|
|
#41
06-26-2005, 01:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] this is standard for me also [/ QUOTE ] But can you say why? [/ QUOTE ] "why" [/ QUOTE ] 1. Not funny. 2. Not original. 3. Not correct as I didn't say "But can you say 'why'?" 
|
|
#42
06-26-2005, 01:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
Jason, I don't really understand this at all. The hand is standard because your opponent is bad, will call previous streets with worse hands and by the time will get to the river the pot is big enough for you to snap off a bluff. Hands like this happen all the time - it sucks that you didn't think this was standard, but now it's in your repetoire. There simply isn't much "why" in a hand like this because not much is going on.
-SmileyEH
|
|
#43
06-26-2005, 01:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] this is standard for me also [/ QUOTE ] But can you say why? [/ QUOTE ] are you only unsure about river? villians stats give him a range wide enough that he could be calling with a lot of hands you're ahead of. also, he is aggressive enough that that there is a chance he will bluff this river when checked to. his aggressiveness also makes me think he might have raised on previous streets with a made hand. the jack isnt the best card to come off, but its better than a diamond or king.
|
|
#44
06-26-2005, 01:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] this is standard for me also [/ QUOTE ] But can you say why? [/ QUOTE ] "why" [/ QUOTE ] 1. Not funny. 2. Not original. 3. Not correct as I didn't say "But can you say 'why'?" [/ QUOTE ] About as funny as the ever so used and abused "can you see why" quote. While we are attacking each others posts though, i find it ironic that the man who thought it was nessesary to start a "State of the forum" post is also the one asking the question of how to play AQ out of position. I see both a pot and a kettle, hmmm. Have a nice day.
|
|
#45
06-26-2005, 02:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
[ QUOTE ] While we are attacking each others posts though, i find it ironic that man who thought it was nessesary to start a "State of the forum" is also the one asking the question of how to play AQ out of position. I see both a pot and a kettle, hmmm. Have a nice day. [/ QUOTE ] My thoughts exactly. I rarely post here, as I am not in the "SS clique". But I lurk here often enough, and enjoy many of the posts. Not really trying to berate you Jason, but this hand is amazingly standard, especially coming from a person that has 4400+ posts in 7 months here (read: high signal/noise ratio??) Isn't this the type of post that you have been trying to prevent newbies from posting? In any event, I hope you learn that the forum is for everybody to enjoy and use as they see fit, and not every hand is "standard" for all posters. There will always be "worthless" posts (such as this hand posting) and there will be the occasional "added to my favorite threads" posts. You have to take the good with the bad. Once again, I'm not trying to be a d**k, but newbies have the same right to post here as you do. Having 4400+ posts does not make you an expert poker player, as evidenced by this thread. Everyone has something to learn, and actually this hand was a good post; I think the "newbies" will learn alot from this post, as I hope you have. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#47
06-26-2005, 02:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
The beautiful irony is that for a "boringly standard" post, this thread has gotten quite a lot of attention. May it R.I.P.
|
|
#49
06-26-2005, 05:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
I hate you. I hate you. I hate you. I don't even know you, but I hate you. I hate your guts. I hope all the bad things in life happen to you and only to you.
|
|
#50
06-26-2005, 05:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Daily Hand Post: \"Amazingly Standard\" AQ?
ok, everybody writes this is standard. i will try to argue against it.
flop: the flop is low, but: its suited and you are up against 3 opponents. the likelihood that someone has a flush draw is roughly 50% and about the same for someone having a pair. even if the flop missed everybody you will get at least one caller anyway pretty often. and a player as passive (pre flop) as villain might have AK or a pocket pair, which he wont fold probably. turn: after calling the flop, villain probably has a diamond draw, a pair, AK or or a pocket pair. he wont fold any of these hands. river: after calling cold preflop and calling flop and turn, he is very likely to have something. if he has 2 broadway cards he has you beat (unless he has exactly KQ). if he has a connector he has you beat as well. if he has a pocket pair he has you beat. the only possibility that he has a weaker hand is KQ or Ax of diamonds with an x that doesn't match the board. sounds like a fold, doesn't it? discuss.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
