More on TA and similar afflictions

[David Sklansky]

For those who would rather have a cut and dried analysis:

There are many hands in holdem, both preflop and on the flop, that would do better if they were all in. What hands they are depends on your position and other parameters. I once called these "scared" hands. Many scared hands would show a small profit if they were indeed all in but otherwise lose. There are also scared hands that will show a profit if all in and a lesser profit if not.

One way to try to figure whether a scared hand will show a profit is by figuring out how profitable the hand would be if it was all in. Almost certainly a hand that is very profitable all in does not lose enough ground to ever justify throwing it away. Call these hands "scared but strong". These hands should never be folded. More on this in a moment

There are other scared hands that are not as stong but still show a small profit even if played meekly. Most players should play these hands as well. But a case can be made for folding them if you are on a short bankroll or if you feel that part of your strength is your fearsome table image. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is folding "scared but strong" hands. That simply gives up to much profit to ever be worth doing for the sake of bankroll management or image. The only exception might be pot limit or no limit games. In limit holdem it is never right to play this way. But there is one specific size game where it might be close. Not surprisingly that size is 20-40. A game where players are playing rather tightly but can still be pushed around. In smaller games the opponent's loose play makes dominating the table an impossibility and missing out on EV due to large pot odds a crime. Bigger limit ring games on the other hand are imposssible to dominate because your opponnents won't let you. In 80-160, the most aggressive good player at the table when head up with the least agressive good player, is playing submissively at least a third of the time. Given that, it is ridiculous to throw away plus EV hands for a dominant image when no one is really dominant in those games.

It will surprise you to find out that my guess as to why Tommy has TA is not because of what I know about him but rather what I know about some others who have it. One is a smaller stakes player who definitely feels uncomfortable with hands that "don't play well". Our new book should be just the ticket for him. The other player is actually world class which means his case of TA was a mild one. But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front. And his reasons were exactly what I believe Tommmy's are. He believes it hurts him when people see him playing hands the way these scared hands often have to be played. A valid point only concerning slightly profitable hands.

What the above has to do with my hypothesizing a need to control, comes from a conversation I had with this same player about how he played a certain good hand headup on a raggedy flop. He bet, got raised, he reraised, got raised again and he called. The turn went check, check. This drove him crazy because he felt he was outplayed. I calmed him down by pointing out that most opponents would have merely called the flop and the turn (thus not "outplaying" him) thereby losing one less small bet. But it was eye opening to me to see how upset he originally was. A personality trait that sometimes leads to TA.

To sum up. Tommy Angeloitis is a silent killer. Like high blood pressure if you have only a moderate case and play mainly 15-30 and 20-40, it can go undetected for years. But it is slowing eroding your arteries or wallet as the case may be, and may, in fact, do you in if you ever encounter more stressful situations or higher games.

[Ulysses]

But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front.

What type of hands specifically are you thinking players like this don't play in early position that they should - and in most/all or just certain types of games?

[samdash]

I was reading that earlier and wondered the same thing. In my live loose-aggressive 10/20 and 4/8 games as well as 3/6 party poker I almost never limp in up front with anything but 77/88/99 and KJs/KQs. What other hands could he be talking about? Are any of the games Tommy plays in any softer than the ones I listed? I can't imagine that.

[J_V]

I've got to catch up on this post. I have some definite thoughts on this. Especially after running the gamet of limits.


Dont' have time right now to get through it.

[scrub]

You are playing way too tight up front for 3/6 on Party if you're folding 66-22, JQs, etc.

Those games are loose and not particularly aggresssive.

scrub

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front.

What type of hands specifically are you thinking players like this don't play in early position that they should - and in most/all or just certain types of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny you should highlight this point. The single biggest hole in HPFAP is the massive overvaluation of suited connectors, especially up front. This error is reflected both in the hand rankings, and in the general preflop strategy.

[andyfox]

Is it possible that David and Mason's Las Vegas game experienc caused this, where the games are generally more passive pre-flop?

[astroglide]

i dunno, KT(s)/JT(s)/J9(s) are pretty awfully ranked...

