Bring me the head of Juan Pablo!!

DeVore

All weekend he's been The Joker to my Batman, the Lex Luther to my Superman, the Ginger to my Rogers. hey, hang on... that last one doesnt work

Last nights 20-in game was a near non-event for me. I wasnt feeling like playing poker (yes, the end of the world is nigh...). Played a SNG and got no cards at all and then I played in the freeroll and got nowhere (and I am starting to hate that tournie...) and then was going to go home when I changed my mind and sat down to play the 20-in. Picture the head on me as we head to the break and I have bought all my buy-ins and have about 800 left. Thankfully the last-three-hands-for-rebuys madness gave me 3000 and the top up gave me another 2500.

After that it settled down and I ground my way to about 20K to get to the final table. Weird final table too. First two hands, two players gone.
Ended up Juan Pablo (who probably used MY MONEY to pay his entry fee!) took joint first with Jim. Jim was an utter scream at the table, at one point angrilly swearing blind he'd have all our money or he'd never play poker again in his life after 40 years playing, man and boy etc etc.... Juan wouldnt chop it up 3 ways with him as he was massive chip leader and I had asked to see his Ace kicker which he refused to show and he then mucked the cards (the sly old fox!).

In the end he plays a mean game three way and I lost out to him but was happy with the 300 notes I won. Heres why:

This hand was mind boggling odd. We're 7 at the final table and Careca leads out with an 8K bet on a 2K blind. Swiftly called by the man to his left (I dont recognise him but he might be from Boards). I have TT and am in something of a bind. I dont want to put the hand down but I dont want to find myself dominated by a bigger pair. I think for a LONG time and decide the best course of action is to presume they have big cards but not paired and see what the flop brings. This sounds like the wrong way to play them and its hard to describe why I felt that was the right way to play them at the time but I was in BB, I had 2K in already and I could afford 6K to see a flop.

Flop comes J76 rainbow. It had to be a Jack didnt it. More tank-time. I figure either one of them might be playing JJ and I'm screwed or else I'm ok, cos I dont put them on AJ. Feeling that I should have done it preflop, I go all in for about 22K, it might save my ass if Iover bet my position... The guy beside Careca nearly bursts a blood vessel in his rush to call out of turn!! Careca wisely puts away A6 (what a chancer!) and I stand up and start to get my coat off the back of the chair tossing over the tens. I am absolutely certain I'm f*cked. I'm already giving out sh*t to myself for playing the hand badly (which I feel I did by not going all in pre-flop perhaps). If you had given me the option to take half my chips back and give him half without a show down I'd have done it.
And to my amazement (and that of most people at the table) he turns over.... 9's. I'm saved by a pip.

DeV.

Hyzepher

Due you have a life outside poker?

Hyzepher

DeVore

There's an outside!!? :eek:






DeV.

Hectorjelly

DeVore wrote:

This hand was mind boggling odd.

The hand doesnt seem odd at all, I see this all the time; players with medium pocket pairs call raises assuming that the preflop raiser doesnt have a higher PP. They then go all in on any flop not containing an A, K or Q.

Marq

I sought a ruling last night. DeV and JP will remember Jim's consternation over being asked to show his kicker last night. I was pretty sure that aside from the "show one, show all" rule (where if you show one player at the table your cards after the hand has finished you must show them to everyone), there is also a "show one, show both" rule: If you win a pot, without a caller (ie, you bet and everybody passes), and you show one card from your hand; if a player at the table asks to see the other, you must oblige them. Danielle confirmed that this rule exists. This is something I intend to rigidly enforce from now on, so all you Ace-Wavers, beware. Not for any professional reason you understand, but simply cos people showing their lone ace pisses me off something awful.

i've always thought that the only reason you show an ace without it's kicker is cos your kicker sucks. that makes me think that you suck. and my opinion matters, it really does. trust me. I'm a dealer

DeVore

Yeah, I had confirmed it with Luke a few days ago. Surprised me and I've had great fun with putting people on tilt by insisting on seeing their kicker... Last night I wasnt going to press the issue cos Jim was about to go bonkers, I thought me might have a heart attack and to be honest, I kinda like Jim! Then he started threatening JP that he'd "have all his money" and then was waving his finger at the spectators swearing he'd never play again and he'd destroy the both of us!
Later he called me over and said he thought we were grand lads altogether. I swear I think he's a howl, take that "I dont know what I'm doing" act with a truck load of salt, I see a fair number of final tables and Jim played last nights like a consumate pro.

