Wynn 150-300 -- I hate limit hold'em

[Fabian]

I was trying to say something like that but couldn't find the right words.

[Mike Gallo]

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

Andy,

I don't want to misinterpret you and have you do a Gary Sheffield on me.<---Read Mondays NY magazine for his interview.-->

However, I think your post drips of sarcasm. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[Dan Druff]

Funny.

But reading past the tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, it appears that you might honestly believe I was portraying myself to be some sort of "table hero" by accusing the guy of being a fake drunk. I wasn't.

The guy was acting so clueless that it was holding up the game. He kept putting out $400 bets on the flop (in a 150-300 game), and then yelled at the dealer when she pused back $250 of his bet, "But I wanna bet thissshhhhh muccchhhh". Each hand was dragging out (at least the few he chose to play at the time), and given that he was super-tight despite his "drunk" state, I strongly suspected a phony.

Live play is slow enough without a fake drunk slowing down the game. Honestly, it looked so much like a horribly acted Hollywood job than a true drunk, judging from the first 10 minutes or so. I called him out on his act because everyone else was whispering their suspicions anyway, and it was slowing down the game. Basically, it was really annoying to watch, and it lost its comedic value after about a minute. I wasn't trying to be the protector of the table, nor was I stating something that everyone else didn't already suspect.

Of course, now that I think of it, it's interesting that BOTH "The Gift" and the fat drunk confused the game for being NL.

You know what they say. Great minds think alike.

[Boris]

Duuuuuuuude!!!! 13 posts and you're already a LEGEND on these boards.

[Diplomat]

What's funny is you pushing your read of him faking it, while previously stating that he was in fact drunk.

So which was it?

-Diplomat

[phish]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Stox:

Your answer is incorrect. The correct answer has to do with exactly how often he might be out of line and will then bluff the river after your fourth street check. With some players, their chance of being out of line on the flop is quite high, and then their chance of bluffing the river is also quite high. With this type of opponent, it's clearly correct to check the turn.

By the way, many of these real aggressive types, if they held a real hand, will always go for a check raise on fourth street after you raise on the flop. That's part of the reason why your answer is not correct. Their three betting the flop actully means less strebgth, not more.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

While I would generally agree w/ Paluka and Bicyclekick's line in situations like this, there is also much merit to Mason's (and other's) take also. And one thing that no one has mentioned is that, in addition to possibly inducing a bluff, you may get paid off by AK AQ 44 33 or other hands that you beat.
Think of it like this: after the flop there is 7.5 BB. Add a bet and call on the river and the pot is 9.5 BBs in total. Now if your opponent actually has a hand like 44 or AQ and may fold the turn, this would be bad for you if he's the type who would call a river bet.
With AQ, he only has 3 outs, which is has 3/44 chance of getting there. So, if he would've folded the turn, but would've paid off the river (assuming you'd bet the river if he checked, which you should) or bet the hand himself, his call on the river gives you a greater expectation than your giving him a free card on the turn gives him.
(This, of course assumes that he would be very unlikely to fold a hand stronger than yours on the turn, which is a reasonable assumption as someone else has pointed out.) Also assumes he would not have played like this with a hand like KQ.

[J.A.Sucker]

BTW, this thread has the potential of the Clarkmeister vs. Pipedream thread from last year's WSOP. That was awesome!

[J.A.Sucker]

I suspect that GoG didn't have any idea who you are, and wouldn't be able to pick you out of a police lineup, even if it was a prop bet with El Diablo. Even so, I don't think he'd care one way or the other if he did know. You are too sensitive, because unless I don't know something, he wasn't making a thinly veiled attack - it's not his style.

FWIW, I think you both played the hand very well. I also think riling people up when playing shorthanded is a good idea, so I can relate to your plight.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
You are too sensitive, because unless I don't know something, he wasn't making a thinly veiled attack - it's not his style.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, it was an unveiled attack:

[ QUOTE ]
The nerdy SB has a shiny WSOP bracelet on his wrist and obvious self-esteem issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds pretty insulting to me and I understand Druff's response.

[Ulysses]

Eddie, let's talk. I used to feel important back in the day when you would answer my calls and just put Mason's calls on the voicemail. But look, you know how it is. Druff? Gab? JV? I'll kick all of their asses. Whatever it takes, baby.