|
|
#11
03-22-2005, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Results of Empire\'s investigation
I contacted Empire immediately after the hand in question and received the results of their investigation today.
Their investigation found that no collusion had been going on and they were also kind enough to provide the players hole cards when I requested it. BB held A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and CO held 6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. This shows that there doesn't seem to have been any collusion going on, just a very sucky CO playing in the game. FatLoser 
|
|
#12
03-22-2005, 01:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Results of Empire\'s investigation
just a very sucky CO playing in the game.
The bb just may have played this hand worse. While failure to 3-bet preflop here doesn't quite rise to the level of "crime against humanity" I think it's damn close given a CO-1 open raise and a couple of (probably goofballish) cold-calls. Couple this with the fact that he can't get excessive action from KQ on that board despite his pre-flop deception and the fact the he missed a bet on the turn (and also probably the fact that he failed to induce a bluff on the river from a player who was almost certainly on air) and I think we have all the necessary ingredients for another "sucky player". Also: 3-bet the flop. You don't particularly care about confronting the button with a double bet on the big street in this situation, and your line gives the bb a better chance to get away from a 2nd best hand. These flop 3-bets are often just bullshit posturing/attempts to keep the lead and knock the caller out, and I don't think the bb's gonna give it a hell of a lot of credit here if he has a reasonable hand. Ironically enough if you played your hand more correctly, he would have gotten exessive action here by being able to smooth call your flop 3-bet and lead 3-bet the turn. In initially reading this post, my gut reaction was that the button had [censored] (I'd think he'd 3-bet with 88 or 44 preflop) and the bb probably had a worse a king. Just as general rule in this game, when you have a decent hand and can't really put them on anything that beats you, you probably just want to jam it, and under no circumstances should you fold.
|
|
#14
03-22-2005, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Empire 30-60, was I colluded against?
[ QUOTE ]
But you should continue if 84 is suspected. Too much in the pot with 5 outs + running pair. [/ QUOTE ] did you even read what he wrote before posting this?
|
|
#16
03-22-2005, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Empire 30-60, was I colluded against?
[ QUOTE ]
I think your accusation is was off base. I think you're one of those posters who likes to post for the sake of it. [/ QUOTE ] being that you responded about the flop and his post was about the river, I'm pretty sure you didn't read it very well. I was about to say the same about you
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
