Question for Daliman

[Jman28]

Hey Daliman,

I was watching one of your HHs on teamfu.freeshell.org, and I came across a hand that I strongly disagree with.

I guess I'm just wondering if you think you made a mistake, or you think there's a flaw in my reasoning. (or both)

4 Handed. BB = 100

Dali (UTG)- 4215
Button - 3540
SB - 350
BB - 1895

You are dealt 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif, 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif and push all-in.

I understand that the other players should need a monster to call because of the short stack, but:

1) They may not know that and call you with TT+, AQ+, or something like that
2) The blinds are only 50 and 100, so you are risking potentially 3500 chips to win 150.

I guess that's it. What do you think? If you wouldn't push, would you play it at all?
Thanks.

-Jman28

(edit) You also go on to quote South Park. Is that recommended at the $200+15s?

[Rolen]

Far be for me to answer for him, but ask yourself this .. You are the button, and you have KK. Do you call?

[Voltron87]

Uh... yes... are you serious? If Dali pushes 4000 chips and I have KK as a 3500 stack, I am standing on the edge of the table, shoveling my chips into the pot. Please tell me you're kidding.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Far be for me to answer for him,

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed.

[ QUOTE ]

but ask yourself this .. You are the button, and you have KK. Do you call?

[/ QUOTE ]

Instantaneously.

eastbay

[Rolen]

Then I guess Dali's opponents find finishing ITM more enjoyable than you.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Then I guess Dali's opponents find finishing ITM more enjoyable than you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're suggesting that the majority of players at the $215 level will fold KK here, you're just flat wrong.

eastbay

[Voltron87]

You don't get it.

Hint in white:

<font color="white"> Do you make more money finishing in 3rd twice or 1st once?



And you're getting 1st way more than that if you go all in with KK. </font>

[Voltron87]

tag team?

[microbet]

You have a point. You were probably just exaggerating with KK.

55 I fold in a second and Daliman would be happy with that.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
You were probably just exaggerating with KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't been following this guy's literature.

eastbay

[Voltron87]

there we go. That's why this is a good push, 2G-3G stacks will fold hands you're behind (55, for example) and make stealing easier. But they still won't fold premium hands (AK, AQ, JJ+) if they know what they're doing and Dali has been pushing half the hands.

[Rolen]

Indeed. The convo goes..

Dali : Enough screwing around gasbag(s), i'm all in
BB + button with marginally (or not so marginally, depending on their tendancy) better hands : I fold

[Maulik]

If this is 4 handed, do you push at cutoff? What kinds of hands are you looking to play with these blinds 4 handed?

I'd be looking to push more often than I'd fold.

[Rolen]

You'd call with JJ if you were the guy with 3500ish chips?

Jesus, i'm a lot more careful with my guarenteed $400 finishes.

[Voltron87]

Yes, because I know JJ is whipping most of Dali's holdings and if I win 7000 chips here I am getting first most of the time. First&gt;&gt;&gt;Third.

[Rolen]

Calling with JJ here is abseloute insanity

EDIT : and i'll explain why .. This table is set up so completely perfectly for you it's not even funny.. You can steal ALL DAY from the small (second smallest here) stack, you're basically refusing a sure thing (a hell of a lot of chips from steals) to take up a massive risk when you don't need to.

These SNGs are not just about calling when you have the better cards

[Voltron87]

If Dali has Ax you think its a bad call? If you do...

[microbet]

What level do you play? I don't play the nosebleed levels myself, but I know you can't be anymore careful about at $400 third place than you are about a $20 third place.

I imagine scared money on the bubble is the biggest +EV factor in the big games.

[Rolen]

I KNOW it's a bad call if Dali has Ax. Your FE later on is loads more what you hope to gain from taking this chance.

[Rolen]

Yes you're right, but I would fold this in a 5+1 just as quickly

[tsevier]

I'm just a newbie and probably all wrong here. With that said, is there not a 3rd option besides fold or push. What about a substantial raise that would intimidate/pot commit the 2 small stacks but give you the opportunity to get out if the 2nd stack pushes all in? Feel free to slap my wrists for such thinking.

[Voltron87]

BWWHAHAHAHWHAHAHAHAHA

ok now I'm laughing for real.

[yeau2]

Agreed. This isn't the world series, where your payouts gonna increase 150 fold if you fold and wait for the short stack to drop. Your looking to win sit n goes, thats where the moneys at. As for JJ 1010 those are my two questionables as what I'd do.

[Rolen]

I get the feeling you have no idea what i'm talking about.

Playing 'OOh, THOSE cards look nice, I think i'll go with them!!!' poker just isn't for me.

[citanul]

god i hope you're not playing any 1000 chip game.

calling here with JJ here against dali should be instantaneous, i think.

i might have to run the numbers out a bit more in my head, but yeah, i'm pretty sure.

i'd like dali's play a lot better if the blinds were 100/200, of course.

but the point is that i'm folding 22-TT probably (eh, it might top out at 99, if there) and i'm foldling a lot of decent aces, as well as everything else in the deck, depending on how feisty i am, and how feisty i think dali's getting.

if you fold kk there, you have a serious leak in your game, and your roi is hurting for it. it is however, good that you are posting in this thread in the fashion you are, since you will hopefully get berated/explained to enough (probably scuba will stop by with an icm at some point) that you will learn the error of your ways.

here's the first step i guess in enlightenment:

put daliman on a set of hands.

citanul

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I get the feeling you have no idea what i'm talking about.

Playing 'OOh, THOSE cards look nice, I think i'll go with them!!!' poker just isn't for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither is money, apparently.

Folding JJ, never mind KK, here is a crime.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
I KNOW it's a bad call if Dali has Ax. Your FE later on is loads more what you hope to gain from taking this chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're going to pass up what's going to be (I'm estimating here) a 65-35 edge so that you can keep stealing from the second shorty? What happens when the real short stack doubles up and they have the same kind of relative stack size? Your golden goose will have died at that point. I think this is crazy talk.

[Rolen]

'What happens when the real short stack doubles up and they have the same kind of relative stack size?'

Even better, then I can steal from both!

[1C5]

1. I like Dali's play here, standard push IMO.

2. Rolen is a nut.

That is all.

[Rolen]

Heh, bah!

[1C5]

His play is SO good here because with the shortstack at only 350, the other 2 players will need a monster to call which the vast majority of the time they will not have which often means free chips ofr Daliman.

[citanul]

another point to consider:

when playing with a good player who acts before you on many hands, he will steal in all or almost all the situations that you were going to steal.

so consider 4 handed, daliman directly to your right with a big stack, 2 shorter stacks to your left. if you think that you're going to make up chips that you give away by making a bad fold (or in your thinking a "good bad fold" i guess) by stealing from the guys to your left, you're entirely wrong. what's going to happen is that daliman is going to raise well, uh, every hand. there aren't going to be any situations where it's a "great time for you to steal" that it isn't also a "great time for him to steal" and since position gets reversed in a lot of ways late in sngs, you're bending over for the man.

citanul

[citanul]

extra reasons why his play is so good:

people, even good players in other ways, are WAY too tight at key spots, and people who are not playing tons of these games, or who are playing recreationally, will often fold WAY too much to try to get into the money, not considering what else is going on.

citanul

[Baked67]

[ QUOTE ]
Far be for me to answer for him, but ask yourself this .. You are the button, and you have KK. Do you call?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just mind boggingly stupid... of course i call, anyone who doesn't is playing way way way way way to weak.

[Rolen]

I probably wouldn't call unless I was forced to (by AA), and i'm guessing that Dali's read on the two big(ger) stacks here is that neither would they - which is why he made the play

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
'What happens when the real short stack doubles up and they have the same kind of relative stack size?'

Even better, then I can steal from both!

