80 pf question - Page 6

PokerCad · #51 08-31-2005, 03:01 PM

Just a note from a nobody, I read your posts on a daily basis, I respect your knowledge and insight and have learned much from your analysis
jeff

surfdoc · #52 08-31-2005, 03:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]

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).

[/ QUOTE ]

I just want to respond to a portion of this post. This discussion is very similar to one I had with mikel on the ride home from LA last night. While I agree with the rest of what you are saying about the "near expert" nonsense, I disagree with your implication that the quality of the discussion is markedly deterioating. I think there is just a progression of skill that occurs and after being aroung here for a long time certain players like yourself, astro, mikel, and diablo just outgrow the same old shiit and get tired of us up and coming players throwing around less advanced ideas. The point I guess I am making is that us common folk really need you guys to "come around" so that we can continue to grow as players.

bicyclekick · #53 08-31-2005, 03:56 PM

What the hell is going on here?

Did a collective bug crawl up all of your asses or is this some elaborate multi-person joke?

You guys are getting on a guy for some minor/debateable words. One person's view of an expert play is another persons routine play is another person's fishy play. Who gives a [censored]. The point he was trying to make is gus is playing good limit holdem. I played quite a bit with him a few months ago and he was mediocre at best. Whether he's making 'near expert' (whatever that means anyhow) or expert plays doesn't really matter. He's making good plays. Don't get so cought up in the freaking language. It's pathetic.

Philuva · #54 08-31-2005, 04:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
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?

[/ QUOTE ]

Expert. He knew the J was coming on the river and got you to put in 6 BB's while he had the nuts.

Luke · #55 08-31-2005, 04:28 PM

You guys are getting on a guy for some minor/debateable words... Don't get so cought up in the freaking language. It's pathetic.

Ding ding ding

Ulysses · #56 08-31-2005, 04:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What the hell is going on here?

Did a collective bug crawl up all of your asses or is this some elaborate multi-person joke?

You guys are getting on a guy for some minor/debateable words. One person's view of an expert play is another persons routine play is another person's fishy play. Who gives a [censored]. The point he was trying to make is gus is playing good limit holdem. I played quite a bit with him a few months ago and he was mediocre at best. Whether he's making 'near expert' (whatever that means anyhow) or expert plays doesn't really matter. He's making good plays. Don't get so cought up in the freaking language. It's pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, what's pathetic imo is the "grand arbiter of skill level" attitude wrt both plays and players, especially when it often comes from players woefully unqualified to make such assessments.

Nigel · #57 08-31-2005, 04:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What the hell is going on here?

Did a collective bug crawl up all of your asses or is this some elaborate multi-person joke?

You guys are getting on a guy for some minor/debateable words. One person's view of an expert play is another persons routine play is another person's fishy play. Who gives a [censored]. The point he was trying to make is gus is playing good limit holdem. I played quite a bit with him a few months ago and he was mediocre at best. Whether he's making 'near expert' (whatever that means anyhow) or expert plays doesn't really matter. He's making good plays. Don't get so cought up in the freaking language. It's pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, what's pathetic imo is the "grand arbiter of skill level" attitude wrt both plays and players, especially when it often comes from players woefully unqualified to make such assessments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, what's pathetic is that this discussion is even happening.

I try and get a discussion going on blind strategy and can't get anyone to say one damn thing, but people are more than happy to spend 20 pages arguing about crap like this, or if Tommy should have folded QQ pre-flop, or whether it's correct to put the 92nd bet in on the river HU with KK on an AAKKx board vs. a 4/1/.1, like it even matters.

It would be nice if more people around here acted like they genuinely were interested in improving their game, rather than getting crtiticism or a pat on the back for how they played one odd hand. Sorry, had to get that off my chest.</rant>

BTW, what the heck is Gus' name on UB?

Nigel

scott8 · #58 08-31-2005, 05:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
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].
gus raises, 3 folds, 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] (2 players)
Hero checks, gus bets, Hero calls.

Turn: (3.25 BB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero checks, gus bets, Hero raises, gus 3-bets, Hero caps, gus calls.

River: (11.25 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, gus raises, 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. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like he extracted the maximum.

Lawrence Ng · #59 08-31-2005, 08:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

A play that gives me a good chance to win the pot or can increase my chances of winning the pot is an advanced, expert play in my book.

Thank you.

Lawrence

SA125 · #60 08-31-2005, 10:00 PM

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Nah, what's pathetic imo is the "grand arbiter of skill level" attitude wrt both plays and players,

[/ QUOTE ]

Barron wins the Gold because I do tend to be more hard on myself than others and had to look up the word "fallacious".

Diablo gets the Silver because, aside from all the other BS, his point of Barron's initial attempt at catergorizing the play of a guy who's won millions is debatable. Limit or NL, whether he used to play fishy or not.

Kick gets the Bronze because it's true, the whole attempt to categorize play is BS. Any focus on specific phrases is BS. Perception can vary greatly.

I'm sure barron stil plays really well and knows goods plays when he sees them. What level they may be, who gives a sh*t. Unless, of course, he maintains to have a handle on them. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]