A Lot of Fun Until Your Friends Find Out...

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
P.S.
Maniac Hands are fun! But very expensive.

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you talking about?

[hellite]

Well W.
You made a terrible call preflop. You agree. Ok. On the flop, you raise a preflop raiser with nothing and get 3-bet by another player acting behing you. The real question at this point is, "what are you doing in this hand". There really aren't many hands that villain could have that you are ahead of right? Your only draw is to two overcarsd that may or may not be good.

You say that you are getting 10-1 with the pot offering you 7 2/3-1. You claim that this is a very profitable call. No it is not. Yes if you calculate all your overcard outs as clean it is profitable, but not "very profitable". You have two overcards That you can't count as clean. Let me reiterate, your hand consists of a poor draw to a possible 6 outs.

What if villain cold called the preflop raise w/1010? Or even AK? or KQ or A10? or JJ? or QQ? or A3 suited? While i am sure your answer will be "that is unlikely", it is likely enough to discount your hand at least a 1-2 outs. If you give yourself five clean outs you can call the turn profitably for 1 bet. If you give yourself 4 clean outs you actually could still call hoping to get 1 bet from villain on the river if you hit your hand. Neither of these scenarios is "very profitable" as you say, but will show a slight gain. The only reason you have this slightly profitable situation is because you made poor decisions on the flop bloating the pot with nothing. If you just call the flop, then you do not have odds to try and complete you r "draw" on the turn. I think this would be a good thing in this case because your draw is so poor. I really do not think there is any debate that this is a poorly played hand.

RECAP

You misplayed an inferior hand out of position and put quite a few bets in the pot to put yourself in a position to call a bet as an underdog in a slightly profitable situation. This is not good poker, and that is why I questioned your decision.

[halis123456789]

hellite:
Take a pill. Deranged made a great advertising play here for the whole table's benefit. And he's not going to do it again, at least not too frequently..isn't that right D?

[halis123456789]

read the post above it..if you still don't understand then don't ask me i've been up all night.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
You say that you are getting 10-1 with the pot offering you 7 2/3-1. You claim that this is a very profitable call. No it is not. Yes if you calculate all your overcard outs as clean it is profitable, but not "very profitable".

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to think 45% is a good return on my money, but then maybe I'm just retarded.


[ QUOTE ]
You have two overcards That you can't count as clean. Let me reiterate, your hand consists of a poor draw to a possible 6 outs.

What if villain cold called the preflop raise w/1010? Or even AK? or KQ or A10? or JJ? or QQ? or A3 suited?

[/ QUOTE ]

You sincerely need to work on your hand reading skills. There are very obvious reasons why villain does not have any of those hands with the possible exception of TT.

[ QUOTE ]
While i am sure your answer will be "that is unlikely", it is likely enough to discount your hand at least a 1-2 outs. If you give yourself five clean outs you can call the turn profitably for 1 bet. If you give yourself 4 clean outs you actually could still call hoping to get 1 bet from villain on the river if you hit your hand. Neither of these scenarios is "very profitable" as you say, but will show a slight gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will have to say this is a radical change from "terrible," which was your original analysis. You've in fact just constructed a pretty nice argument why a turn call is necessary.

[ QUOTE ]
I really do not think there is any debate that this is a poorly played hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine. That's why I was asking. I sincerely hope that you get past the point of thinking that these boards are for personal evaluations of people's play. I reiterate that I posted the hand because I felt I probably misplayed it.

I will say this last post is certainly a step in the right direction, though.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
hellite:
Take a pill. Deranged made a great advertising play here for the whole table's benefit. And he's not going to do it again, at least not too frequently..isn't that right D?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on whether I decide to come back later in the night drunk...

I did interesting things for my table image, though.

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for your turn call, it is terible! If you think this call is automatic, you should get some buckets and start bailing water right now. You simply can't compute six clean outs here. How do you figure?

[/ QUOTE ]

I watched the hand and I put the villain squarely on 55-99.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sfer and W, get over yourselves. Hellite has filled this forum with far better posts and feedback, and besides that, his read must be better than both of yours, even if you were at the table.

Terrible call, terrible play, put your dunce caps back on and assume the position. I think something to the tune of, "thank you sir may I have another" is in order.

[W. Deranged]

[img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[hellite]

Nice post Donnie. Great content, and lots of humor. Its good to see that the resident droids at least all agree with each other whether they are right or wrong.

As far as reads go, you mean W. knew that villain had him beat when he raised the flop and got 3-bet? If not, when did he pick up the read?

Why not take a look at my last post? Is there something wrong with my description of the events? Even if his read on villian in accurate, he is an underdog to win the hand and his turn call is marginally profitable.

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Even if his read on villian in accurate, he is an underdog to win the hand and his turn call is marginally profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying he should fold a hand that figures to be "marginally profitable"? Uh....

And you know that I don't need to be a favorite in a hand to make a call correct, right?