[/ QUOTE ]

What we have here is the logical continuation of those guys who fold all types of hands PF on level 1 'to wait for a better spot'. That 60% edge isn't enough early? Well, obviously, when you can steal every hand, it's not enough late, either. Why call the big stack with KK as a mere 70% favorite when you can steal the next hand and be 100%?

Well, until that next hand gets called as a 2:1 dog, or until Daliman just goes all in every hand, or until the player runs out of bankroll. Whichever.

[lorinda]

a 65-35 edge

How many of the people saying to call with JJ actually know why they are saying it.

I know at least one does.

Remember: 2nd pays 3 units, and 1st pays 5 units, so you need some kind of edge to take this gamble, and I think a good few of those who call with JJ here do so for entirely the wrong reasons.

In an $11 I would often, but not always, fold JJ here.

Edit: Post destroyed by Citanul and Adanthar, we will never know who was just guessing now /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Lori

[1C5]

[ QUOTE ]
I probably wouldn't call unless I was forced to (by AA), and i'm guessing that Dali's read on the two big(ger) stacks here is that neither would they - which is why he made the play

[/ QUOTE ]

So if you were one of the 2 middle stacks you would fold KK here? Ha ha ha ha ha ha hahaha...........

[eastbay]

Dali pushing 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/KK-call.PNG

Setting aside for a moment the issue of whether players do or don't call here, is it correct?

Discuss.

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
a 65-35 edge

How many of the people saying to call with JJ actually know why they are saying it.

I know at least one does.

Remember: 2nd pays 3 units, and 1st pays 5 units, so you need some kind of edge to take this gamble, and I think a good few of those who call with JJ here do so for entirely the wrong reasons.

In an $11 I would often, but not always, fold JJ here.

Edit: Post destroyed by Citanul and Adanthar, we will never know who was just guessing now /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

See "Hold The Phone", please, Lori.

eastbay

[adanthar]

When the button wins this hand, he'll have a lot more equity than 7K in chips indicates.

Also, Dali's not just pushing any hand with an ace in it.

[citanul]

i agree that when button wins this hand, he gets a huge amount more equity than just the chips.

i don't know if i'd be PUSHING very many hands at all, but let's say that dali's standard raise here is a push, which is reasonable. eastbay didn't give him a set of hands that only contained ace and another card. but i do think that the KJs+ is too narrow on the "weak" end of the spectrum.

citanul

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
When the button wins this hand, he'll have a lot more equity than 7K in chips indicates.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why, exactly? 44% of the prize pool seems quite reasonable, doesn't it? It's blinds 50/100. Even given a locked 2nd, one double through by 1800 and it's anybody's game HU.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, Dali's not just pushing any hand with an ace in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's pushing a lot of dominated pairs, just as I specified. Look, blinds are only 50/100 here. I don't think he's making this move and incurring this risk with nothing.

But, give me a better range if you want.

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
i agree that when button wins this hand, he gets a huge amount more equity than just the chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, why? He's got 44% of the pool. Even given a locked 2nd, one double-up by 1800 stack and it's anybody's game HU.

[ QUOTE ]

i don't know if i'd be PUSHING very many hands at all, but let's say that dali's standard raise here is a push, which is reasonable. eastbay didn't give him a set of hands that only contained ace and another card. but i do think that the KJs+ is too narrow on the "weak" end of the spectrum.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

Weaken it up and I'll re-run it. Even with boosting button's equity over chip counts, I think we should acknowledge that this was closer than any of us thought apriori.

eastbay

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Why, exactly? 44% of the prize pool seems quite reasonable, doesn't it? It's blinds 50/100. Even given a locked 2nd, one double through by 1800 and it's anybody's game HU.

[/ QUOTE ]

The next hand will look like this:
Dali (BB)- 675 before posting
Hero (SB) - 7230
Button - 250
UTG - 1795

Hero's going to be very hard pressed to get out of the bubble without at least 8000 chips, especially if UTG's default raise isn't a push (it shouldn't be) [edit: I should say 'should be, but never is] and if he's good enough to reraise all in with 72o when button pushes.

[ QUOTE ]
No, he's pushing a lot of dominated pairs, just as I specified. Look, blinds are only 50/100 here. I don't think he's making this move and incurring this risk with nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's put it this way: I think KJs is on the very upper range of what he's willing to push here and 97s (or 97o) is probably somewhere in the bottom third but not all the way down.

[Rolen]

Revenge of the weak-tights!!!

[citanul]

so i haven't registered your powertools yet, but intuitively, and from some "duh" pokerstoving, here's the thing that gets me here.

making the KK's equity larger in this spot against a range of hands can happen in 2 ways.

1) you can add more hands that kk crushes

2) you can subtract hands

i think that either are reasonable, depending on game conditions, but given the lowness of the blinds, i'd be more inclined to tighten the range than loosen it.

specifically, i'm showing AA-44 Aks-ATs KQs KJs AKo-AQo as running 74%, which is probably enough to put this back into the "call" category from 72% with the other range. only daliman's going to be able to tell us his range here, but eh, there's really no but.

mostly what i'm saying here is, the more hands you put in the set that have an ace, the worse off kk is doing, the more hands without an ace, the better. but we mostly all knew that already.

citanul

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

specifically, i'm showing AA-44 Aks-ATs KQs KJs AKo-AQo as running 74%, which is probably enough to put this back into the "call" category from 72% with the other range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking at the numbers, you need a win percentage of just over 75% to make it breakeven.

Yes, this is much closer than I think anybody (save Rolen) expected. My intuition balks at that, though.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

The next hand will look like this:
Dali (BB)- 675 before posting
Hero (SB) - 7230
Button - 250
UTG - 1795


[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. You can even boost him to an extremely favorable 47% equity, and it's still close.

[ QUOTE ]

Let's put it this way: I think KJs is on the very upper range of what he's willing to push here and 97s (or 97o) is probably somewhere in the bottom third but not all the way down.

[/ QUOTE ]

If true, that's crazy. Are you seeing the blind amt here?

If he's pushing that wide a range from UTG, then he's pushing an even wider range from elsewhere, which means he's been pushing nearly every hand, which means that his image sucks, there's a good number of calling hands, and he's risking a boatload of chips to pick up 150. That's just reckless.

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Revenge of the weak-tights!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Rolen,

Don't get too big for your britches. This is about the only thing you've said in the past couple of days that is even close to debatable.

But I'm willing to give credit where credit is due. This is closer than I thought no matter how you slice it.

eastbay

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
That's just reckless.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

this is daliman we're talking about. j/k. kinda. no, really.

also, remember how horribly retiscent people are to call with say, AJ, even when someone's image sucks. i mean "i could just sit here and fold, and wait for that idiot with 350 chips to bust, which he'll clearly do, and then i'll have 400 bucks!"

citanul

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure. You can even boost him to an extremely favorable 47% equity, and it's still close.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a post on that subject ready to go but I'm gonna hold off on it in the interest of seeing where this goes for a while.

Suffice to say: If you give both yourself and the BB calling standards of exactly AA-QQ (maybe JJ) and AK, and Daliman knows this, which two cards is he correct to push with?

Also, this IN NO WAY implies he's been playing reckless all game or in fact at any point up until the SB lost all his chips.

[Rolen]

Dali's comments! Someone must have his phone # /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

Suffice to say: If you give both yourself and the BB calling standards of exactly AA-QQ (maybe JJ) and AK, and Daliman knows this, which two cards is he correct to push with?


[/ QUOTE ]

With JJ, about half, and this includes even the slightest of marginal +$EV. If you want to boost your equity more than 1/4% of the prize pool, it's QQ+,AK only.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, this IN NO WAY implies he's been playing reckless all game or in fact at any point up until the SB lost all his chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

We don't know how many hands SB has been short stacked, this is true.

