|
|
#43
11-13-2004, 11:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
"it'd be better to just find a softer game where your decisions will be more cut and dry."
Mike you are acting like Paluka is uncomfortable playing 100-200 when you have no clue that is the case and is in fact completely untrue from everything I have ever heard or seen from Paluka. Why are you telling him to find a better game when obviously this is the game he drove all the way down to foxwoods to play? The next game available is 50-100, if anything that game is close to too low. 
|
|
#44
11-14-2004, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
"Mike you are acting like Paluka is uncomfortable playing 100-200"
no im not. im saying that *anyone* who would think it's certainly wrong to play the A4s there would likely be doing so because they are giving too much respect to the other good players at the table and underestimating their own skill and the value of their position and relative skill vs. the crummy players. paluka made the call and my suspicion was that he would. ive read many posts of his and it's clear he knows what he's doing, at least from my modest understanding of things. some of you need to learn to seperate the idea of "hero" from the post from the actual poster, and need to worry much more about why you think a call is wrong here but posters like paluka and clarkmeister (and, ahem, me) dont.
|
|
#45
11-14-2004, 12:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
Mike you originally said
"that youd ask means you shouldnt be in the game. it's a definite play." Now you are tip-toeing around and making nice. You didnt say that anyone who thought it was clearly wrong sucks at 100-200, you said anyone who would even have to ask the question for discussion sucks at 100-200...Also, the "Clarkmeister is on my side so I must be right" argument is getting way old
|
|
#46
11-14-2004, 12:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
let me rephrase it: you all suck so bad that you even play 3-6 is amazing to me. there, no more tiptoeing. and clarkmeister sucks too.
sheesh, try and take something back and be nice and explain things and look what i get. you guys are too NITpicky for me. seriously though the problem is partially in that you took "shouldnt be in the game" to mean "sucks at 100-200". shouldnt be in the game connotes much more. it's like me saying i "shouldnt be on here posting and wasting my time over this nitpicky shiit" as opposed to saying "i suck at posting". im really glad ive lead this thread so far off topic. i mean were you guys beaten as children? youre all so freaking sensitive.
|
|
#47
11-14-2004, 01:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
[ QUOTE ]
i mean were you guys beaten as children? youre all so freaking sensitive. [/ QUOTE ] With an aluminum baseball bat until i was 11. Thanks for bringing it up. sorry i couldnt resist [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
|
|
#50
11-14-2004, 02:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Foxwoods 100/200 from last week
[ QUOTE ]
some of you need to learn to seperate the idea of "hero" from the post from the actual poster, and need to worry much more about why you think a call is wrong here but posters like paluka and clarkmeister (and, ahem, me) dont. [/ QUOTE ] Uh-huh, right. OK let's play this little game. We've also heard from Steve Giufre, JV, and (ahem), M, and some others, that they think the call isn't best. We've yet to hear from El Diablo, Dynasty or Rick but I'll bet they would at least lean towards the fold too. As for Ikke I won't try to guess what he would say, and I'll bet Mason would say fold. Heck why don't we just wait for SpicyF to chime in as that should give some serious weight to the matter. It's too bad Louie Landale doesn't post all that much anymore or we could just settle this by vote of the Roundtable. Where the heck is Vince when you need him?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
