|
|
#112
11-03-2005, 12:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: More like....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You play only 4 hands AA, KK, QQ or AK. You get these roughly every 44-45 hands. [/ QUOTE ] This might work for tourneys like Slansky's beginner method, but this would not for ring games. Playing this style you miss out on the bread and butter of no limit cash games, IMPLIED ODDS. [/ QUOTE ] the style actually works. $1 to $20k seems like some pretty grueling hrs and probably have better equity just playing solid poker. 
|
|
#113
11-03-2005, 12:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another message from BH
[ QUOTE ]
Just click on the "Live at the bike, Watch the archives" window. [/ QUOTE ] Thanks, i missed it, it's at night here in the Netherlands. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#114
11-03-2005, 12:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
[ QUOTE ]
...it is simply designed to take advantage of a donk that will call a short stack with say KJ suited etc... [/ QUOTE ] I think the article does not give credit to most no limit players...I'd rather be the guy who hits a set of deuces and covers donkey's stack on an A2x as he overplays his AK. That's a play that most people will make, not calling all in with KJ suited; cash game is not a tournament. edit: In addition, I honestly feel that a preflop all-in, in a ring game is absolutely pointless. Your pot equity is shot with this move unless multiple players have gone all in and you want to maximize your dominance with a hand like AA or KK (which even against two players you're only about a mediocre favorite over 2 random hands). You also destroy any pot odds for an opponent to call, why call 1.5:1 with AQ or 99 when you figure you're heads up and behind.
|
|
#115
11-03-2005, 12:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The article in Bluff magazine was effectively David Sklansky's "The System." [/ QUOTE ] I did not know this. hmmmmmmmm. Was this discussed on here elsewhere??? [/ QUOTE ] I don't know. All I know is that when I read it, that is exactly what I thought it was. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com
|
|
#117
11-03-2005, 12:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
From what I understand, Frank DID make the nut flush. The straight flush is a different hand. The nut flush is exactly that, the best possible flush. a straight flush is not a flush.
|
|
#118
11-03-2005, 12:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
[ QUOTE ]
From what I understand, Frank DID flop the nut flush. The straight flush is a different hand. The nut flush is exactly that, the best possible flush. a straight flush is not a flush. [/ QUOTE ] Please explain, maybe I'm a bit slow.
|
|
#119
11-03-2005, 12:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
Keep in mind that the article was an interview with a wacky guy who does the Jim Rose Circus. Same guy that has a show where a guy puts a rubiks cube in his mouth and spits it out solved, condoms passed out to a crowd and whoever gets the blue one, get 1/2 hour with the pornstar. lol
I'm sure it is easier to do online than live. If anyone could do it online, Ferguson could.
|
|
#120
11-03-2005, 12:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More like....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] From what I understand, Frank DID flop the nut flush. The straight flush is a different hand. The nut flush is exactly that, the best possible flush. a straight flush is not a flush. [/ QUOTE ] Please explain, maybe I'm a bit slow. [/ QUOTE ] Well I don't think I explained that very well. A straight flush is technically a flush. But the "nut flush" does not imply the straight. Therefore the nut flush is just a flush . He has the nut flush. He does not have the nuts. This is like saying you flopped the nut straight on a 3 flush board. you have the nut straight but you dont have the nuts. I think this makes sense to me.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
