50/100 vs mahatma

[durrrr]

[ QUOTE ]
durrr,

if you know "what's going on on the flop" and your opponent knows "what's going on on the flop" and you know that his action is directly related to "knowing what's going on on the flop," wouldn't you agree that it might be a necessity for those of us trying to analyze the hand to have some clue of what additional factors mahatma is taking into account before we can consider putting him on a range of hands or possible actions? understanding much of the analysis of mahatma hands comes from simply saying "my hand is top pair, he often puts in huge bets with much less, i'll call anything," i really don't like looking at the hands in such a way. when there's more information about what's driving his decisions that you are aware of and are not telling us, it's very difficult to think through the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if i posted a hand where i had AA and i limped in order to reraise later. Instead the flop came AKQ monotone (w/e make up a situation), and i asked how to play it from there. Would you want to know why i chose this time to limp? I see hands like this often and they usually get adequate responses- however all anyone has asked me is about the flop bet.

[ QUOTE ]
if you didn't want to tell us about what the thing about the bb player is that makes you bet this flop, i think it would have been wise to not tell us the identity of the player, and instead tell us the relevant information about the player that drives your decision making throughout.

c

[/ QUOTE ]

1) im not going to give away future EV to make an internet forum happy.

2) the flop was not an interesting part of the hand.

3) the player should be able to realize who he was w/o me revealing his identity.


If i say "leave it alone" it means that street is unimportant for discussion. If you dont agree w/ "my read" that its unimportant for discussion- then you cant put any faith in my reads for the rest of the hand and therefore have no information to post on (so just dont reply to my posts).

This isnt meant solely at you citanul- but at every1 who focused on the flop. Poker isnt a game of complete information; i'd like a judgement based on what you know (which as i said is almost exactly the same as what i know- since the reasons behind my flop bet dont affect the turn action). Prah isnt telepathic as far as i know- so he doesnt know my exact reasons- although he can guess (just as you can); he just knows that they focus on the big blind. The flop line is fine- read into it as u like but this is my last reply to anyone who is focusing on it. This thread could have been very interesting and IMO beneficial for a learning/discussion experience however most replies focused on a pointless portion of the hand.

I refuse to argue/defend something which i consider so inconsequential anymore so I'm not going to respond to anyone else asking the same questions about the flop.

[citanul]

i'm super confused, but i'm willing to disregard the flop i guess.

i'm confused because of your "the player should be able to figure out who he is without me revealing his identity. you posted who the player was in your original post.

anyway, the questioning on the flop bet i think mostly arose *because* you made such a point of "it has its reasons but i don't want to talk about them." it makes people want to know what they are. for instance if you randomly had a player who is going to push there often and with such crap that you'll be happy to call a push on the flop, we would want to know that. in a later post you even said it's "because of the over-aggro bb..."

i'll try to be back later with actual thoughts on the hand's play. sorry for the inconvenience.

c