[SoBeDude]

The game has evolved since that book was written. What was once the proper play may no longer be so.

Could it be that the book is simply not as accurate as it once was?

-Scott

[JimRivett]

Hello David,

Thank you for this post, it shows that you do want to participate in these discussions. However, for me, your post asks more questons than it answers.

For instantance, you mention "scared" hands, could you expand a little on that (yes I know you mention suited connectors later in the post), perhaps give some specific examples, explaining further what "your position and other parameters" mean.

Another question I have is in the fifth paragraph of your post you mention "folding scared but strong" hands, and that folding these hands in a pot or no limit situation might be correct. Would these be the same "scared" hands that you want to go all in with?

The reason I'm curious about this "scared" hand business is that it may in fact be a common situation that most (if not all) of us have overlooked and any light you could shed on it would be appreciated.

Regards,
Jim

btw Could other posters refrain from responding to this post with "their" opinion of what David means. Thanks.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
i dunno, KT(s)/JT(s)/J9(s) are pretty awfully ranked...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, as I'm sure many of you with extensive hand databases can show, I don't think it is even a debatable topic.

[oddjob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i dunno, KT(s)/JT(s)/J9(s) are pretty awfully ranked...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, as I'm sure many of you with extensive hand databases can show, I don't think it is even a debatable topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

no way, i've met way too many people that live and die by the notion that JTs is the greatest hand in poker, and i would like people to keep believing that.

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i dunno, KT(s)/JT(s)/J9(s) are pretty awfully ranked...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, as I'm sure many of you with extensive hand databases can show, I don't think it is even a debatable topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I concur. As for the suited connectors, I rarely find the loose/passive games at the middle limits that make them profitable to play. Even if you can get in pre-flop for one bet, the flops tend to be played aggressively, ruining the implied odds. The medium and small pocket pairs are much more valuable in these games, and they pretty much play themselves after the flop.

[mike l.]

"Not surprisingly that size is 20-40. A game where players are playing rather tightly but can still be pushed around."

this proves that in a lot of ways youre really out of touch with current hold em trends, and while your intentions are good you sometimes have no idea what youre talking about.

[mike l.]

"The single biggest hole in HPFAP is the massive overvaluation of suited connectors, especially up front."

the games were more passive back then especially the games mason played in.

[astroglide]

and pocket pairs are still better hands, even back then

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
"The single biggest hole in HPFAP is the massive overvaluation of suited connectors, especially up front."

the games were more passive back then especially the games mason played in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd buy it except for two things. First, the book is the 21st century edition. Second, David wrote this post, from scratch, about 24 hours ago. So his views apparently haven't changed.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
David Sklansky: "Not surprisingly that size is 20-40. A game where players are playing rather tightly but can still be pushed around."

mike l.: "this proves that in a lot of ways youre really out of touch with current hold em trends, and while your intentions are good you sometimes have no idea what youre talking about."

[/ QUOTE ]



Mike, I see this on the East Coast at least a fair bit. Maybe East Coast games and Las Vegas games are more passive than southern California games.

[The WET BEAVER]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front.

What type of hands specifically are you thinking players like this don't play in early position that they should - and in most/all or just certain types of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny you should highlight this point. The single biggest hole in HPFAP is the massive overvaluation of suited connectors, especially up front. This error is reflected both in the hand rankings, and in the general preflop strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]


That statement isn't true. According to HEPFAP, you shouldn't even be playing T9s and below up front. It's usually the impatient people who limp with those hands up front.

[mike l.]

"Las Vegas games are more passive than southern California games."

last several times i was there vegas games were a little bit more on the sane side, but good games (and there are plenty of them) featured many multiway pots contested in a generally loose and aggressive fashion. so really there's not much difference anymore. nor is there much difference from online play where the majority of hold em is played.

ive said it before and ill say it again: a great thing would be for sklansky to come and play 20-40/40-80 at commerce for about a month straight and write a book about that. too bad he knows it all.

[Ulysses]

But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front.

What type of hands specifically are you thinking players like this don't play in early position that they should - and in most/all or just certain types of games?