I just don't get a woody for those 150 chips here and I'm not sure why anyone would. Save your image for when it can buy you something worthwhile.

eastbay

[citanul]

also would help: a link to the particular game that the hand came from, so that we can get some context of how dali was playing.

citanul

[Scuba Chuck]

Rolen, out of curiosity, how many SNGs are you playing a month?

I can see how playing this tight is more of a normal play for someone who plays infrequently. But, if you're playing quite a few a month, say over 100, I think you might want to consider that you're giving up edges that are costing you $$$.

[Rolen]

http://www.tightpoker.com/replays/pp_10142004_daliman_nl200stt5.txt

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
another point to consider:

when playing with a good player who acts before you on many hands, he will steal in all or almost all the situations that you were going to steal.

so consider 4 handed, daliman directly to your right with a big stack, 2 shorter stacks to your left. if you think that you're going to make up chips that you give away by making a bad fold (or in your thinking a "good bad fold" i guess) by stealing from the guys to your left, you're entirely wrong. what's going to happen is that daliman is going to raise well, uh, every hand. there aren't going to be any situations where it's a "great time for you to steal" that it isn't also a "great time for him to steal" and since position gets reversed in a lot of ways late in sngs, you're bending over for the man.

[/ QUOTE ]

To continue...

Daliman also knows that the psychology of a bad player is to fold premium hands when they are in your shoes. IMO, he's banking on it. It's in his thoughts, he's done the math, it's an edge he considers.

[Rolen]

I have played over 700 this month.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
I have played over 700 this month.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then, you're a good candidate to take some time and run the numbers. I think you'll be surprised how much easy $$$ you're missing out on.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.tightpoker.com/replays/pp_10142004_daliman_nl200stt5.txt

[/ QUOTE ]

ahhh, sweet irony

[Rolen]

Take a look at eastbays 'hold the phone' post in this thread

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
With JJ, about half, and this includes even the slightest of marginal +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, so he's correct to push 97s /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Now extend that further. He pushes and everyone folds. How many times do you think he's going to keep pushing?

PS: The short stack is not going to bust until Dali's good and ready.

[adanthar]

***** Hand History for Game 1053343975 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:05:57 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 10 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (600)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1195)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5165)
Seat 10: gobbles (3040)
SwordNShield posts small blind (100)
RoundersInc posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 7c, 2c ]
DarkStargasm raises (5165) to 5165
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
iMsoLucky0: swordnshield is your dadddy
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5465 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5465
SwordNShield balance 500, lost 100 (folded)
RoundersInc balance 995, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5465, bet 5165, collected 5465, net +300
gobbles balance 3040, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 1053345033 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:06:14 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (500)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (995)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5465)
Seat 10: gobbles (3040)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 3c, 6s ]
gobbles calls (200)
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
DarkStargasm raises (5265) to 5465
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5765 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5765
SwordNShield balance 500, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 895, lost 100 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5765, bet 5465, collected 5765, net +300
gobbles balance 2840, lost 200 (folded)

(2 hands later)

***** Hand History for Game 1053349475 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:07:22 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 10 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (300)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1495)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5665)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
SwordNShield posts small blind (100)
RoundersInc posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 9h, 4d ]
DarkStargasm raises (5665) to 5665
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5965 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5965
SwordNShield balance 200, lost 100 (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1295, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5965, bet 5665, collected 5965, net +300
gobbles balance 2540, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 1053350911 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:07:45 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (200)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1295)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5965)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 6c, Ks ]
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc calls (100)
DarkStargasm raises (5765) to 5965
DarkStargasm is all-In.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $6165 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 6165
SwordNShield balance 200, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1095, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 6165, bet 5965, collected 6165, net +200
gobbles balance 2540, didn't bet (folded)

Do you see why?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With JJ, about half, and this includes even the slightest of marginal +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, so he's correct to push 97s /images/graemlins/grin.gif.


[/ QUOTE ]

Making your assumptions, which I think are bogus.

[ QUOTE ]

Now extend that further. He pushes and everyone folds. How many times do you think he's going to keep pushing?


[/ QUOTE ]

He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

eastbay

[eastbay]

This is about as weighty as Rolen's posting of his folding AK and winning several hands later.

eastbay

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

[adanthar]

In order for it not to carry any weight, that yokel who limp/folded would've had to call an all in with his small to middle pair.

I don't care how many consecutive hands Daliman pushes; if they have 2K chips they are still folding 99/AT. It may not be correct empirically, but that is what most of the $200 population will do, because they are correct to do so in that particular hand. The absolute furthest anyone will go is maybe calling tens, with the occasional moron who minraises KQ and then calls the inevitable all in after thinking about it.

Individual hands and calling ranges thereof are not the way to think about this at all.

[microbet]

If you put Dali on a very wide range of hands, which I think he could have, QQ is still good, but not AK. If you put him on any two cards TT is still good, but still not AK.

I'm talking purely ICM.

Rolen did made the point that you do need a very good hand to call.

But, most of the respondents, I think, put the borderline at about TT or JJ, which I think is about right ICM wise with what Dali's likely pushing standards are. As far as PPs go, that is about where I would have expected, but I might have made a mistake and called here with AK.

Is anyone going to argue that AK is a call from the button? AKs is only a 67% favorite over Ax, 99+ and it would be hard to construct a more favorable push range for Dali.

As far as the OP's question goes, it sure is a good push for Dali, at least if he gives his opponants Eastbay's sit-n-go tool.

[Voltron87]

I call jacks or better. I probably fold AK.

[steeser]

No time to read the responses here, but I thought I'd weigh in.

I think this is a god awful play. I'm a regular in the 200's, and while I am all for bullying the table, the risk far outweighs the reward. While you will take this pot down a huge majority of the time, there are going to be times when the two stacks that can damage you will wake up with a monster. If it's the 2nd biggest stack, you've went from dominating to 3rd place. Play this hand like you would play AA at the start, raise 2-4X, and then if someone pushes, re-evaluate and likely fold. Only the most aggressive/reckless players will re-raise you with something less than a premium hand. You do this and fold, you are still the chip leader.

Being the chip leader can be as much about protecting your stack as playing recklessly.

If the blinds are 150/300 in this situation, then I can see a push. Otherwise, play it smart.

[adanthar]

AK is a clear call from the button solely because once again, the 7500 chips mean much more to me than either the ICM or Eastbay's calculator says they should.

But I admit AQ is borderline and I'd fold AJ, which is exactly why Daliman pushing top half (and probably top 95%) is correct. Knowing that he's pushing the top 95% makes no difference whatsoever to unpaired hands and only a small one to medium pairs.

[citanul]

your assumption that he plays AA any differently is a shitty one.

citanul

[Voltron87]

I mean AQ.

[microbet]

I sure wish I got dealt AA, KK, AK often enough that this was a big deal.

[Jman28]

I didn't mention these hands because I didn't really have much of a problem with any of them, only the one I mentioned in the OP.

I just really didn't like how small the blinds were in comparison to the push.

-Jman28

[Jman28]

which I still disagree with, this push was toward the beginning of Dali's aggression party.

Therefore, in my opinion, the opponents who didn't know him should not have put him on a hand as low as 44.

-Jman28

[draw2aflush]

simply put alot of poker is gambling and if ur not willing to call that big bet or go all in with KK thats crazy probably even QQ or AK, but i see folding everything else unless u have a great read,Just a thought

[raptor517]

yuck. i really dont like calling with AK here. maybe im biased, but i cant stand calling off my stack with AK. in this situation, i fold JJ probably 80% of the time, QQ maybe ill fold 30% of the time. AA and KK im in there no doubt. ok, well, queens ill get in there like 50% of the time. maybe more. hell, since its dali, im in there with 66 or better for pairs, cuz i know hes the type of sucker that pushes with 33 right there. holla

[microbet]

Are you talking to me? Are you talking to me?

