80 pf question

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
plays like checkraising the turn OOP w/ 2nd best hand to get a tight MP squeezed between gus & fish to fold a hand that beats both so that gus gets to SD vs. the fish HU.

this kind of play is a separator imo between a good player and a great player, but not one that is necessarily expert because it can be arrived at by deduction and not necessarily multilevel + mathematical analysis....

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect your opinion and I'm not jumping on the bash bandwagon here, I just don't think that play is as advanced as you say it is for one reason. I do it myself. I'd guess many others on here do it also. Therefore, I can guarantee you, it's a pretty good move but not near expert.

[/ QUOTE ]

just because people tend to be hard on themselves (you in this case, but we all are in general) doesn't make the play any less good. using your opinion of your lack of expert level play to argue that a play you do must be nonexpert is fallacious, logically speaking.

its a very good play and to see somebody who ive also seen play like an idiot do it while also playing controleld good poker makes me say he plays good, at times. the play itself is near expert because of the thinking involved. i understand you dont agree but you provided no reasoning behind dropping the clasification of the play.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]
Great post. We can all fall into this trap sometime. Just becuz something may be second nature to us doesnt make it any less expert. We sometimes forget all the studying and playing and thinking about the game that made such a play second nature.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive seen him make near expert plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, thanks for the eval, champ.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, wtf. fine, you think im a duche. but c'mon, i see a damn good play when i see a damn good play. im not saying that i am an expert, just that i can recognize a great play. you dont need to make a post like that in response to an honest opinion.

how about trying : "you may have overestimated his abilities." or "be careful what you call expert b/c what is to you may not be to the "real" experts like ray etc.."

no, you have to be a douche right back.

thanks.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

You said you've seen him make "near expert" plays. Please explain to me what plays you saw that were "near expert" and how you distinguished them from "expert" plays. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

plays like checkraising the turn OOP w/ 2nd best hand to get a tight MP squeezed between gus & fish to fold a hand that beats both so that gus gets to SD vs. the fish HU.

this kind of play is a separator imo between a good player and a great player, but not one that is necessarily expert because it can be arrived at by deduction and not necessarily multilevel + mathematical analysis that encompases what i would consider expert play. therefore, that particular play is "near expert" imo.

clearly i can be wrong b/c thats just my opinion.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

What are some example of "expert" plays? Thanks.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive seen him make near expert plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, thanks for the eval, champ.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, wtf. fine, you think im a duche. but c'mon, i see a damn good play when i see a damn good play. im not saying that i am an expert, just that i can recognize a great play. you dont need to make a post like that in response to an honest opinion.

how about trying : "you may have overestimated his abilities." or "be careful what you call expert b/c what is to you may not be to the "real" experts like ray etc.."

no, you have to be a douche right back.

thanks.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

You said you've seen him make "near expert" plays. Please explain to me what plays you saw that were "near expert" and how you distinguished them from "expert" plays. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

plays like checkraising the turn OOP w/ 2nd best hand to get a tight MP squeezed between gus & fish to fold a hand that beats both so that gus gets to SD vs. the fish HU.

this kind of play is a separator imo between a good player and a great player, but not one that is necessarily expert because it can be arrived at by deduction and not necessarily multilevel + mathematical analysis that encompases what i would consider expert play. therefore, that particular play is "near expert" imo.

clearly i can be wrong b/c thats just my opinion.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

What are some example of "expert" plays? Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is harder to come up with, but aplayer who will remain nameless pulled one against me a while ago that i can't remember exactly but it went something like this:

fish limped nameless raised i called in bb w/ A3s fish called.

flop was Jd73i c'red nameless fish folded nameless called.

turn was Qd. i bet nameless called.

river was Ad. i think for a second and bet. nameless raises i think and say @)(#*$)(@#*& im so screwed...i make a CRYYING call. if my hand was a SMIDGE worse id fold w/o a second thought.

so i called on a board of Jd7x3xQdAd and was shown K9o.

this is an expert play b/c each decision is so thought intensive and mathematical that if you change any of the variables it becomes a horrible fishy play.

i c'red a J73 flop. what do i have? well, i called in the bb getting 6.5:1 from an iso raise with a fish in the pot. nameless concluded that his 9 AND K outs were good b/c it looks like what i had, a small pair.

on the turn nameless picked up MORE outs w/ any T K 9 and a big enough pot to call (maybe a raise could be argued here).

on the river that Ad is a GREAT card for him to bluff. if i make a desperation bet w/ 66/88 etc. i HAVE to fold, the better hand here. i ahd top and bottom 2 pair so i had to call.

the expertness of this play is recognizing the situation on the flop, the players involved and the mathematical expecation of his outs being live and leverage against me in position later in the hand. its a level above a relatively simple turn C'R to fold out a better hand and get HU w/ a fish. i dont think Gus could make this play.

the THOUGHT process behind this hand makes it expert IMO. does that help?

