killinitkg21

PokerStars Game #6243017839: Tournament #30627089, $200+$15 Hold'em No Limit - Level XIX (3000/6000) - 2006/09/10 - 21:36:20 (ET)Table '30627089 229' 9-max Seat #2 is the buttonSeat 1: blingdog (21836 in chips) Seat 2: Dunross (10824 in chips) Seat 3: BkAlex (61804 in chips) Seat 4: kiaser (19565 in chips) Seat 5: BraveJayhawk (119991 in chips) Seat 6: freezeplay (157468 in chips) Seat 7: Exclusive (25631 in chips) Seat 8: KillinItKG21 (41132 in chips) Seat 9: 1profiler (97499 in chips) blingdog: posts the ante 300Dunross: posts the ante 300BkAlex: posts the ante 300kiaser: posts the ante 300B

yea i heard that too... ive stolen a few blinds and stayed away from conflicts for the most part lately- nothin major and still well under avg. stack with 44k

PokerStars Game #6242659889: Tournament #30627089, $200+$15 Hold'em No Limit - Level XVII (1500/3000) - 2006/09/10 - 21:08:16 (ET)Table '30627089 229' 9-max Seat #6 is the buttonSeat 1: blingdog (24368 in chips) Seat 2: florio (36238 in chips) Seat 3: iMnotsoLucky (28815 in chips) Seat 4: kiaser (68667 in chips) Seat 5: BraveJayhawk (91853 in chips) Seat 6: freezeplay (115718 in chips) Seat 7: Exclusive (57072 in chips) Seat 8: KillinItKG21 (19791 in chips) Seat 9: 1profiler (44634 in chips) blingdog: posts the ante 150florio: posts the ante 150iMnotsoLucky: posts the ante 150kiaser: posts the

4th break sittin at 28k, havent won a pot in awhile... well under average but im still ok- i dont feel like bustin anytime soon

not much to post... will do when i get in a hand tho

table 229 im in with 32k... rail it up

haha thanks buddy... my aim aint workin right now but keep railin me

PokerStars Game #6241486963: Tournament #30627089, $200+$15 Hold'em No Limit - Level XII (500/1000) - 2006/09/10 - 19:30:09 (ET)Table '30627089 103' 9-max Seat #2 is the buttonSeat 1: KillinItKG21 (11399 in chips) Seat 2: iamlucky (13010 in chips) Seat 3: DrDorthia (37806 in chips) Seat 4: bigegypt (15367 in chips) Seat 5: tap5159 (7617 in chips) Seat 6: argenpoker (28944 in chips) Seat 7: stillernin (12125 in chips) Seat 8: Fryday (27241 in chips) Seat 9: lifeisjust (3610 in chips) is sitting outKillinItKG21: posts the ante 50iamlucky: posts the ante 50DrDorthia: posts the ante 50bigegypt: po

really good man, im a little above average with 10,100.. not really sure why i decided to get in this thing but i'm pretty sure it was because it was the first sunday i had off in the last 3 months :icon_dance:edit: busted the luckiest donk at my table and now im in 78th

first time in as well, really early but im sittin in 9th with 6340

Do I read this right? I mean I guess it isn't that far fethced but they took out .40 cents via rake on a penny table? Granted this is a $8.54 pot that you took down, but you still lost 22% of the total pot to the rake. I thought that they don't take a rake on the penny tables ANYWHERE!Ok. Before you go demanding your money back on pp Jeremy, take note that it was 4 % rake and not an insane 22! :oops: if there was a 22% rake on any site i'd quit poker right now

i think everyone's figured out that the nuts is the best possible hand at the given time. Thought i would just clarify the terminology of the "mortal" nuts. Contrary to popular belief in this post, the "mortal" nuts can be beat by the showdown, sometimes quite easily. Everyone is mistaking it for the "immortal" nuts, which is the same as the stone cold nuts. Immortal = it cannot be beat, Mortal = it can.

I got a good Matusow moment.. :shock: I was watchin' him the other day and he goes all-in on the river on a desperation bluff after he missed his 2 7 flush, the other guy calls and has an aces full boat. Matusow drops over 2k total on that one hand and he writes "oops lol". Extremely amusing to me that someone (especially Matusow) can just lose 2000 bucks and shrug it off like nothing happened.

I agree with you 100% that if Dags thought that it would be a coinflip situation that he would have to fold the pocket tens here. But as acesgotcracked said, if I was in John's position here I would have to feel that Hoyt was making a steal here and that he had less than decent cards... I mean, why else would he go all-in? IMO, if Hoyt does have good cards then he would just make a standard raise here (3xBB maybe) or even limp, hoping that Dags raises him and there could be more in the pot in a profitable situation for Hoyt. Going all-in in this situation screams STEAL to me. I mean maybe

potpumper43 wrote: Well, if you paid more attention you would've seen that hoyt was simply trying to blind-steal. Hoyt was in the small blind and Dags was in the big blind, it had gotten to a point where the blinds were going up decently fast and players in late position were raising with decent hands- but not premium hands. In this hand, it had folded around to Hoyt who got the idea to steal Dags blind figuring that he probably :roll: wouldn't have much of a hand. Dags woke up with tens, he made the correct read and called. How can you say this was a bad call when Dags had him domin