[steeser]

[ QUOTE ]
your assumption that he plays AA any differently is a shitty one.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. I've played in SNG's with him before, and while it is an assumption, I'd say it's fairly accurate. Again for higher blinds, I could see pushing with any hand he would raise with, but in this case, I still see the risk as being very large compared to the potential reward.

I nearly added the caveat that it would be ok if he were to play AA this way, I can see it a bit more, but even if his opponents knew it were possible that he played AA that way, they would not fold a super premium hand to that bet.

[tsevier]

I'm a newbie, so please bear with me...

Is there any situation with the number of players left here and the relatively small blind size where a raise less than all in would be suggested. Or once we get to this point is it all in or fold?

[Rolen]

This is by no means a standard play, but the player in question is better than all of us so we can't critique without knowing his thinking. He's probably thinking that the two med stacks need extremely good hands to call, and that since they'd be dealt them less than his stack/150 it's worthwhile.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
which I still disagree with, this push was toward the beginning of Dali's aggression party.

Therefore, in my opinion, the opponents who didn't know him should not have put him on a hand as low as 44.

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes it more a better play than one might think...that's huge. Otherwise I dont like this play at all. I need big fat juicy blinds to even think about this...

[steeser]

Yes, this is basically true, but what I'm saying is there are some players who will call with any PP in this situation, especially after you have done this a few times, as they get tired of allowing you to run them over. They may also call with AQ, AJ, although getting less likely. That's why I don't think the 150 is worth the all-in raise.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because your calling assumptions are wrong, or will quickly become wrong.

Either that or you are assigning some kind of magic value to 150 chips that simply doesn't exist.

Take this to 100/200, and it's an entirely different conversation.

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at eastbays 'hold the phone' post in this thread

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew you'd be encouraged by this when you shouldn't be. You've advocated burning cash many times in the past few days. You have a long way to go.

eastbay

[Apathy]

I would be inclined to call with a few more hands (JJ,AK) if the short stack was to Dali's immediate left. As it stands Dali will not be able to steal for as many hands as people are saying he will, the shortstack is in the worst position for him. This makes QQ a pretty tough call in my books (and looking at ICM) and any worse hand (AK included) an easy fold to every Dali push. Most 200s players have a decent idea of this concept and that is why Dali can push almost anything here even at the 50/100 level.

[stupidsucker]

For some reason I was reminded of an old Strasser post of a HH. Strasser(big stack) pushed with a small stack on the bubble and the second highest stack said he folded QQ.

I personaly dont think the push was very great. 150 chips means nothing to the pusher. Id be more inclinded to put in a 2.5BB bet or maybe even a stall a bit and limp.

As for calling if you are the 3500 stack???

Count me in as the idiot tight ass. I fold JJ, and I consider folding QQ, but probably not. I fold AK in a hartbeat. Some of you say how awesome that 7500 chips is, but that 3500 chips is awesome too. I feel I am a shoein for 2nd place, and 1st is far from unatainable.

All of you people who put so much emphasis on GETTING FIRST PLACE may have something to teach me because I am not convinced yet that the risk is always worth it. Acording to the SnG tool this is a fold.


It is nearly impossible to tell how you all would really act because...
a) its not real
b) therefor not your money
c) you know what the pusher holds so being objective is impossible.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
That's because your calling assumptions are wrong, or will quickly become wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they aren't.

If Daliman has a completely random hand, and the button knows this, what is he correct to call with? Without having access to your calculator, I'm going to venture an educated guess that, because a winning percentage of 72.3% isn't enough, AK is not on that list.

In fact, here's a quick runthrough on Pokerstove:
Hand 1: 24.9882 % [ 00.25 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 2: 75.0118 % [ 00.75 00.00 ] { TT }

Hand 1: 27.9427 % [ 00.28 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 2: 72.0573 % [ 00.72 00.00 ] { 99 }

The breakdown is...somewhere between TT and 99. (AK is only 65% against a random hand and isn't even on the same radar.) In other words, if you know Daliman is pushing blind, your calling standards should go from 'QQ, maybe JJ' to...'TT, but probably not 99' and the software also says to fold AK no matter what.

Your opponents will keep folding. $200 players are not idiots; they know what Daliman is trying and will eventually loosen up *somewhat*, but only to the extent that the third time he does this they'll grit their teeth and call with an AQ (and still be mathematically wrong, although it's the software that needs fixin'.) They're never going to loosen up enough to where it's a real problem; eight hands in, by the time they even think of going up against him with KQ, he has already gained two thousand chips.

You're making the assumption that a $200 opponent will start calling with a hand like 88. That's not going to happen.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
Your opponents will keep folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

As long as the know the math they will (just another caution to lower limit players) This type of push doesn't really work at lower limits and even in the 109s I can't do it sometimes because the second big stack thinks 66 and AQ are the nuts.

Notice how pushing any two in Dalis spot quickly becomes incorrect if you widen the calling ranges of the big stacks even a tiny bit.

[adanthar]

Yeah, that's correct. You do have to have some respect for their play to do anything close to this.

But this is very classic big buyin big stack play and it works as well as it does for a very good reason.

[stupidsucker]

Rolen... are you RolenOnRiver?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

Your opponents will keep folding. $200 players are not idiots; they know what Daliman is trying and will eventually loosen up *somewhat*

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and you are underestimating how quickly this push goes bad when that starts to happen, as well as ignoring the nontrivial effects of a small stack call. "Loosening" to even TT+, AQ+ makes Dali's push wrong for anything but TT+,AQ+, and that's not even giving it any buffer whatsoever.

You are also trying to simplify the problem too much. Small stack is correct to call with a full 70% of his hands if he puts Dali on any two. Doubling him up removes the leverage you are overestimating but no doubt is significant and something you want to keep as long as possible.

Putting him on his correct calling range with the other two on TT+ only (which is also close to correct), now makes Dali's push wrong for anything but top 30% down to JTs.

eastbay

[DonButtons]

I agree with steesers statements here.

Risk a huge stack for 150 chips? I rather make a 2.5xBB raise, and fold to a all in except to the short stacks.

Also, these days, its usually not 4 handed at 50-100, and most 200 ers dont have that of tight calling requirements anymore to make this play that profitable.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with steesers statements here.

Risk a huge stack for 150 chips? I rather make a 2.5xBB raise, and fold to a all in except to the short stacks.

Also, these days, its usually not 4 handed at 50-100, and most 200 ers dont have that of tight calling requirements anymore to make this play that profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

The voice of reason.

You know what? I'd be willing to make a small wager that Daliman would admit to multi-tabling when he made this play, and didn't really notice the blinds were only 50/100, he just made his autopilot bubble play where blinds are "always" at least 100/200 or higher, and would reconsider the play on closer examination.

eastbay

[Rolen]

Yep, why, you see me do something dumb?

[nokona13]

Okay, I have an issue with this common wisdom from this board. A big part of the strategy here assumes that one of two things is true:

1) When it's short handed your opponents are "playing for 3rd" and will fold if you push 50% of hands.

2) Your opponents know that making a marginal call on or near the bubble only gives equity to all the other remaining players besides himself and the pusher.

I've found that neither of these things is true. If I push more than once an orbit with 4-5 left, I start getting called by crap (good crap I guess, ie the any ace, most kings approach), meaning it becomes WAY too dangerous to steal with crap like T7. I don't understand this "you can always just steal your way to victory" idea. I've found the opposite is true and you have to rely on the fishy propensity to overvalue hands and always stack someone or come close on your great hands, stealing just enough to keep your head above water on the bubble.

I'll vouch for the fact that you can often just fold your way to the money on PP, but you've gott win some actual hands, and not just in heads up (most of the time) to finish first...

Just my short experience with online STT...

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Putting him on his correct calling range with the other two on TT+ only (which is also close to correct), now makes Dali's push wrong for anything but top 30% down to JTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the time the short stack knows that, two things have happened: the blinds have gone up, and Daliman should already be prepared to dump chips to the shortie.