Sometimes I like to show an ace just to show that when I bet on the ace that hit the turn and scared everyone off I wasnt kidding, I did have the ace. That way they dont think I'm a thief. Which of course, I am (or, I'd want them to think the other way... and I'm telling this cos ... um, cos I like you all. Yes.)

DeV.

Juan Pablo

(who probably used MY MONEY to pay his entry fee!)

Correct!

Jim was funny when I wouldnt do a deal, then reraised him next hand when he was big blind! I heard some grumbling like "young fecks coming in...." I was so tempted not to do a deal when he proclaimed "You have no chance against me anyway heads up, but I'll do a deal cause im not a b0ll1x" i felt like taking him on but it was near 3am and some of us work a 9-5 as a sideline to our poker :rolleyes: Upon reflection I should have played heads up, as I could do with the practice, but gotta be happy with the cash. Mr Murphy, I shall see you Wednesday for the next installment..........

Marq

Ah yeah, I don't mind someone showing the ace when they've hit it, just when they've gone all-in pre-flop.

To be honest, I wish Jim would stop with the act when it gets to the final table. his rant about never playing poker again was hilarious, and I'd like to see more of that Macker-like zealoutry. But the "eh, is that a diamond, eh, is he gone? and, eh, him, is he gone? eh, I'm all in?" it impresses no-one. The acting like a senile old fart certainly helps him in the early stages when newbies who don't know Jim from adam are more inclined to call those all-in's with the Boots, but most people at the final table know him well enough to know that it's all an act. It slows the game down unnecessarily, and it's downright annoying.

overheard his conversation with you after the game Tom. "I thought you were a bollix, but someone told me you weren't, so you're not a bollix."
Classic.

DeVore

Yeah I still think he's a scream even when he's play acting. He's determined to maintain the "rock" image as he was sure to tell me he hadnt bluffed me once in the night. To be honest I find him funny and I like Mairead too, she's a kind soul.

Try and get Macker on Joe or Paddy's table for some fireworks... they drive him up the walls!

Mr Murphy, I shall see you Wednesday for the next installment..........

Until next time, Mr Pablo if that is your real name!! MUhAAhahaha *cough*

DeV.

Juan Pablo

His rant where he demanded "I want to see youze two show your cards after every hand from now on" was amusing, its good to get closure on that ruling though, good work Marq, there is a Benson in it for ya (although I would technically be paying you with your own ciggies )

kipple

If you win a pot, without a caller (ie, you bet and everybody passes), and you show one card from your hand; if a player at the table asks to see the other, you must oblige them. Danielle confirmed that this rule exists.

Can somebody post the full set of tournament rules. This is not a rule at the wsop.


T.

Marq

Yes, it's not a rule at the WSOP. Every card-room / casino has a different set of rules. You're in luck however: I'm currently gathering together all the house rules for fitz tournies. Have to confirm a few more rulings but I'll post it all up next week and hopefully Hyzepher will sticky it. I posted something up before I started working there and half of it is wrong, or at least, not entirely right, so I aim to fix that and provide a definitive guide for anyone that plays the tournies.

DeVore

Sweeeeeeeeeeet! They should post them up in the club too (presumeably they will) so everyone can reference them. Stuff like misdeals, coming in on the button or not, late entries/stacks or the perennial 3rd-card-from-the-bottom vs first-burned-card argument.

DeV.

DapperGent

Marq wrote:

I posted something up before I started working there and half of it is wrong, or at least, not entirely right,

That's because yore a spanner.