Bump, because I really want to know the answer. Hopefully you're checking the forums today, David.

[andyfox]

"It will surprise you to find out that my guess as to why Tommy has TA is not because of what I know about him . . ."

Doesn't surprise me a bit. You've assumed something on the basis of perhaps 6 or 7 hands Tommy's posted about out of the millions he's played. I know the man well and you're 180 degrees wrong.

[MMMMMM]

I too would like to know this.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But there was no question he had it as he folded too many suited connecters especially up front.

What type of hands specifically are you thinking players like this don't play in early position that they should - and in most/all or just certain types of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny you should highlight this point. The single biggest hole in HPFAP is the massive overvaluation of suited connectors, especially up front. This error is reflected both in the hand rankings, and in the general preflop strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

this might be due to the fact that modern hold'em games are much more aggressive than it used to be. escpecially in mid limit hold'em. therefore it is more common now for one to be dominated with JTs when the pot is raised behind him (QT, KT, AT, AJ, KJ, QJ, etc...) whereas in the past, players didn't use to isolate so much with "bad" hands.

that's my best guess.

Kenny

[SinCityGuy]

Good point, Kenny.

Limping in early with a hand like JTs, and then playing it out of position against one or two opponents for two bets isn't my idea of fun either.

[glen]

Theonly problem is that he is the original noted poker authority, and everyone would play differently against him, like they do against mason in vegas.

[David Sklansky]

You guys missed my point. I'm not going to debate when suited are connectors are worth playing. I'm talking about the syndrome of folding them even when there is no debate because they must be played passively or in a way that feels uncomfortable.

[CrackerZack]

playing fun or passively isn't the point. the point is playing profitably. If the people here (including me) cannot figure out how to play 98s up front when you the flop comes something like T63 with one of our suit, then this information, while nice too look at, isn't much help. Lets debate when this makes sense, and how it makes sense to take a passive role.

[bigfishead]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
David Sklansky: "Not surprisingly that size is 20-40. A game where players are playing rather tightly but can still be pushed around."

mike l.: "this proves that in a lot of ways youre really out of touch with current hold em trends, and while your intentions are good you sometimes have no idea what youre talking about."

[/ QUOTE ]

Here here. Well said. Having logged in many hours in the games that Tommy plays in and Vegas games, and witnessed Vegas regulars lose huge amounts of their bankroll when they came to northern California, I concur that David is clueless. But clueless only in the respect of understanding the differences in the games in some locales and how to play those games. His strategy will play fairly well in Vegas, where in fact yes you can push around some of the tighter 20-40 players. But not in Northern Cal.

I have in fact sat in games in northern Cal and watched an unknown player for 45 minutes and than asked him how long they have been here from LV. They are freaked out that I would now they are Las Vegans. But it shows all over the play they have. They have then asked me how the hell to beat these games. I have told them "buy more than 1 rack".

hmmm....wonder what that means? If you dont know David you are clueless. Not everywhere plays like Vegas. Vegas is grinders, "know it all", entitlement disease run rampant. Easy to identify, easy to tilt.



Mike, I see this on the East Coast at least a fair bit. Maybe East Coast games and Las Vegas games are more passive than southern California games.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys missed my point. I'm not going to debate when suited are connectors are worth playing. I'm talking about the syndrome of folding them even when there is no debate because they must be played passively or in a way that feels uncomfortable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently your definition of "when there is no debate" is different from most around here.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Apparently your definition of "when there is no debate" is different from most around here.

[/ QUOTE ]

A fair enough point. Before I continue let me say that it's clear to me anyway that Dave and Mason have stated that the hand rankings are more or less a crutch that should be thrown away as soon as possible. Second of all Dave's point is valid in that he's talking about hands where folding is wrong. In HFAP it is written /images/graemlins/smile.gif:

Specifically, in early position in a typical hold'em game, if you are the first one in, or if there is only a call to your right, be prepared to play only those hands in the first four groups. In a loose game, as long as the players aren't too aggressive, you can add the Group 5 hands, especially the suited connectors. In a tough game, it is probably best to discard even the Group 4 hands. These guidelines are very important. Playing too many hands up front is one of the most costly errors that you can make.