Keeping the short stack alive is about half the point of the whole exercise and losing chips to him is a *good* thing (as long as he doesn't double up before the blinds go up, which essentially means it matters at what point during the 50/100 level Dali starts doing this. I'll happily concede that much.)

[pooh74]

One thing that I havent seen discussed here is when you have a situation where you have two large stacks and two small ones, the advantage of gaining chips at the mid levels creates an "equitable distance" (for lack of better term) between yourself (chipleader) and the second stack which is not only about X chips you gain, but the equity that accompanies having them...there is not a large window of time to accomplish this and here Dali is taking advantage of that I believe.

Here, Dali is BS, but not by so much...by creating a larger chip gap between him and second stack has a compounding effect on Dali's edges over time. (2nd stack's calling range narrows).

Making this seem not as bad even more so...IOW, its not all about risking 3500 for 150....

Just flame me if I am simply overstating the obvious...just felt it was a minor subtlety that escapes the math.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
(as long as he doesn't double up before the blinds go up, which essentially means it matters at what point during the 50/100 level Dali starts doing this. I'll happily concede that much.)

[/ QUOTE ]

And I'll concede that this context matters.

In any case, I prefer the reads estimated by experienced $215 players like Don Buttons over assuming that all players in this $215 are bubble experts and are going to play correctly and not start tilting into pride/frustration calls relatively quickly.

I've also watched and data-mined enough $215s to know that this is not at all unlikely.

eastbay

[TheUsher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with steesers statements here.

Risk a huge stack for 150 chips? I rather make a 2.5xBB raise, and fold to a all in except to the short stacks.

Also, these days, its usually not 4 handed at 50-100, and most 200 ers dont have that of tight calling requirements anymore to make this play that profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

The voice of reason.

You know what? I'd be willing to make a small wager that Daliman would admit to multi-tabling when he made this play, and didn't really notice the blinds were only 50/100, he just made his autopilot bubble play where blinds are "always" at least 100/200 or higher, and would reconsider the play on closer examination.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say the play is fine if the blinds are higher but L:4 is pushing it a bit to be pushing all-in. Also, the original 44 hand was the last hand of the level so maybe you're right that he didn't notice. He did start chatting it up a few hands later though.

I'd be more interested in the thought process behind this hand:

***** Hand History for Game 1053339843 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:04:54 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (300)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1795)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (4365)
Seat 10: gobbles (3540)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ Js, Jh ]
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc raises (300) to 400
DarkStargasm raises (400) to 600
RoundersInc calls (200)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 7d, 4s, 5h ]
RoundersInc checks.
DarkStargasm bets (200)
RoundersInc folds.
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1400
Board: [ 7d 4s 5h ]
SwordNShield balance 300, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1195, lost 600 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 4965, bet 800, collected 1400, net +600
gobbles balance 3540, didn't bet (folded)

I could see a number of reasons why it was played this way, but this was the next hand to the original one posted and the first hand of L:5.



Oh and this guy's an idiot:
***** Hand History for Game 1053352129 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:08:04 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (200)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1095)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (6165)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
DarkStargasm posts small blind (100)
gobbles posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ Kc, 6c ]
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc raises (400) to 400
DarkStargasm raises (6065) to 6165
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
RoundersInc calls (695)
RoundersInc is all-In.
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 2c, Jh, 2d ]
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 6s ]
** Dealing River ** : [ Ac ]
Creating Main Pot with $2390 with RoundersInc
Creating Side Pot 1 with $5070 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 2390 | Side Pot 1: 5070
Board: [ 2c Jh 2d 6s Ac ]
SwordNShield balance 200, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 0, lost 1095 [ Qd Ks ] [ a pair of twos -- Ac,Ks,Qd,2c,2d ]
DarkStargasm balance 7460, bet 6165, collected 7460, net +1295 [ Kc 6c ] [ two pairs, sixes and twos -- Ac,6c,6s,2c,2d ]
gobbles balance 2340, lost 200 (folded)

RoundersInc finished in fourth place.
DarkStargasm: lol
gobbles: lol
RoundersInc: wow
gobbles: i had 99 there
RoundersInc: thats rediculous
DarkStargasm: yer own fault
gobbles: shoulda waited for money rounders
DarkStargasm: RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!
iMsoLucky0: shut up, tubby
iMsoLucky0: well then you are going to cost yourself lots of money
RoundersInc: and rape you over and over

[davehwm]

I'd feel kinda cool if I was Daliman and logged into 2+2 to see an 11 page thread about a hand that I played.

[stupidsucker]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, why, you see me do something dumb?

[/ QUOTE ]

Almost. Maybe it was all talk, but you got a pretty big head as the big stack on the bubble with me once.

***** Hand History for Game 1808608953 *****
300/600 TOURNEYTEXASHTGAMETABLE (NL) (TOURNAMENT 10798699) - MON MAR 28 18:30:52 EST 2005
Table Table 13974 (Real Money) -- Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Seat11 (2375)
Seat 3: RolenOnRiver (4680)
Seat 8: nolimping (260)
Seat 9: StealnStacks (685)
Seat11 posts small blind (150)
RolenOnRiver posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Seat11 [ Js, Jd ]
nolimping folds.
StealnStacks folds.
Seat11 raises (2225) to 2375
Seat11 is all-In.
nolimping: call
StealnStacks: thats what im sayin
RolenOnRiver: i probably should for his impudence
RolenOnRiver: A5s
RolenOnRiver folds.
Creating Main Pot with $2675 with Seat11
Seat11: call away lol
** Summary **
Main Pot: 2675
Seat11 balance 2675, bet 2375, collected 2675, net +300 [ Js Jd ] [ a pair of jacks -- Js,Jd ]
RolenOnRiver balance 4380, lost 300 (folded)
nolimping balance 260, didn't bet (folded)
StealnStacks balance 685, didn't bet (folded)

HU you beat me. Your HU play sucks IMO if this game was your normal showing, its full of min raises. But your hand selection seems ok.

You won two important races. a 60/40 when you were behind, and then a domination my TT Vs your KT for the final pot.

This is the only game we have played together. Kinda funny how you rant here about how tight of a caller you are, but you thought and thought about throwing away a nice chunk to me with a horrible hand like A5s all because you were the mean big stack and I should have more manors I guess. How dare I push with JJ from the SB. You should have taught me a lesson for my impudence.

[TheUsher]

pwned!@ /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[Rolen]

Ah yes, I remember that one. Min raises work for me HU, if you want to find out whether I have a hand you're gonna have to go allin, which gives me the option. The A5s was, of course, all talk.

[TheUsher]

[ QUOTE ]
Ah yes, I remember that one. Min raises work for me HU, if you want to find out whether I have a hand you're gonna have to go allin, which gives me the option. The A5s was, of course, all talk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just wait until people catch on, call the mini-raises and bluff at every flop. Doesn't have to be all-ins, could be little over 1/2-3/4 pot bets and then you'll never know where you're at on the flop. Now the math says you'll miss more than I bet and now you're the one raising all-in. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Something to think about there...

Oh and if you don't want to raise all-in with bottom pair or mid pair then it'll be even better.

[Rolen]

People often do that with some of them, sometimes 4 or 5 times, they'll fold to about 60% still though which keeps me going, and on the fifth time, i'll flop top pair and that'll be that.

[TheUsher]

[ QUOTE ]
People often do that with some of them, sometimes 4 or 5 times, they'll fold to about 60% still though which keeps me going, and on the fifth time, i'll flop top pair and that'll be that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure which level you're saying this happens at but the times I actually use this, I'm almost certain there will be no 5th time. This works best when I'm crippled to begin with HU but when I start gaining momentum and taking the lead you'll see nothing but all-ins in your BB. This is assuming Level 7 and on which is almost all of my HU battles.

