothin you haven't told her twice already

no offense, but you know what's more irritating than that? when a bonehead spouse tries to do something they suck at and gets mad when his/her mate tries to teach them how to do it the right way.What do you know? You're just a man. You should watch Lifetime and learn to move heavy furniture, never criticize, take criticism, treat a girl like a princess while simultaneously respecting her independence, and always keep your mouth about the fact that what I just wrote has more conflicts than 18th century Europe.

Few things:I agree with what you said if the games are for meaningless amounts of money. In that case let her have fun and stop being a control freak. However, if she's playing putting money online and playing with your money or playing games that are for a meaningful amount of money then he has an obligation to teacher not to be a sucker. If she's gambling away serious money then he shouldn't just stand by and let her have her fun. I don't think anyone would want somebody splitting tens at blackjack with their money, which is probably the equivalent of the plays his wife has made.In my op

It would be blasphomos for me to compare my one-liners to Al Bundy's :-)

I couldn't help it. This kid was trying to bluff me out of every pot I raised. He dumped over 100 bucks to me in about a half hour. This was what was said after he raised and reraised my JJ with 2/3 off.ME: glad this isn't a tourney, we'd be accused of chip dumpingHIM: i hate you#2661855530: mitzoflick wins $7ME: i love youME: please don't leaveHIM: your a XXXXin idiotME: whatever you sayI was basically trying to goat him into keeping up this play (it seemed to work) because he had like 300 in front of him still. Anyway, should I stick to not chatting or is needling useful against idiots i

The games are beatable when the table is rediculously loose. I'm talking about when the flops are 8 handed and such. If you avoid the urge to bluff at all (missing with AK for example) and just play your drawing hands well and get max value out of your made hands they can be beaten pretty soundly but it's terribly boring. You're reduced to an odds machine (include rake and tip in pot odds). You also have to suffer through many bad beats. I just play 4/8. The player still blow and the rake is a small perentage of the pot.

Thansk for the replies. This actually happened to me last might. I lost to 9 two outers and head a set lose to a backdoor straight within a half hour of 4 tabling. Not looking for sympathy, but it seemed like a pretty statistically significant string of beats. I thought I might have a better chance of floppign a royal.

I know it's a complicated a equation and I haven't taken a math course in 4 years so that's why I'm asking. Thought maybe someone might be smart enough to figure it out. I was all reading and writing in school.

should've phrased the question better. Within a 100 hands, there are 10 played where the player is in on the flop a 90% or better favorite to win. The other 90 hands are relevant only for the sake of frequency. What are the odds the player who is the favorite will lose all 10 of those hands.