Stars 100/200 Question

[Festus22]

I finished my micro session at Stars and go watch the 100/200 game for awhile. And I observed what I thought was hideous poker. Examples (game was 8-handed):

BB called a PF cap with J-7s
Button open-limped with 5-2s
UTG open-raised with 7-5s
2 players called a 3rd player's river bet and bottom pair took it down on a non-paired board.

Is the game at this level more about reads, feel and bluffs than sound fundamentals? I was pretty surprised by what I saw but was just curious whether this is what the "next level" of poker is really like or just another case of clueless players being everywhere.

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
BB called a PF cap with J-7s
Button open-limped with 5-2s
UTG open-raised with 7-5s
2 players called a 3rd player's river bet and bottom pair took it down on a non-paired board.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a 100-200 player, but I would say the first two are very bad decisions in every situation. Number three sounds pretty bad, but you didn't say how many players had cards. You might make a case for it in certain short-handed games. Number four is probably crappy all around, but the actions on earlier streets might make someone's play correct here.

I'd love to hear from someone who acutually beats 100-200.

[elysium]

hi festus
this excellent post describing internet poker motion distributing a billow of chum gives a very precise description of advertising follow through. it is being done to enhance the effect of internet poker ads and as you see it is very riveting. the sharks festus are hidden behind the technocloak. to see how this all works, grab hold of a hundred dollar bill and toss it into the water. you'll be given quite a show, well worth the hundred. do make sure though that the hundred comes from your non-cash-outable dollars in the account balance contolled by the same internet poker sharks. and do distinguish, as you enjoy watching roiling white-water consume this meager feast, that you are not watching a show put on by real talented poker sharks, but rather by a more or less talented computer software jockey who thinks he has gotten live poker action down just right.

remember that computers are only as intelligent as the people who package them. these software jockeys couldn't simulate decent poker action in a hundred years festus. if they were intelligent enough to play a decent hand of poker, they never would have had to sink this low to turn a crooked buck. they are good at extracting money from gullible people lured in by the advertising and then tieing it up in tangle so you can't cash-out. they are poor in simulating live poker action because just don't have what it takes to understand the game. everyone in the poker community feels very embarrassed for them. and as long as this thread gets posted, these software jockeys are being given every ounce of the poker community's wrathful scorn.

[Zele]

You're going to have to give a little more thorough justification if you're really suggesting that internet poker is all a big con game.