-Barron

[GuyOnTilt]

Are you [censored] serious dude?

GoT

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you [censored] serious dude?

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

its the closest thing i could come up with. expert plays dont come up very often. thats why the gus play i gave was "near expert"

please elaborate on your profanity. although im sure it involves me being stupid but i gotta learn sometime.

Barron

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive seen him make near expert plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, thanks for the eval, champ.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, wtf. fine, you think im a duche. but c'mon, i see a damn good play when i see a damn good play. im not saying that i am an expert, just that i can recognize a great play. you dont need to make a post like that in response to an honest opinion.

how about trying : "you may have overestimated his abilities." or "be careful what you call expert b/c what is to you may not be to the "real" experts like ray etc.."

no, you have to be a douche right back.

thanks.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

You said you've seen him make "near expert" plays. Please explain to me what plays you saw that were "near expert" and how you distinguished them from "expert" plays. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

plays like checkraising the turn OOP w/ 2nd best hand to get a tight MP squeezed between gus & fish to fold a hand that beats both so that gus gets to SD vs. the fish HU.

this kind of play is a separator imo between a good player and a great player, but not one that is necessarily expert because it can be arrived at by deduction and not necessarily multilevel + mathematical analysis that encompases what i would consider expert play. therefore, that particular play is "near expert" imo.

clearly i can be wrong b/c thats just my opinion.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

What are some example of "expert" plays? Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is harder to come up with, but aplayer who will remain nameless pulled one against me a while ago that i can't remember exactly but it went something like this:

fish limped nameless raised i called in bb w/ A3s fish called.

flop was Jd73i c'red nameless fish folded nameless called.

turn was Qd. i bet nameless called.

river was Ad. i think for a second and bet. nameless raises i think and say @)(#*$)(@#*& im so screwed...i make a CRYYING call. if my hand was a SMIDGE worse id fold w/o a second thought.

so i called on a board of Jd7x3xQdAd and was shown K9o.

this is an expert play b/c each decision is so thought intensive and mathematical that if you change any of the variables it becomes a horrible fishy play.

i c'red a J73 flop. what do i have? well, i called in the bb getting 6.5:1 from an iso raise with a fish in the pot. nameless concluded that his 9 AND K outs were good b/c it looks like what i had, a small pair.

on the turn nameless picked up MORE outs w/ any T K 9 and a big enough pot to call (maybe a raise could be argued here).

on the river that Ad is a GREAT card for him to bluff. if i make a desperation bet w/ 66/88 etc. i HAVE to fold, the better hand here. i ahd top and bottom 2 pair so i had to call.

the expertness of this play is recognizing the situation on the flop, the players involved and the mathematical expecation of his outs being live and leverage against me in position later in the hand. its a level above a relatively simple turn C'R to fold out a better hand and get HU w/ a fish. i dont think Gus could make this play.

the THOUGHT process behind this hand makes it expert IMO. does that help?

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

wait, are you SURE the fish folded in this hand? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive seen him make near expert plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, thanks for the eval, champ.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, wtf. fine, you think im a duche. but c'mon, i see a damn good play when i see a damn good play. im not saying that i am an expert, just that i can recognize a great play. you dont need to make a post like that in response to an honest opinion.

how about trying : "you may have overestimated his abilities." or "be careful what you call expert b/c what is to you may not be to the "real" experts like ray etc.."

no, you have to be a douche right back.

thanks.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

You said you've seen him make "near expert" plays. Please explain to me what plays you saw that were "near expert" and how you distinguished them from "expert" plays. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

plays like checkraising the turn OOP w/ 2nd best hand to get a tight MP squeezed between gus & fish to fold a hand that beats both so that gus gets to SD vs. the fish HU.

this kind of play is a separator imo between a good player and a great player, but not one that is necessarily expert because it can be arrived at by deduction and not necessarily multilevel + mathematical analysis that encompases what i would consider expert play. therefore, that particular play is "near expert" imo.

clearly i can be wrong b/c thats just my opinion.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

What are some example of "expert" plays? Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is harder to come up with, but aplayer who will remain nameless pulled one against me a while ago that i can't remember exactly but it went something like this:

fish limped nameless raised i called in bb w/ A3s fish called.

flop was Jd73i c'red nameless fish folded nameless called.

turn was Qd. i bet nameless called.