Well the HFAP passage quoted doesn't seem to advocate playing a lot of suited connectors to me. In fact I'd say that the hands that there are no debate about are hands in Groups 1-3. The book does mention criteria for not playing hands in Groups 4 & 5. Let's look at the suited connectors in Groups 1-3:


AKs, AQs, AJs, ATs

KQs, KJs

QJs

JTs


So if some of these hands are open to debate it's the weaker ones and I would guess that you would say that AKs and AQs are the only hands that aren't open to debate. Is that right? Personally I don't believe that the following hands:

AJs, ATs, KQs, KJs, QJs, JTs

are big losers in the games that the book is aimed at.

From the HFAPs Introduction:

Keep in mind that the following stategies ae designed for medium limit games, that is $10-20 hold'em upt (and including) $40-80 hold'em.

Some more passages:

When we refer to a game as loose, we mean a game without much before-the-flop raising and with many players in most pots. (This game would actually be loose and passive.)

When we say tough, we mean a game with a fair amount of raising, but not many large multiway pots. (This game would actually be tight and aggressive.)

Next passage:

We also point out that loose and passive are not the same thing. If a game is loose, but still very aggressive, you should not be in many pots. On the other hand, you could play a fair number of hands in a tight but passive game.

Put another way, passive/aggressive should have a major impact on the number of hands that you play, while loose/tight should impact the mix of hands that you play.

Next passage:

Sometimes you will need to add a few hands to those you play up front to throw your opponents off. For examplee, you occasionally should play a hand like

7/images/graemlins/spade.gif 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif

in an early position, even if the game is tough, to stop your more observant opponents from stealing against you when "rags" flop. Also, this is a good hand to occasionally raise with if you feel that your early position raises are getting too much respect. (That is you are not getting any action.). However, no matter what the reason for playing a hand like this, make sure that your hand is suited, and only do it occasionally.

If there is a raise to your right and the game is typical or tough, you should limit your play to hands in Gropu 1 and 2. Angainst an extremely tight player in a tough game, it may be correcto to throw away some of the Group 2 hands such as:

A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif

(Remember that this chapter refers to early-position decisions.)


So I don't understand your point about HFAP advocating playing too many suited connectors up front.

[DanZ]

.

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys missed my point. I'm not going to debate when suited are connectors are worth playing. I'm talking about the syndrome of folding them even when there is no debate because they must be played passively or in a way that feels uncomfortable.

[/ QUOTE ]

David,

I think I understand your point, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Let's suppose that we find one of those rare loose/passive middle limit games. We limp in with our T9s and get five more callers. In this particular hand, we will not win by playing aggressively or by trying to outplay our opponents by making fancy plays. We will win by checking and calling if we have pot odds to draw to. Since this is atypical holdem strategy MOST of the time, the tight/aggressive players are reluctant to play these hands even when the game conditions show that they might be profitable.

Is that close?

[rigoletto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You guys missed my point. I'm not going to debate when suited are connectors are worth playing. I'm talking about the syndrome of folding them even when there is no debate because they must be played passively or in a way that feels uncomfortable.

[/ QUOTE ]

David,

I think I understand your point, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Let's suppose that we find one of those rare loose/passive middle limit games. We limp in with our T9s and get five more callers. In this particular hand, we will not win by playing aggressively or by trying to outplay our opponents by making fancy plays. We will win by checking and calling if we have pot odds to draw to. Since this is atypical holdem strategy MOST of the time, the tight/aggressive players are reluctant to play these hands even when the game conditions show that they might be profitable.

Is that close?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think these situations will occur mostly in the blinds. You could have a raiser, two cold callers and the sb back to you in the BB with QTs. You're getting 9:1 on your call, do you play?

