Re: 100-200 against stoxtrader
 

All of this is Aliesque.

I used to live in Edmonton during the Oilers' glory years in the 80s. One time, all of the Oilers went to Ali's house for dinner and presented him with a hockey stick bearing all of the players' signatures. Ali took one look at it and immediately came up with this gem:

I love your company
I admire your style
But to bring a gift so cheap
Please stay away for a while

With all due respect to Diablo, Ali's wit is still unmatched.

Re: 100-200 against stoxtrader
 

[ QUOTE ]
you are terrified of this guy. that was the main point i was making. that's not good.

it's shorthanded. he can make this checkraise there w/ JJ. nad TT and other hands. after all it looks like he can recognize how scared of a Q you are.

but it sounds to me like youve narrowed his hand down to a Q basically completely. yeah duh anyone can see that it looks like he thinks you have AK and so he's river c/ring the Q here. yeah that's like really brilliant. why post that? it sounds to me like youre 100% convinced he has a Q or better so i guess go ahead and lay it down. this player is straightforward tight great etc okay then just dump your AA. but why post about it?

any time someone posts something obvious, if im going to get involved it's going to try and play devil's advocate and try to find another way to look at it. if youre just posting something to say A is A (or Q is Q in this case) then my bad for wasting my time getting involved.

you are terrified of this guy. or you own him so bad you see right through him and can make this laydown. which is it?



[/ QUOTE ]

Well I'm not going to make a completely ego driven statement either way. You can feel free to perceive me however you want. I'm more concerned about how I'm perceived by the players that I play against...and who knows, maybe one day you'll be in this game against me and you can try to run me over if you think that it is easy to do so. I'm not going to sit here and try and argue if I'm a weak player or whatever, as that is pointless. I could post hands where I three or fourbet an unimproved big pair on the turn or river when there is a paired broadway card, but what would be the point of that? Your analysis of this hand is too nearsighted.

All that being said, I think I did misplay the hand. I don't feel that way often, but that is why I posted the hand. I only have about 15k hands at limits this high and wanted some feedback from those with more experience. I've gotten that now, and I thank you.

The mistake in this hand was thinking he could fold a worse hand on the turn, which was clear overthinking on my part. The correct way to lose this hand was to bet the turn and call down from there. I can see that clearly now. But as far as all of your posturing and reposturing...well, like I said, once you start playing this high online you can try it against me and see how it goes. Personally, I vary my approach from opponent to opponent - and against this particular opponent at this particular time, the play seemed to flow. As far as his play, I think he played the hand great. After whiffing the turn cr he caught his perfect card on the river and brilliantly check-raised me on the river when I'm sure his plan was to simply bet it.

Playing devil's advocate is one thing, and I'm sorry if you feel like you've wasted your time, but if you're going to chime in with some convoluded theories about how terrified I am of a given player based on one play, then feel free to not waste your time. I'll concede that JJ or TT might poossibly take a swing at me on the river trying to get me to fold AK...and I forgot to mention that I had paid off a checkraise of his in a HU blind situation in the last orbit..which was another contributing factor in my decision to call down.
-James

Re: mike
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah my first post said he should 3 bet the river. then hero came on said there's no way on earth sb could have a K here. so that narrows his hand down to..hmm let's see here.. the nuts.. and hmm..let's see...NOTHING ELSE. WOW! what a useless thread!

see where im coming from?

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you have a K there? What percentage of the time would that be?
-James

Re: 100-200 against stoxtrader
 

"because james first called the game short
but when he further described the playing
i'm not sure what's left to be saying'

outstanding.

"if you both have such narrow ranges
your game is in need of some changes"

yes. this thread sucked. but posts like this sort of redeemed it.

Re: mike
 

"Could you have a K there? What percentage of the time would that be?"

i dont know. maybe id have AK. maybe id have KJ and be waiting until the turn to make a checkraise play hoping you will get scared. i dont know the opponent and ive read about some pretty freaky 1-2 online hands before. so i figured maybe he has a K or some other hand. honestly i cant imagine playing the hand the way he did and flat calling from the sb there w/ KQ EVER so i cant say i relate at all to the way either of you played it. when the players know each other well enough to narrow each other's hands down to such a great extent the thread is pointless. start better threads.

Re: mike
 

Re: 100-200 against stoxtrader
 

FWIW- I completely understand the reasons why you checked the turn. And I agree with this play in many situations. It's just not my style in short-handed (2,3,4-way) play. If a guy's lucky enough to have a queen or 99 and cleans my clock for a hand, I'll take my lumps. I'm looking to create bigger cracks in his brain which I can then climb into in and cause more grievious playing errors (than the one I made), down the road.

Re: 100-200 against stoxtrader
 

"maybe one day you'll be in this game against me"

fat chance. i make it a habit to play in GOOD games.

"As far as his play, I think he played the hand great."

well there's something we could talk about. because i think he most certainly did not. the play is to bet the river, hope you have the presumed AK and that you raise, and then 3 bet. or hope you call down with a worse hand you wouldve checked behind again. it can be argued the other streets were misplayed as well, in fact we did so elsewhere in this thread.

something no one has mentioned is another possible hand for you to have is AQ and youve decided to check the turn and be cute. this would also mean betting the river is his best play.

"convoluded theories about how terrified I am of a given player'

it wasnt convoluted. it was simple: repeatedly in this thread you give this player too much credit and respect for a very narrow range of hands. that=fear.

btw youre taking all this a touch too personally. i dont know you from adam, nor you me, and everything said in this post is completely in the spirit and context of the thread itself, there are NO meta-thread considerations. i will NOT be playing any big online games with you EVER, and i will NOT be taking any shots at you anywhere but on this forum.

Re: mike
 

Are you saying that this thread would not have received such a response if it were simply titled, "hand against stoxtrader"? Seriously. The "stoxtrader" caught my attention more than the 100-200 in front of it, because I know he is well respected on this forum.

Edit: I should add that anything with, "hand against Astroglide" in the title would surely receive a tremendous response as well. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: mike
 

we will see. i will post an online 5-10 hand and call it 200-400 hand in a few weeks and i bet it will get a TON of reponses.