Self serving magazine articles - Page 3

PokerHorse · #21 09-03-2005, 11:41 AM

it certainly isnt re-raise time. Yes the game overall probably is loose but the other tight player in the game is raising in early posistion, which negates this strategy. If on the button ,I could see a call here but with a bet and raise on the turn id be gone, and it would really depend on
how the games been going as to whether I call the pre-flop raise.

PokerHorse · #22 09-03-2005, 11:46 AM

Like i said above I could see calling, but youd be gone on the flop and even though the game is loose, current conditions apply, so the call imo is not clear cut.The odds you are getting to come in are negated by a very tight raiser. with a loose raiser then I'm with the program.

bernie · #23 09-03-2005, 02:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The odds you are getting to come in are negated by a very tight raiser. with a loose raiser then I'm with the program.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are not negated. Reduced, yes. But not negated. This is a routine call in this spot. If the raiser was loose, then you're looking more at 3 betting in this situation.

[ QUOTE ]
but youd be gone on the flop and even though the game is loose, current conditions apply, so the call imo is not clear cut

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter what the flop is, whether you'd be gone or not, in regards to how you play it preflop.

b

PokerHorse · #24 09-03-2005, 03:15 PM

?? we do know what the flop is and your right i shouldnt have used the term negated, severly reduced fits my bill, look above at Masons and others posts and youll find I'm not alone here. good luck

bernie · #25 09-04-2005, 07:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
?? we do know what the flop is and your right i shouldnt have used the term negated, severly reduced fits my bill, look above at Masons and others posts and youll find I'm not alone here. good luck

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't know what the flop is before the flop is out. the way the post read was making it seem that because of the flop, he shouldn't have seen the flop.

Preflop I believe Mason would coldcall in this spot as would the greater majority of players on this site. The question is the reraise, not seeing the flop.

b

PokerHorse · #26 09-05-2005, 05:14 PM

Dude ,i said if I did call I would have been gone on the flop. What part has got you confused? actually, dont answer, lets move on okay.?

BarronVangorToth · #27 09-05-2005, 11:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dude ,i said if I did call I would have been gone on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

MANY would call rather than raise pre-flop; those that call shouldn't continue after the flop. Hence the point of the article: given the action and how I have applied SSH to this level of game and these players all leads me to this line in these types of events which I believe are +EV in the immediate scenario at hand.

But, yes, if you call, you fold the flop.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

PokerHorse · #28 09-06-2005, 02:20 PM

Yes i understand. This post wasnt directed at you.
Again with a tight raiser, to me the conditions are not good for your play, and the justification at the end of the article is flawed logic.After you made the first mistake, the pot allowed you to continue but with the pot being capped preflop by a TIGHT raiser and then bet raised and three bet,you have to adjust your odds. this is also a results oriented hand.had you made your straight on the turn
and then faced a re-draw to a full house and lost, this article would never have made it. I do understand one thing from other posts I have now read, which is in general your feeling is that players play too tightly in many situations.
One thing to think about is categories of games. it is more a function of how players are playing right now, rather than making blanket assumptions, and you have to seperate the players.Overall I'm sure that half the table or even more were playing loose, but the other tight aggressive player in the game had the edge here, so it just wasnt the right spot. Tight hand in a loose game. Just as loose hands in tight games happen as wellall the time.

-Oz- · #29 09-08-2005, 08:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, as for Osborne's article, is this anything new? I would rather of had an article detaling bubble strategy or some other useful comment than the generic, dont' be results oriented, and here is why! Look at this good call I made!

[/ QUOTE ]

While I appreciate your opinion, I think you missed the point of my article. The reason I detailed the hand (and my "great" call) was to set up the conditions where I made a realization about how to think about the game. I agree that this wasn't an earthshaking strategy concept, but it has a major effect on how I evaluate my own play, and that's why I shared it. If this was nothing new to you, congratulations; just one area where your thinking was more advanced than mine. But I suspect there were lots of readers that hadn't thought about this particular application of ROT before.

Thanks for the feedback. Perhaps some of my future articles will be of more value to you.

-Oz-

wdeadwyler · #30 09-13-2005, 12:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Finally, as for Osborne's article, is this anything new? I would rather of had an article detaling bubble strategy or some other useful comment than the generic, dont' be results oriented, and here is why! Look at this good call I made!

[/ QUOTE ]

While I appreciate your opinion, I think you missed the point of my article. The reason I detailed the hand (and my "great" call) was to set up the conditions where I made a realization about how to think about the game. I agree that this wasn't an earthshaking strategy concept, but it has a major effect on how I evaluate my own play, and that's why I shared it. If this was nothing new to you, congratulations; just one area where your thinking was more advanced than mine.
-Oz-

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow I got owned.