[hetron]

I don't know where on the east coast you are talking about (perhaps foxwoods), but the Taj 20-40 has always to me been a game of picking off ultra-aggressive types who get involved in pots with dominated hands. More and more, mid limit hold em is getting populated by types who know aggressiveness in holdem is of paramount importance. However, a lot of these players don't know how to "back off on the accelerator" when their hands run into trouble. Players who have been playing holdem for a while, who have a good "feel" for the right hand values in the right spot have a big advantage in this 20-40. Throwing away hands in marginal situations with some +EV is not that big of a mistake in this sort of game. Much more of an important is preflop hand selection and knowing when to lower the boom on the bull who is charging forward with his good-but-beaten hand.

[hetron]

In the AC 20/40 games, you can get by even if you lose on situations where you have pot odds but are out of position and might be beaten. That's not where most of the EV lies in those games. The EV in most of those games involves wacking around an aggressive player who has AQ and you have AA on a flop of Q74, and staying out of situations where the reverse is done to you.

[David Sklansky]

This is not about suited connectors. I wish I had used a different example to avoid distraction. Perhaps not calling on the button in a tough game when there is a raiser and two callers and you have KT suited, or folding J7 suited in the small blind in an unraised pot. In other words avoiding hands that are mathematically profitable, merely because they might lose some EV on later betting rounds and often have to be played like a wimp. That is Tommy Angeloitis (NOT Tommy Angelitis as some clininicians mistakenly refer to it). A disease that has now quickly been examined by over five thousand two plus twoers by the way.

[rigoletto]

Can't you come up with a better name. The whole Tommy thing gets in the way of the issue. You could make a competition and give out a signed copy of a book as a prize!

I suggest Premature Discartis Prideientis (PreDiPri)!

[David Sklansky]

Come up with a better name? And deny Tommy being immortalizied along with the likes of Munchausen, Taysach, Epstein, Barr, and Lou Gehrig?

[rigoletto]

[ QUOTE ]
Come up with a better name? And deny Tommy being immortalizied along with the likes of Munchausen, Taysach, Epstein, Barr, and Lou Gehrig?

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, that's just funny /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[risen]

Don't forget that Mr. Genital Warts.

[rigoletto]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that Mr. Genital Warts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe he named that malady after his daughter little Clamydia!

[andyfox]

"A disease that has now quickly been examined by over five thousand two plus twoers by the way."

Fuzzy writing. It's a disease that has been examined over five thousand times by two plus twoers.

[Zeno]

I would like to take this opportunity to offer everyone a pointless post. As pointless as all the dividing lines or trench lines or scared lines or numerology lines or hand grouping lines or other self-inflicted lines that we submit ourselves to, and also, scandalously inflict on each other.


As so happens, by the grace of Zeus I suppose, I am reading a very excellent book (Goodbye to All That, by Robert Graves) that somehow fits snuggly into the recent shenanigans in the Mid-limit forum. I will submit some background data for the feverously detailed among us before moving on to the excerpt from the book, presented below. It is July 1916 in northern France and the Somme offensive is off and running in fits and starts along entrenched lines separating the allies (in this case the British) from the loathsome Germans to the west. Graves [An officer] is recounting some activities from ‘A’ Company that he was part of for certain periods of the War.

Let’s all listen in:


‘When the mist cleared, we saw a German gun with ‘First Battalion Royal Welch Fusiliers’ chalked on it – evidently a trophy. I wondered what had happened to Siegfried and friends of ‘A’ Company. We found the battalion quite close in bivouacs; Siegfried was still alive, so were Edmund Dadd, and two other ‘A’ Company officers. The battalion had seen heavy fighting: in their first attack at Fricourt they overran our opposite number in the German Army, the Twenty-third Infantry Regiment, who were undergoing a special disciplinary spell in the trenches because an inspecting staff-officer, coming round, discovered all the officers ensconced in a deep dug-out at Manetz village, instead of being up in the trenches with their men. (Edmund Dadd told me that throughout the bad time in March there were no German soldiers of higher rank opposite us than corporals)