river was Ad. i think for a second and bet. nameless raises i think and say @)(#*$)(@#*& im so screwed...i make a CRYYING call. if my hand was a SMIDGE worse id fold w/o a second thought.

so i called on a board of Jd7x3xQdAd and was shown K9o.

this is an expert play b/c each decision is so thought intensive and mathematical that if you change any of the variables it becomes a horrible fishy play.

i c'red a J73 flop. what do i have? well, i called in the bb getting 6.5:1 from an iso raise with a fish in the pot. nameless concluded that his 9 AND K outs were good b/c it looks like what i had, a small pair.

on the turn nameless picked up MORE outs w/ any T K 9 and a big enough pot to call (maybe a raise could be argued here).

on the river that Ad is a GREAT card for him to bluff. if i make a desperation bet w/ 66/88 etc. i HAVE to fold, the better hand here. i ahd top and bottom 2 pair so i had to call.

the expertness of this play is recognizing the situation on the flop, the players involved and the mathematical expecation of his outs being live and leverage against me in position later in the hand. its a level above a relatively simple turn C'R to fold out a better hand and get HU w/ a fish. i dont think Gus could make this play.

the THOUGHT process behind this hand makes it expert IMO. does that help?

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]
Another great post. I think your opponent did make a mistake by not raising the turn. He should know that you should be checkraising with many hands in this spot, some of these hands include Jx,7x,3x and any pocket pair. The turn Queen gives him more outs and its a decent scare card for him to represent. So I think he shouldve of raised in that spot. Once your opponent called the turn, i thought the river bluff raise was a good move considering that you still could have a weak holding, and he has another scare card he can repesent. I think that you played the hand very well. And I thought your opponent played his hand well but I do think not raising the turn here was a mistake by him in this situation.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
its the closest thing i could come up with. expert plays dont come up very often. thats why the gus play i gave was "near expert"

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know how you choose to define the term "expert" in this sense 'cause I've never bothered thinking about it, but it would seem you tend to at least give a lot of weight to any play which the 2p2 MHS forum wouldn't make/think to make but is better. If that's the case, then they come up ALL THE TIME.

[ QUOTE ]
please elaborate on your profanity. although im sure it involves me being stupid but i gotta learn sometime.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude. The play you just gave isn't "very" advanced. Obviously "very" is completely subjective depending on where you are in terms of skill at LHE, but that play and similar plays along the same lines of thinking are [censored] that I learned a long time ago, and I've developed a lot since then and still wouldn't consider myself an expert player. Say a player who was decent at LHE and was playing smaller mid-stakes games saw me pull a play like flat calling a 3bet HU OOP PF with AKo after opening from LMP, check-raising a 843 two-tone flop, betting an 8r turn, and betting a 9r river for value. He might consider my overall line on that hand "expert", because in his limited knowledge of the game it is. To me, it's an SOP hand. Do I think he's dumb for considering it an "expert" play? No, as long as he's not all pompous about his abilities, sp. over-estimating them.

But the air with which you talk (in general on this board and in this thread specifically), it sounds like you think you're an authority on this [censored] and are in some position to judge which plays are "near-expert" and which plays are "expert". I rarely come around here anymore and a lot of it has to do with things like this (not with you specifically). It seems like a ton of what this board is now is a group of mediocre LHE players patting each other on the back and telling each other how great their plays are. I do not assume to be expert, nor do I assume to be able to judge who/what is or isn't expert, but that's my honest opinion (and it's only my opinion obv).

GoT

[J.A.Sucker]

My point is simple: the things you describe are good plays. Players who make these players are playing well, and if they make the right play almost all of the time, which players who understand these concepts do, they are good players. The best players are able to determine the proper time to make plays, and this is what gets the money at the big limits. Not so good players don't have as good a judgement. If the dude is doing what you say, he sounds good, but this is a different player than I played with recently. Poker isn't rocket science, though, and I'm sure Gus can figure it out.

[daryn]

barron,

i played a hand vs. gus last night, and just wanted to see if you could clarify something for me. is his play here expert, or merely near expert? i know you are the guy to ask.

PokerStars 100/200 Hold'em (5 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is BB with T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
<font color="#CC3333">gus raises</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Hero calls.

Flop: (4.50 SB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">gus bets</font>, Hero calls.

Turn: (3.25 BB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">gus bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">gus 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero caps</font>, gus calls.

River: (11.25 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">gus raises</font>, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 15.25 BB

gus has As Kc (straight, ace high).
Hero has Ts Qs (two pair, queens and tens).
Outcome: UTG wins 15.25 BB. </font>