|
|
#91
11-27-2004, 03:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
[ QUOTE ]
Lansing: i) Please explain how C/R someone ON YOUR LEFT will help protect your hand. ii) Please admit that all your psychic predictions of how the actions will unfold were WRONG. iii) Please explain why you bet the river AFTER SAYING YOU HAD SOMEONE ON QQ!!!! iv) Please provide evidence of your stated winrates. I call BS! v) Please explain why everyone disagrees with you on this post. Bear in mind that many of the players are internet pros at 15/30 or higher. As you can think on such a higher level than them, why aren't you killing the 100/200 game? Or are you? Please provide evidence. vi) You ask us to come play against you on Party Poker, please provide your ID. Please answer these questions Lansing. [/ QUOTE ] I have answered all of these before, but here goes: 1. I would have been CRing the KK, which was on my immediate RIGHT, forcing the UTG and MP fish to call two bets cold, with the prospect of a reraise by the KK. This is a much stronger move to protect my hand than capping preflop, and there was a good chance capping preflop would impair my ability to do it at all. 2. With the exception of the UTG not capping, everyone behaved as I expected. The UTG probably didn't cap because he recognized how weak-tight the CO was. The UTG was a maniac who had been doing a lot of nutty betting, and it was a good assumption to make that he would cap. He didn't, and my strategy worked out even better because of this, because I was able to CR the CO and force the fish to call two cold, AND I was able to convince the CO that his KK was good, making him confident enough to reraise (probably putting me on AQ or a busted AK). 3. I was not sure he had QQ, though his turn raise gave me pause. I still thought there was a good chance I was best, so I bet. I was raised and called. Pretty standard. 4. I've attached my PT stats for the last 2 months below. As I have stated in other posts, I just made the move up again from 3-6 and 2-4 to 5-10, though I had suffered a 110BB downswing on 3-6, which accounts for the lower than normal winrate. Yes I know everyone will yap about sample size at 5-10, but that's silly in this case. I have an Empire account that I played on until I got an affiliate on Party, and the stats there are slightly better than these (better at 5-10, worse at 2-4, almost exactly the same at 3-6), with more 5-10 hands, but these 43,000 hands suffice for my point. winrates <<If that link doesn't work just let me know. I'm new at this webpage thing>> 5. Everyone appears to disagree because they cannot see the logic of not capping with aces in this instance. The reason I don't play higher is that I still want to learn more and I have student loands to pay off. Thus, I cannot afford the large (in money terms) variance. Once they're done and the BR is bigger, I'm likely moving up. I have played up to 30-60 (5 times, live, maybe 2000 hands) and done extremely well, much better than at 5-10 in fact. But it scared the crap out of me, I freely admit. 6. Don't be an idiot and ask this stupid question again. I have explained why I am not going to do that, and it should be obvious. Come to the 5-10 tables and you will undoubtedly be playing me at some point. I hope you feel satisfied now. 
|
|
#93
11-27-2004, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
What part of WHAT I JUST WROTE escapes you?
I told you these were two months of stats from when I switched. I have more stats from my Empire account, but I kept those manually for the most part (been using PT for about 2.5 months). I had played about 12,000 hands at Empire with a 5-10 winrate of ~3.1/100. Anyways, I have no interest in proving to anyone here that I am a winning player. Believe it or not, I don't care.
|
|
#94
11-27-2004, 04:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
[ QUOTE ]
Anyways, I have no interest in proving to anyone here that I am a winning player. Believe it or not, I don't care. [/ QUOTE ] Yet, you posted a screenshot of your PT stats. How deliciously ironic.
|
|
#96
11-27-2004, 04:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
You continually flip flop between your pre-hand reads/strategies and your post-hand analysis. They are inconsistent with each other (as I have already pointed out), yet are the basis for your whole argument.
1 - You claim CO is so weak-tight that he's gone into check-call mode after being raised once on the flop when he had an overpair, yet in this hand you got to checkraise him twice and he 3-bet you each time so that means your plan was correct. No. 2 - You expect UTG (a maniac) to cap preflop, but not lead the flop? So then CO leads and you get to CR and force everyone to call 2 bets cold so again it validates your plan? No.
|
|
#97
11-27-2004, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
[ QUOTE ]
You continually flip flop between your pre-hand reads/strategies and your post-hand analysis. They are inconsistent with each other (as I have already pointed out), yet are the basis for your whole argument. 1 - You claim CO is so weak-tight that he's gone into check-call mode after being raised once on the flop when he had an overpair, yet in this hand you got to checkraise him twice and he 3-bet you each time so that means your plan was correct. No. 2 - You expect UTG (a maniac) to cap preflop, but not lead the flop? So then CO leads and you get to CR and force everyone to call 2 bets cold so again it validates your plan? No. [/ QUOTE ] You're either illiterate or being purposely stupid. 1. He would have gone into check call mode HAD I BEEN THE ONE WHO CAPPED. Because I did NOT cap, he did NOT put me on AA or QQ, which he almost certainly WOULD have had I capped. At the most I would have been able to raise him once, if that. This is a function of MY table image and HIS together. Christ, this is so simple. 2. No, I expect him to lead the flop, letting the KK raise him (because even the WT player doesn't fear this maniac with KK in his hand) and letting me 3 bet, forcing the maniac to call two bets (and likely fold) and the fish to call two bets (and hopefully fold, or at least make a brutal call). As it happens, I was able to make the fish call two cold anyways, and the maniac realized (as did I) that the UTG probably had AA, KK, or QQ or he would not have behaved as he did. Jesus, try to at least show some glimmer of intelligence when you criticize. At least show that you understand the most basic strategic issues in the hand before you type.
|
|
#100
11-27-2004, 04:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heh, sometimes you get a beat so nutty all you can do is laugh. *cry*
At the risk of being the only one defending this guy, and being called him again lol, he seems to have reasonable reasons for his play. You may not agree, and hell I *don't* agree, but I understand what he was doing and why it wasn't totally silly, as some people are intimating. He's showed stats that indicate he's a solid winning player, and so I really don't understand the level of anomosity here. It looks like a play that could have gone both ways, and he had a read on the players at the table that made him play it the way he did. Had the fishy player not hit, it would have been a pretty nice line on the hand.
But then again, I like flamewars, so carry on ...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