The battalion’s next objective was ‘The Quadrangle’, a small copse [thicket] this side of the Manetz Wood, where Siegfried distinguished himself by taking, single-handed, a battalion frontage which the Royal Irish Regiment had failed to take the day before. He went over with bombs [grenades] in daylight, under covering fire from a couple of rifles, and scared away the occupants. A pointless feat, since instead of signaling for reinforcements, he sat in the German trench and began reading a book of poems which he had brought with him. When he finally went back he did not even report. Colonel Stockwell, then in command, raged at him. The attack on Mametz Wood had been delayed for two hours because British patrols were still reported to be out. ‘British Patrols’ were Siegfried and his book of poems. ‘I’d have got you a D.S.O [Distinguished Service Cross, a respected medal for bravery] if you’d only shown more sense’ stormed Stockwell. ‘


How pointless this all is and how it fits in with a so called disease pugnaciously named after someone that I personally believe does not even exist - I leave to you, dear reader.


And also, Mr Sklansky -

As for ‘immortalizing’ someone, this bombast by you is missing the mark, you are puffing on the wrong end of the cigar as usual, an infamous habit that perhaps has a charm all its own.

Respectfully,

Zeno: Master of Facts, Fiction, and Fancy.

PS - Let's call the disease Siegfried-i-test

[Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!]

Thats a wordy post. You clearly dont have shut-the-hell-upitis. look out, its spreading.

[mike l.]

"someone that I personally believe does not even exist"

i dont read books so i didnt read all your post, but does this mean you dont think tommy's a real person? if so that's pretty sweet. he's more like jesus every day.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats a wordy post.

[/ QUOTE ]

A pointless post should always be verbose - what's the point of a non-wordy pointless post?

-Zeno

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont read books so i didnt read all your post, but does this mean you dont think tommy's a real person?

[/ QUOTE ]


That is correct - I do not believe in the existence of Tommy Angelo. He is a metaphysical specter concocted by sinister forces within 2+2 for propaganda proposes, in addition to the specific fulminous act of naming a disease after this phantasm.

[ QUOTE ]
if so that's pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
he's more like jesus every day.

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree, again. A thorn in the side of 2+2 perhaps. A word to the wise; be careful what you invent - it may come back to haunt you.

-Zeno

PS. I don't exist either.

[thedorf]

could someone please tell me where all of the (flawed?) tommy angelo advice is? I haven't been able to find it on this site. Also, where is the best literature on how to play in the small blind. If I recall correctly "texas holdem for advanced players" has a good section on it but I don't recall any advice for what to play against raises in the SB. right now I play 5/10 with a $2 smallblind and I call anything in an unraised pot unless the player in bb has tendency to raise a lot (by the way, if you concentrate, I think spotting the tell of someone who is about to raise the bb is fairly easy. It's about the only one I can spot with consistency. too bad its only slightly profitable.). I will probably have the bankroll for 10/20 with a $5 bb pretty soon though and would like to know how to adjust starting requirements. I would especially like to know what I should consider when deciding to call a raise from the BB and even more importantly from the SB. thanks

[MMMMMM]

"A pointless post should always be verbose - what's the point of a non-wordy pointless post?"

Good point.

[Boopotts]

Is to see this same sort of criticism lobbed at Jim Brier when he frequented these boards. Say what you will about Tommy Angelo, but Jim Brier probably did more to lead new players down a wayward path then Tommy Angelo could ever do.

In any event, I doubt that even the most severe case of TA could result in a yearly 'loss' of tens of thousands of dollars in missed profits. Is folding KQo in the SB against a steal raise a -EV play? Yeah, I think it is. But there are other things to consider. If you're the type of player who does not embrace the exchange of much larger swings for marginally more profit-- and many, many winning players are like this-- then who can really argue with folds like this? Sure, you can argue that a true 'pro' should work to rid himself of an aversion to swings, but if the player in question hasn't rid himself of such an aversion then you can construct the argument that the best thing to do with that KQo 'right not' is to muck it. And ditto for the A5s, or whatever other marginal hands are being considered.

[astroglide]

Is to see this same sort of criticism lobbed at Jim Brier when he frequented these boards. Say what you will about Tommy Angelo, but Jim Brier probably did more to lead new players down a wayward path then Tommy Angelo could ever do.

agreed.