Re: This was deception, that\'s for sure
[ QUOTE ]
1) Were my post-turn and post-river calls too loose? Or was I too passive for not aggressing more with the hand I did have?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think so. Sometimes you pay off. In fact, you probably lost the least you could with this hand because the guy really didn't play his aces very well. Limping and then just calling the flop with the aces is horrible. I think your reasoning for shutting down the aggression was correct. I put him on two pair when he raised.
[ QUOTE ]
2) Is it possible that his 'disconnect' was intentional? Or was his actual play even more deceptive than this?
[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt it was intentional. Even if it were, I wouldn't have considered it a tell anyway.
[ QUOTE ]
3) Am I a sore loser for even asking the question?
[/ QUOTE ]
No comment. You didn't lose nearly as much as you could have.
[ QUOTE ]
Bonus Question:
Given that so many people think that to check-raise is a sin because it is deceptive, if his disconnect was deceptive, is that unethical in poker?
[/ QUOTE ]
Anyone who has a problem with check-raising doesn't understand how poker is played. People who get angry at being check-raised are idiots. Disconnects are disconnects, there's no reason to read anything into them other than the guy has a slow/bad connection. If you start considering disconnects to be tells, you'll just confuse yourself.
Regards,
T
|