how many bets until you just call? - Page 5

#41 11-23-2005, 01:10 PM

HE HAS THE SECOND NUTS IF THE VILLAIN HOLDS A STRAIGHT FLUSH BECAUSE ONLY ONE IS POSSIBLE WHEN THE VILLAIN HOLDS THE 4c.

TheWorstPlayer · #42 11-23-2005, 01:20 PM

This is not true. Obviously it is more likely for his opponent to have the straight flush when both 47c and 42c make the straight flush than if only one combination of cards makes the straight flush. Therefore it is not helpful to say it is the second nuts and more helpful to say it is the third even though two different players can't hold the first and second nuts at the same time since they share the 4c.

shemp · #43 11-23-2005, 01:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This is not true. Obviously it is more likely for his opponent to have the straight flush when both 47c and 42c make the straight flush than if only one combination of cards makes the straight flush. Therefore it is not helpful to say it is the second nuts and more helpful to say it is the third even though two different players can't hold the first and second nuts at the same time since they share the 4c.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an amusing technical hijack. Why call it 3rd nuts if you know that it can never come in 3rd? If i have jt on the JJT43 board, I have the nuts, even though JJ would be better. I should add, that I'd choose your usage typically.

wheelz · #44 11-23-2005, 01:26 PM

if the board has JJ and you have JJ how is JJ a possible holding for anyone else? or a better hand even?

nit

shemp · #45 11-23-2005, 01:32 PM

The same way it is possible for both better hands 7c4c and 4c2c to be out there at the same time? (Just to be on the safe side: It's Not.)

wheelz · #46 11-23-2005, 01:33 PM

no.

TheWorstPlayer · #47 11-23-2005, 02:30 PM

I know you agree with me, but just to clarify: you rule out YOUR OWN cards when determining nut-itude, but you can't rule out the number of OTHER card combinations just because some of them overlap.

#48 11-23-2005, 02:33 PM

Man this is technical.

Vincent Lepore · #49 11-23-2005, 04:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still a moron for going that many bets on the river, either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think that it matters even a little. A situation like this arises so infrequently that the results are inconsequentilal and not worth discussing. If you are a winning player costing yourself a bet or two in situations like the one you describe are meaningless. Somebody please reread the hand. Did he say he was on tilt? No he failed to take an extemely unlikely event into account. EXTREMELY UNLIKLEY is the key. Don't worry about such small things things. They are things that come automatically not through discussion but through experience. Worry about the big things, your overall strategy andyou will be fine.

Vince

shemp · #50 11-23-2005, 05:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really think that it matters even a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

Goint 11 bets (I re-counted) on the river with a non-nut A of trump on a 4 flush board matters quite a bit, even if it happens rarely.

[ QUOTE ]
Did he say he was on tilt?

[/ QUOTE ]

He said the other guy was a fish/moron in word and deed. Telling I think. He's so arrogant, that he's convinced the other guy can't read the board or is so stupid he is going off with a weaker hand. And he has a built in defense, that even if he is wrong, the other guy is a huge moron for even having that hand. This is a study in arrogance and entitlement syndrome. If he had simply misread his own hand, it would not be nearly so condemning of him. On the original board he posted (I'm skimmed the thread now, calling the 3-bet is closing in a crying call.)