[Rolen]

It really depends, if you call the min raise then bluff the minimum on the flop EVERY time then eventually i'm going over the top of you regardless of what I have.

Heh, or I might call + see what you do on the turn, and then YOU'LL never know where you stand. Poker rulez

[TheUsher]

[ QUOTE ]
It really depends, if you call the min raise then bluff the minimum on the flop EVERY time then eventually i'm going over the top of you regardless of what I have.

Heh, or I might call + see what you do on the turn, and then YOU'LL never know where you stand. Poker rulez

[/ QUOTE ]

I never bluff the minimum. Also, I'd like to see you catch on the first 2-3 times this happens. Like I said, it won't happen all the time which is just enough for me to get aggressive with the newfound chips. My whole point was that mini-raises suck unless up against the tightest opponents I'd say. It's a bad strategy when the blinds are substantial. Frequently you'll have opponents come over the top with complete crap hands like Qx, Kx, etc.

Edit: All this stuff I've been saying could all be wrong and I'd be glad to be corrected by the more experienced posters here.

[Rolen]

I used to employ the push or fold method of HU, since applying the min raise (to the 20+2s) my 1/2/3 splits have been MUCH better, could be due to other stuff like bigger chip stacks for me when I get to HU play recently. I find that the only hands that most of my HU opponents are willing to go allin over the top of a min raise are hands that they'll call an allin with. So then I can actually look at my cards and if I see 72o I have the option to fold.

[johnny005]

Do you think it is strange that anytime you say something about bubble play everyone disagrees with you??

[Rolen]

Nope. Most players aren't perfect, so of course they'll disagree with me! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I'm just joking here, by the way.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
Dali pushing 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/KK-call.PNG

Setting aside for a moment the issue of whether players do or don't call here, is it correct?

Discuss.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

how do i get a copy of this [sit-n-go analyzer]?

[Voltron87]

You know this is actually one of the times an internet poker argument could be settled by the classic "20K HU freezeout on Stars". Ole!

[Rolen]

I'd love to, uh, got 16.5K to lend me?

[eastbay]

I have a classified ad on 2+2, at the bottom (Sit and Go Power Tools.)

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to employ the push or fold method of HU, since applying the min raise (to the 20+2s) my 1/2/3 splits have been MUCH better, could be due to other stuff like bigger chip stacks for me when I get to HU play recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

This can work against opponents who suck. It fails miserably against better players for the reason which has been explained to you multiple times now: it's exploitable as hell.

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, I have an issue with this common wisdom from this board. A big part of the strategy here assumes that one of two things is true:

1) When it's short handed your opponents are "playing for 3rd" and will fold if you push 50% of hands.

2) Your opponents know that making a marginal call on or near the bubble only gives equity to all the other remaining players besides himself and the pusher.

I've found that neither of these things is true.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's highly buy-in dependent. It becomes more true as you go up. I really think adanthar has taken it too far, though.

eastbay

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Daliman,

I was watching one of your HHs on teamfu.freeshell.org, and I came across a hand that I strongly disagree with.

I guess I'm just wondering if you think you made a mistake, or you think there's a flaw in my reasoning. (or both)

4 Handed. BB = 100

Dali (UTG)- 4215
Button - 3540
SB - 350
BB - 1895

You are dealt 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif, 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif and push all-in.

I understand that the other players should need a monster to call because of the short stack, but:

1) They may not know that and call you with TT+, AQ+, or something like that
2) The blinds are only 50 and 100, so you are risking potentially 3500 chips to win 150.

I guess that's it. What do you think? If you wouldn't push, would you play it at all?
Thanks.

-Jman28

(edit) You also go on to quote South Park. Is that recommended at the $200+15s?

[/ QUOTE ]


Note that I havent read the entire 12 pages of repsonses here, but I actually looked at that page and saw like just 4-5 hands, and that was one that I thought was insane. I hate opening allin there.

[curtains]

Normally I'd just make a raise to 250-400 here. The BB will still usually fold most of his hands, even pretty strong hands sometimes. The button should fold a lot too.

Making a normal raise is clearly +EV, so when analyzing whether or not moving allin is +EV, we have to compare it to our other options too.

I haven't registered the result of these debates as to whether the original push is +EV, but I can't imagine there are many groups of players that would make it more +EV than just making a normal raise.

[citanul]

oh, definitely at some point in this discussion it was entirely skipped over the main point of the post, which was "wtf, you opened all in with 44?"

i think that opening all in with 44 is +EV, but that opening for a standard raise is more +EV. i think that almost everyone here would open with a standard raise here, and it would be fine. the point being of course, that as you note, there are times when the decision between plays is more than just "pick THE +EV play," and suddendly becomes "there are several +EV plays, pick the best." in this case, i think dali messed up most likely. does it become a mistake even though it was +EV? i think so.

did it inspire some reasonable discussion (and some unreasonable?) yeah, i think so too.

citanul

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
It's highly buy-in dependent. It becomes more true as you go up. I really think adanthar has taken it too far, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I arrived at this point through watching a whole lot of Step 5 bubble play. It's also quite possible that the 200's have gotten softer and you can't try this anymore.

I think it's a brilliant strategy because, by the time anyone realizes what you're doing 5-7 hands in, you're up enough chips to have opened up a commanding lead. But it also doesn't work well unless you take pains to keep the short stack in but short, and very few people can do both things well.

[curtains]

I'm not so sure the original push is even +ev, but I could be wrong about that. It's usually irrelevant when you have 30x the BB, since there are almost always better options available anyway.

[Voltron87]

I think the 44 push is terrible, it's an easy "big committing raise". If a SS pushes back, call, if mr 3500 pushes... fold. The push is dependant on who's playing, but I'm not a big fan of it.

You missed the guy saying if he had KK and was the 3500 stack he'd fold to an all in... /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Jman28]

Is your name Daliman?

[Rolen]

I thought we already established that calling would indeed be a -ev play?

[Voltron87]

ohmigod you're retarded.

[Daliman]

LOL, it's funny. I just happened to be looking at this hand/tourney while going over strategy with a friend I'm teaching. In analysis before i saw what I did there,(Id forgotten), I said that normally I autopush there, but then I said 150 in blinds isn't really worth pushing for there. Of course, I had some 'splainin to do when we played the hand out, to which I explained that now I'd just fold it, and a poker player constantly makes adjustments, and I fell that 150 just wouldn't be worth it. Later, however, I remembered that the player with 3500 chips was VERY tight/abc.

I'll now read more of this huge thread...sheesh.

[Rolen]

'A closed mind is like a closed fist. Karate means open mind. But it might as well mean open fist'

Open yer fist dude

[Voltron87]

It's a waste. Most of it was an argument over whether the 3500 stack should call with KK.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Calling with JJ here is abseloute insanity

EDIT : and i'll explain why .. This table is set up so completely perfectly for you it's not even funny.. You can steal ALL DAY from the small (second smallest here) stack, you're basically refusing a sure thing (a hell of a lot of chips from steals) to take up a massive risk when you don't need to.

These SNGs are not just about calling when you have the better cards

[/ QUOTE ]

JJ would be a call here, but inherently risky, TT I personally would fold though. A scontext, before this hand, I had been showing/playing lots of big hands, so the 3500 stack has to give my raise more respect than normal. Later, he figured out i was stealing every chip not nailed down and stayed the hell out of my way. This statement though;



[ QUOTE ]
You can steal ALL DAY from the small (second smallest here) stack,

[/ QUOTE ]
is normally true, but if you watch the history, it never happened. I acted before him on 3 of 4 hands, and made the steal plays he would every single time, because I can. The only time he could steal would be vs my BB; not a good idea.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
What level do you play? I don't play the nosebleed levels myself, but I know you can't be anymore careful about at $400 third place than you are about a $20 third place.

I imagine scared money on the bubble is the biggest +EV factor in the big games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ding DIng DIng DIng!

