Re: OOPS
 

HE HAS THE SECOND NUTS IF THE VILLAIN HOLDS A STRAIGHT FLUSH BECAUSE ONLY ONE IS POSSIBLE WHEN THE VILLAIN HOLDS THE 4c.

Re: OOPS
 

This is not true. Obviously it is more likely for his opponent to have the straight flush when both 47c and 42c make the straight flush than if only one combination of cards makes the straight flush. Therefore it is not helpful to say it is the second nuts and more helpful to say it is the third even though two different players can't hold the first and second nuts at the same time since they share the 4c.

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is not true. Obviously it is more likely for his opponent to have the straight flush when both 47c and 42c make the straight flush than if only one combination of cards makes the straight flush. Therefore it is not helpful to say it is the second nuts and more helpful to say it is the third even though two different players can't hold the first and second nuts at the same time since they share the 4c.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an amusing technical hijack. Why call it 3rd nuts if you know that it can never come in 3rd? If i have jt on the JJT43 board, I have the nuts, even though JJ would be better. I should add, that I'd choose your usage typically.

Re: OOPS
 

if the board has JJ and you have JJ how is JJ a possible holding for anyone else? or a better hand even?

nit

Re: OOPS
 

The same way it is possible for both better hands 7c4c and 4c2c to be out there at the same time? (Just to be on the safe side: It's Not.)

Re: OOPS
 

no.

Re: OOPS
 

I know you agree with me, but just to clarify: you rule out YOUR OWN cards when determining nut-itude, but you can't rule out the number of OTHER card combinations just because some of them overlap.

Re: OOPS
 

Man this is technical.

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still a moron for going that many bets on the river, either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think that it matters even a little. A situation like this arises so infrequently that the results are inconsequentilal and not worth discussing. If you are a winning player costing yourself a bet or two in situations like the one you describe are meaningless. Somebody please reread the hand. Did he say he was on tilt? No he failed to take an extemely unlikely event into account. EXTREMELY UNLIKLEY is the key. Don't worry about such small things things. They are things that come automatically not through discussion but through experience. Worry about the big things, your overall strategy andyou will be fine.

Vince

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really think that it matters even a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

Goint 11 bets (I re-counted) on the river with a non-nut A of trump on a 4 flush board matters quite a bit, even if it happens rarely.

[ QUOTE ]
Did he say he was on tilt?

[/ QUOTE ]

He said the other guy was a fish/moron in word and deed. Telling I think. He's so arrogant, that he's convinced the other guy can't read the board or is so stupid he is going off with a weaker hand. And he has a built in defense, that even if he is wrong, the other guy is a huge moron for even having that hand. This is a study in arrogance and entitlement syndrome. If he had simply misread his own hand, it would not be nearly so condemning of him. On the original board he posted (I'm skimmed the thread now, calling the 3-bet is closing in a crying call.)

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still a moron for going that many bets on the river, either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think that it matters even a little. A situation like this arises so infrequently that the results are inconsequentilal and not worth discussing. If you are a winning player costing yourself a bet or two in situations like the one you describe are meaningless. Somebody please reread the hand. Did he say he was on tilt? No he failed to take an extemely unlikely event into account. EXTREMELY UNLIKLEY is the key. Don't worry about such small things things. They are things that come automatically not through discussion but through experience. Worry about the big things, your overall strategy andyou will be fine.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

I was never on tilt...I just was amused by the hand and thought you guys would be, too. I went on to book a big win that night, so that's why I can laugh about it now!

And Vince brings up a good point - I did notice the straight flush out there - I just chose to ignore a very unlikely event - and it cost me a few bets. Oh well. Next hand!

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really think that it matters even a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

Goint 11 bets (I re-counted) on the river with a non-nut A of trump on a 4 flush board matters quite a bit, even if it happens rarely.

[ QUOTE ]
Did he say he was on tilt?

[/ QUOTE ]

He said the other guy was a fish/moron in word and deed. Telling I think. He's so arrogant, that he's convinced the other guy can't read the board or is so stupid he is going off with a weaker hand. And he has a built in defense, that even if he is wrong, the other guy is a huge moron for even having that hand. This is a study in arrogance and entitlement syndrome. If he had simply misread his own hand, it would not be nearly so condemning of him. On the original board he posted (I'm skimmed the thread now, calling the 3-bet is closing in a crying call.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Shemp, my calling the other guy a fish was a joke - I was being facetious, as we all know who the obvious fish in the hand was. You should really re-read my original post - it was meant as a funny story, nothing more.

And as this was my very first foray into a 15/30 game - and my very first hand at the table - I'm not sure how I could qualify any player sitting at the table as good nor bad, do you?

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
Shemp, my calling the other guy a fish was a joke - I was being facetious, as we all know who the obvious fish in the hand was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I'm wrong again. My apologies.

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
He said the other guy was a fish/moron in word and deed. Telling I think. He's so arrogant,

[/ QUOTE ]

So what! Every winning poker player is arrogant in one way or another. It comes with the territory.

Vince

Re: OOPS
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



He DID make his straight flush. Ansd as far as I recollect, the 2c4c was the ONLY possible straight flush out there. So I had the 2nd nuts.


[/ QUOTE ]

this is impossible, since you have the Ac the only straight flush 2c4c makes is with a board of 3 5 6, making 4c7c the better straight flush. you had the 3rd nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

24 and 74 are the same hand---only a ST FL using the 4 beats him----he effectively had the 2nd nuts