Re: Question in Ciaffone\'s PL and NL book
[ QUOTE ]
just a piece of advice, next time you REALLY want to learn something about this great book, dont respond so forcefully when someone reinforces your preconcieved notions, let the discussion grow naturally, this thread closely resembles a dialogue of theoretical masturbation
[/ QUOTE ]
Little hostile. It is a great book, note I put one question up for discussion not the grounding of the entire book.
I don't believe I responded that forcefully. I was surprised someone would advocate so strongly a fold with such a strong hand to just one raise. I don't understand why you have to commit your entire stack if you call. Why can't you re-evaluate on the turn. Does the villain bet the turn here 100% of the time as you make it sound? I don't believe so. That is just the point I'm trying to make. A thinking opponent can make this raise with a wide range depending on hero's previous actions. I've done it with nothing to make it look like I have a set (case and point, it was against Fslexcduck when she had a set [oops!] and she strongly believed she was going to stack me).
Anyway, I'm not sure what 'preconceived notion' Ciaffone reinforced. How do I let the discussion grow IF I DON'T POST.
Your response is inane.
I like theory. And I like masturbation. Why not put the two together?
|