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
'What happens when the real short stack doubles up and they have the same kind of relative stack size?'

Even better, then I can steal from both!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to sound like a jerk here, but your SNG thinking is severely flawed. I can't imagine you beat the game.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
'What happens when the real short stack doubles up and they have the same kind of relative stack size?'

Even better, then I can steal from both!

[/ QUOTE ]

Common misconception. Equal short stacks=Significantly reduced fold/steal equity.

[Rolen]

Hmmh, that's a real shame since I respect your opinion. Hey, how about some lessons to make me a little less crappy /images/graemlins/grin.gif

..I do manage to beat the 20+2s.

[Rolen]

I'm learning already!

I can feel the -EV oozing out of me

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
***** Hand History for Game 1053343975 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:05:57 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 10 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (600)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1195)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5165)
Seat 10: gobbles (3040)
SwordNShield posts small blind (100)
RoundersInc posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 7c, 2c ]
DarkStargasm raises (5165) to 5165
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
iMsoLucky0: swordnshield is your dadddy
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5465 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5465
SwordNShield balance 500, lost 100 (folded)
RoundersInc balance 995, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5465, bet 5165, collected 5465, net +300
gobbles balance 3040, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 1053345033 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:06:14 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (500)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (995)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5465)
Seat 10: gobbles (3040)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 3c, 6s ]
gobbles calls (200)
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
DarkStargasm raises (5265) to 5465
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5765 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5765
SwordNShield balance 500, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 895, lost 100 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5765, bet 5465, collected 5765, net +300
gobbles balance 2840, lost 200 (folded)

(2 hands later)

***** Hand History for Game 1053349475 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:07:22 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 10 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (300)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1495)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5665)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
SwordNShield posts small blind (100)
RoundersInc posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 9h, 4d ]
DarkStargasm raises (5665) to 5665
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5965 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5965
SwordNShield balance 200, lost 100 (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1295, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 5965, bet 5665, collected 5965, net +300
gobbles balance 2540, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 1053350911 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:07:45 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (200)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1295)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (5965)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ 6c, Ks ]
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc calls (100)
DarkStargasm raises (5765) to 5965
DarkStargasm is all-In.
RoundersInc folds.
Creating Main Pot with $6165 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 6165
SwordNShield balance 200, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1095, lost 200 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 6165, bet 5965, collected 6165, net +200
gobbles balance 2540, didn't bet (folded)

Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the interest of full disclosure, as said in another post, I was playing pretty tight-aggressive before this, and hand shown more than a few monsters. Had the 44 hand happened after all of these hands, it would be closer to proper to call with a wider range of hands.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With JJ, about half, and this includes even the slightest of marginal +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, so he's correct to push 97s /images/graemlins/grin.gif.


[/ QUOTE ]

Making your assumptions, which I think are bogus.

[ QUOTE ]

Now extend that further. He pushes and everyone folds. How many times do you think he's going to keep pushing?


[/ QUOTE ]

He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if done right. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Lasted about 20 hands.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I call jacks or better. I probably fold AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds about right.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
your assumption that he plays AA any differently is a shitty one.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]
Correct.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
which I still disagree with, this push was toward the beginning of Dali's aggression party.

Therefore, in my opinion, the opponents who didn't know him should not have put him on a hand as low as 44.

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly right.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because your calling assumptions are wrong, or will quickly become wrong.

Either that or you are assigning some kind of magic value to 150 chips that simply doesn't exist.

Take this to 100/200, and it's an entirely different conversation.

eastbay


[/ QUOTE ]
The extra variable you are missing here is that this was the final hand of 50-100 blinds, yet another extenuating circumstance.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with steesers statements here.

Risk a huge stack for 150 chips? I rather make a 2.5xBB raise, and fold to a all in except to the short stacks.

Also, these days, its usually not 4 handed at 50-100, and most 200 ers dont have that of tight calling requirements anymore to make this play that profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

The voice of reason.

You know what? I'd be willing to make a small wager that Daliman would admit to multi-tabling when he made this play, and didn't really notice the blinds were only 50/100, he just made his autopilot bubble play where blinds are "always" at least 100/200 or higher, and would reconsider the play on closer examination.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

I was multitabling, but I'm pretty sure I knew the blind size maybe not though. As I have said elsewhere, 150 really isn't worth this risk, but I had a very tight/solid/aggressive image to this point, and gobbles had been playing VERY tightly. I'm sure this all factored, but today, i'd probably fold 70% of the time or so. At the time, fold might have been only 20%.

P.S. Making a "small" wager that I was multitabling is akin to betting that I was breathing when I made this play...

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that I havent seen discussed here is when you have a situation where you have two large stacks and two small ones, the advantage of gaining chips at the mid levels creates an "equitable distance" (for lack of better term) between yourself (chipleader) and the second stack which is not only about X chips you gain, but the equity that accompanies having them...there is not a large window of time to accomplish this and here Dali is taking advantage of that I believe.

Here, Dali is BS, but not by so much...by creating a larger chip gap between him and second stack has a compounding effect on Dali's edges over time. (2nd stack's calling range narrows).

Making this seem not as bad even more so...IOW, its not all about risking 3500 for 150....

Just flame me if I am simply overstating the obvious...just felt it was a minor subtlety that escapes the math.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just SUCH a beautiful post...

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with steesers statements here.

Risk a huge stack for 150 chips? I rather make a 2.5xBB raise, and fold to a all in except to the short stacks.

Also, these days, its usually not 4 handed at 50-100, and most 200 ers dont have that of tight calling requirements anymore to make this play that profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

The voice of reason.

You know what? I'd be willing to make a small wager that Daliman would admit to multi-tabling when he made this play, and didn't really notice the blinds were only 50/100, he just made his autopilot bubble play where blinds are "always" at least 100/200 or higher, and would reconsider the play on closer examination.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say the play is fine if the blinds are higher but L:4 is pushing it a bit to be pushing all-in. Also, the original 44 hand was the last hand of the level so maybe you're right that he didn't notice. He did start chatting it up a few hands later though.

I'd be more interested in the thought process behind this hand:

***** Hand History for Game 1053339843 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:04:54 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (300)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1795)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (4365)
Seat 10: gobbles (3540)
RoundersInc posts small blind (100)
DarkStargasm posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ Js, Jh ]
gobbles folds.
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc raises (300) to 400
DarkStargasm raises (400) to 600
RoundersInc calls (200)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 7d, 4s, 5h ]
RoundersInc checks.
DarkStargasm bets (200)
RoundersInc folds.
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1400
Board: [ 7d 4s 5h ]
SwordNShield balance 300, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 1195, lost 600 (folded)
DarkStargasm balance 4965, bet 800, collected 1400, net +600
gobbles balance 3540, didn't bet (folded)

<font color="red">I saw udders. </font>


I could see a number of reasons why it was played this way, but this was the next hand to the original one posted and the first hand of L:5.