Marq

that's the last of the miracle rivers for you. you've hurt my feelings now.

DeVore

Hectorjelly wrote:

The hand doesnt seem odd at all, I see this all the time; players with medium pocket pairs call raises assuming that the preflop raiser doesnt have a higher PP. They then go all in on any flop not containing an A, K or Q.

What seemed odd about it was his play. Remember I'm in BB, therefore I call last (which incidentally, I wouldnt have done if there had been more to act after me). I know the price of the flop and I pay to see it.

Then *I* go all in, on a Jack high flop.... If I were in his position I would think I had QQ, KK or AA. I flat call third and then goo all in knowing my opponents must have decent enough hands... that shows a LOT of strength.
As it is I'm a f*ckin' chancer with TT. Why he thought his 99's were good I dont know. Had I been in his situation, I'd have been long long gone, let alone calling an all-in! Its fairly bad play on my part to make that all in move, but at least I can claim I was first to act and over represented my strength but jaaaaaysis to call an all in with 99's.... Brave call!
I asked him why he did it and he said that I spent so long thinking about my hand that he reckoned I didnt have a pair, let alone a higher pair.
Thats about the 37846537845th time someone has said something like that to me. I cant believe people equate taking time to think over a hand with someone not having a very big hand. I could be thinking about just about ANYTHING from:
"How can I get the most from this bloke" to "whats the correct play for TT in this position" to "how DO they get the fig into the fig rolls?".
Sometimes I even sit there comtemplating my hand because someone at the table has complained about it and I want to needle them or because the blinds are about to go up and I'm in SB or "how long do I have to sit here looking like I'm thinking in order to get the guy behind me to join the two of us all-in since I have the nuts!" or a million and one other reasons!!

Boy, it was a slow day in work today...

DeV.

DapperGent

that's the last of the miracle rivers for you. you've hurt my feelings now.

What miracle rivers? You never give me anything.

Does anyone know what that guy last night was doing calling my raises and all in with A8o. That hurt my feelings.

I came second in a ladbrokes multi table after I got home last night. €350! It caused me to like poker again.

kipple

I'm currently gathering together all the house rules for fitz tournies. Have to confirm a few more rulings but I'll post it all up next week and hopefully Hyzepher will sticky it.

Great Work!

Hectorjelly

DeVore wrote:

Then *I* go all in, on a Jack high flop.... If I were in his position I would think I had QQ, KK or AA. I flat call third and then goo all in knowing my opponents must have decent enough hands... that shows a LOT of strength.

You both made precisely the same assumption, that the others in the hand had big Broadway cards rather than an overpair. Your play is exactly in line with this mode of play, and its often done with any type of medium PP, like 66 77 88 etc.

Just calling with AA or KK after a raiser and that many callers is akin to suicide, sometimes it can be a good play to smooth call a single raiser to trap him, but with that many others in the hand your would be only trapping yourself, so he can discount those hands, assuming he recognises your a good player.

DeVore

Hectorjelly wrote:

You both made precisely the same assumption, that the others in the hand had big Broadway cards rather than an overpair. Your play is exactly in line with this mode of play, and its often done with any type of medium PP, like 66 77 88 etc.

Ah but I have no information to go on post flop, so mine is a decision based on the preflop information, my reads on people (I didnt put Careca on much, I'd folded a pair of 10's to him earlier in the night but not this time) and my feeling for how they regarded me and my hand.

On the other hand when it comes to the other guys turn he has more info then I. He now knows I want to stay in the hand and I'm making a pretty big statement with my all in. He knows that with little info available to me I flat called two players and go all in on the flop. I'm either a nutter or I have SOMETHING.... he thinks perhaps that I have AK? AQ? would anyone really play AQ like that?? What cards does he think I have?

My play wasnt great imho, but with the information he has... I definitely would have been stepping away from the hand! Sure he called so fast he never even heard what Careca had to say about it!!

DeV.