Is this statement 100% true?

[Annulus]

Pocket Kings should never be folded preflop at partypoker in the $33s or $55s regardless of the betting action.

Irregardless is not a word, so no.

[Annulus]

[ QUOTE ]
Irregardless is not a word, so no.

[/ QUOTE ]

you prolly suck at poker so your opinion does not count. anyways, "regardless".

if you're aware that another player is a tremendous TAG player, and he is aware that you're a tremendous TAG player...and you both somehow have accumulated abnormally large early level chip stacks...and he has pushed all-in after a pre-flop re-raise...........then.......maybe

generally........... no.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Irregardless is not a word, so no.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct sir. proof

[Annulus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Irregardless is not a word, so no.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct sir. proof

[/ QUOTE ]

you shouldn't sweat the small things in life [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img].

[MikeyObviously]

no. it is not 100 percent true.

To reword the folding AA part of Sklansky on tourney poker...lets say you are in 4th with 100 chips and the other three stacks are 3300 each. If all 3 of them go all in you should fold. This is the most extreme example, but there are much less extreme examples where you would fold KK and AA as well.

[Annulus]

[ QUOTE ]
no. it is not 100 percent true.

To reword the folding AA part of Sklansky on tourney poker...lets say you are in 4th with 100 chips and the other three stacks are 3300 each. If all 3 of them go all in you should fold. This is the most extreme example, but there are much less extreme examples where you would fold KK and AA as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think sklansky is talking about a mTT. my understand in STT theory is that you should never pass up any edges ever. heck, were not worried about busting out.

folding in the aforementioned scenario is absolutely correct...

[Annulus]

OK, i see your point in that extreme example. But, i guess my question is in general and not in any extreme situations.