Oh and this guy's an idiot:
***** Hand History for Game 1053352129 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 6462324) - Wed Oct 13 01:08:04 EDT 2004
Table Table 12279 (Real Money) -- Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: SwordNShield (200)
Seat 3: RoundersInc (1095)
Seat 8: DarkStargasm (6165)
Seat 10: gobbles (2540)
DarkStargasm posts small blind (100)
gobbles posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarkStargasm [ Kc, 6c ]
SwordNShield folds.
RoundersInc raises (400) to 400
DarkStargasm raises (6065) to 6165
DarkStargasm is all-In.
gobbles folds.
RoundersInc calls (695)
RoundersInc is all-In.
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 2c, Jh, 2d ]
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 6s ]
** Dealing River ** : [ Ac ]
Creating Main Pot with $2390 with RoundersInc
Creating Side Pot 1 with $5070 with DarkStargasm
** Summary **
Main Pot: 2390 | Side Pot 1: 5070
Board: [ 2c Jh 2d 6s Ac ]
SwordNShield balance 200, didn't bet (folded)
RoundersInc balance 0, lost 1095 [ Qd Ks ] [ a pair of twos -- Ac,Ks,Qd,2c,2d ]
DarkStargasm balance 7460, bet 6165, collected 7460, net +1295 [ Kc 6c ] [ two pairs, sixes and twos -- Ac,6c,6s,2c,2d ]
gobbles balance 2340, lost 200 (folded)

RoundersInc finished in fourth place.
DarkStargasm: lol
gobbles: lol
RoundersInc: wow
gobbles: i had 99 there
RoundersInc: thats rediculous
DarkStargasm: yer own fault
gobbles: shoulda waited for money rounders
DarkStargasm: RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!
iMsoLucky0: shut up, tubby
iMsoLucky0: well then you are going to cost yourself lots of money
RoundersInc: and rape you over and over

[/ QUOTE ]
In this second hand, I had gotten a bit of lip from rounders earlier I believe, and I just decided I wasn't going to allow him through. If I had total trash, i may not have done this, but Rounders had made more than a few dubious plays before, so I knew there was a better than average chence if he DIDN'T fold, I;d be looking at a hand like 55 or QJ.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd feel kinda cool if I was Daliman and logged into 2+2 to see an 11 page thread about a hand that I played.

[/ QUOTE ]
You too?

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

Usually, I'm involved in 11-page threads by saying something stupid, contentious, both, or neither.

[pooh74]

thx! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
i think dali messed up most likely

[/ QUOTE ]

oh my god, did someone just say that dali made a mistake? goodness. my heart wont stop beating. oh, and i think opening all in utg with 44 is by far not the best play. eat that.

[citanul]

HOLLA!!!

<font color="white"> bwahahahaha? </font>

citanul

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think dali messed up most likely

[/ QUOTE ]

oh my god, did someone just say that dali made a mistake? goodness. my heart wont stop beating. oh, and i think opening all in utg with 44 is by far not the best play. eat that.

[/ QUOTE ]


Better Than pushing vs a committed BB with 27s....

Holla.

[raptor517]

my vote is autocall with KK. whoever doesnt should never play poker again. ever. and should get a job at chik fil a, cuz mcdonalds isnt good enough for a snger. actually, if u fold KK there, u deserve mcdonalds. hah.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]


oh my god, did someone just say that dali made a mistake? goodness. my heart wont stop beating. oh, and i think opening all in utg with 44 is by far not the best play. eat that.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard to argue with raptor's well thought out arguments.

Ra

[raptor517]

:#&amp;*%#&amp;%&amp;*#&amp;%(*@#. ok. we wont argue any more about this. but it was a +EV play. maybe not with the infinite dali wisdom that you posess, but with my finite raptor wisdom it was correct. holla

[raptor517]

wait.. were you being sarcastic? i couldnt quite tell.. and for the record, i thought for a good 6 seconds before posting. hah.

[curtains]

hah??? You end your post with hah???? Who's holding raptor hostage?

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]

hah??? You end your post with hah???? Who's holding raptor hostage?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
eat that.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hah

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hah

[/ QUOTE ]
Raptor is fine. Seriously, don't worry about him. Move along people, nothing to see here. Hah. I mean eat that.... no I mean...SHOW'S OVER FOLKS!


On a completely unrelated topic, what is the best way to get urine stains out of a carpet?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With JJ, about half, and this includes even the slightest of marginal +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, so he's correct to push 97s /images/graemlins/grin.gif.


[/ QUOTE ]

Making your assumptions, which I think are bogus.

[ QUOTE ]

Now extend that further. He pushes and everyone folds. How many times do you think he's going to keep pushing?


[/ QUOTE ]

He'd be very foolish to keep pushing as long as button is behind. The only thing that makes these pushes even marginally correct is an uber-tight calling range. That will whither and die in about two hands.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]



Not if done right. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Lasted about 20 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said: everything changes when the level changes. My comments are for 50/100 specifically.

eastbay

[raptor517]

409 bleach [censored]. oh, and i love my fake id. bwahahahahhaa

[QUADS4444]

I recently pulled up my POKER PROPHECY for DARKSTARGASM and this is what is shows....

Player darkstargasm
Games played 57
Wins 14 (24.56%)
Losses 43 (75.44%)
Average Buy-In $200
Players with better winning percentage 212576
Players with worse winning percentage 153978
$200 Table: 14 wins / 43 losses / 24.56% wins

I'm new to this forum so I assume what others say about Daliman is true and that he is indeed a winning player.

Having said that, an ITM rate of 24.56% is pretty disappointing after 57 games (not to mention frustrating).

Question: Is this just a statistical abberration? And if so, what would be the probability of a winning player being this low after 57 games?

[Rolen]

He hasn't used that one for a while I don't think, try 'surrealpoker'

[curtains]

Of course its a statistical abberation. I have 3 accounts, on which one is like ITM over 40% and the other is like 30%, and the other is in between. Meanwhile he is in the same situation. Is he a bad player based on which handle you happen to search for?

[raptor517]

oh wow, i gotta keep yugo away from my laptop. holla

[QUADS4444]

Impressive indeed! Outstanding!

Player surrealpoker
Games played 266
Wins 123 (46.24%)
Losses 143 (53.76%)
Average Buy-In $167.74
Players with better winning percentage 54239
Players with worse winning percentage 312378
$1000 Table: 3 wins / 7 losses / 30% wins
$200 Table: 72 wins / 73 losses / 49.66% wins
$100 Table: 24 wins / 26 losses / 48% wins
$20 Table: 0 wins / 1 losses / 0% wins
$10 Table: 24 wins / 36 losses / 40% wins

I wonder why he played the $10's? Experimenting? Blowing off steam? Any ideas?

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I recently pulled up my POKER PROPHECY for DARKSTARGASM and this is what is shows....

Player darkstargasm
Games played 57
Wins 14 (24.56%)
Losses 43 (75.44%)
Average Buy-In $200
Players with better winning percentage 212576
Players with worse winning percentage 153978
$200 Table: 14 wins / 43 losses / 24.56% wins

I'm new to this forum so I assume what others say about Daliman is true and that he is indeed a winning player.

Having said that, an ITM rate of 24.56% is pretty disappointing after 57 games (not to mention frustrating).

Question: Is this just a statistical abberration? And if so, what would be the probability of a winning player being this low after 57 games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this was during my 44 buyin drawdon. I exorcised thsi account name 2 months ago..

Have been Iluv2plypoka and surrealpoker lately.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Impressive indeed! Outstanding!

Player surrealpoker
Games played 266
Wins 123 (46.24%)
Losses 143 (53.76%)
Average Buy-In $167.74
Players with better winning percentage 54239
Players with worse winning percentage 312378
$1000 Table: 3 wins / 7 losses / 30% wins
$200 Table: 72 wins / 73 losses / 49.66% wins
$100 Table: 24 wins / 26 losses / 48% wins
$20 Table: 0 wins / 1 losses / 0% wins
$10 Table: 24 wins / 36 losses / 40% wins

I wonder why he played the $10's? Experimenting? Blowing off steam? Any ideas?

[/ QUOTE ]

Teaching a friend. That's his play

[QUADS4444]

&gt;&gt;Teaching a friend. That's his play&lt;&lt;

Ahh. That explains it.
I could use a lesson or two, lol.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
&gt;&gt;Teaching a friend. That's his play&lt;&lt;

Ahh. That explains it.
I could use a lesson or two, lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get in line.... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[raptor517]

oh hail great daliman. please teach me your ways.. i must suck mucho dalinut. forever. and ever.... please call... 3uo

[QUADS4444]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
&gt;&gt;Teaching a friend. That's his play&lt;&lt;

Ahh. That explains it.
I could use a lesson or two, lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get in line.... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like I might need a sleeping bag and a porta-potty.