value of calculated aggression

Gholimoli

i was going through some recent HH on my tourneys and were looking for some good and bad hands that turn things around for me.
basically key hands that either gave me a huge chip lead or crippled me and i found these two hands that i found interesting:
1.keep in mind that tourneys can not be won with out luck.
2.you need to put your self in a postion to get lucky.

Villain(BB) stack 50K
Blinds 1200/2400
UTG limps
Folded to me on the button and I limp with 97s
BB checks.
Pot:7K
Flop: TTAr
BB leads 4K .
UTG folds.
Im not sure if BB has the T and im thinking I can get of the A with a big bet so I make it 14K with the intention of folding to any raise.BB thinks and calls and im thinking oh feck he has the T.
Pot:35K
Turn : J
BB checks
I think about checking behind here but the pot is very large .if I check there is no way im able to get the pot on the river .ive shown strength on a scary looking board so he has to assume ive got some of it.also I have about 40K at the moment which is comfortable to play with but I can also play the same with 30K but if were to win the pot here that would give me 75K and I will be in commanding position to boss the table .
So I lead for another 10K leaving my self with 30K .
BB calls.
Pot:55K
River: 8s (no flush )
BB checks.
Now his check suggest that he does not have the nuts(full house) or TT other wise ive shown that im pot committed and the pot in too big for me to fold to a value bet(this is as far as he is concerned) so the lack of bet there told me that my str is deffo good.
Now im sure he has the T and his got about 25K left and the pot is 55K .i was thinking of making a small enough value bet to make sure he will call but then again I thought there is no way he can get away from this with 3 tens.
So I went all in in for his remaining stack and he thought about it but eventually called me.
He was out and I went from 60K to 100K and ruled the table and eventually won it.
Now some may say it was a stupid play that got lucky but as I said ;
1. i felt comfortable playing with 30K which is what I had left before the str hit.
2. You really can’t win tourneys with out luck.


Hand two:
60 people left
first prise 4.5K
second 3K
my stack 30K
villain 30K
blinds 800/1600
UTG raises to 4K
Its folded to me on BB and I have KJh so I call.
Pot :8600
Flop: A8T with A being a heart.
My read on UTG is a bad A .i don’t think he has AK or AJ but im not sure.
As far as im concerned I have missed but the pot is big enough for me to have ago at it.
I bet 4K and he calls.
I wasn’t sure what the call meant to be honest I thought AT is possible so is A8 .with no real draws there it was safe enough to slow play.
Turn: 5h
Pot :16800
Now I really wanna see the river .as far as his concerned there is no way im on a flush draw seen as there was only one heart on the flop.so the 5h certainly doesn’t change anything .he prob puts me on AK ,AQ ,AJ or something so if his slow playing he will prob continue to do so. now if check to him he could make a big raise that I can not call but I felt a little 4K bet could confuse him and he may just call me.if he raised I would prob fold. I bet 4K into 16.5K pot and he calls.
River: 2h
Pot 24.5 K
So I have the nuts and I don’t think there is any way his gonna put me on it. his been calling me all along and the pot is again too big for him to be able to let go. so I push for my remaining 18K or so and he calls instantly with AT. I win that and double up and went on to take second here.
Now the thing about these hands are it may not work all the time.and it will hurt you or bust you when it doesn’t. however if I was given the choice of playing safe and making into the FT with no stack at all and going out in 9th or 8th often, or taking risks for a big stacks and not making as much FTs but given my self the chance of taking a tourney down when I do, I will always choose the latter.

fuzzbox

Wow - I dont know what to say.

handsfree

what you have described is the biggest flaw in my game. you got into a hand and didn't let go, just to strike luck on the river. this stubborness is something you need to stamp out. rely on your skill and not on your luck

Culchie

fuzzbox wrote:

Wow - I dont know what to say.

I say ... Holiday.

RoundTower

Gholimoli wrote:

however if I was given the choice of playing safe and making into the FT with no stack at all and going out in 9th or 8th often, or taking risks for a big stacks and not making as much FTs but given my self the chance of taking a tourney down when I do, I will always choose the latter.

Your other 493 posts have been on the subject of passing up edges, even huge edges, early in the tournament so that you can keep limping on rather than building up a big stack. Why the change?

fuzzbox

Culchie wrote:

I say ... Holiday.

You shot who in the what now?

Gholimoli

RoundTower wrote:

Your other 493 posts have been on the subject of passing up edges, even huge edges, early in the tournament so that you can keep limping on rather than building up a big stack. Why the change?

i try to play the situation as much as i can.
the post ive made about passing ify situations have all ben near the end.
either FT or something like 15 people left.
i have felt comfortable with my stack that i could get do well with out the need to take huge risks.
in the two examples ive given i have risked just enough to give my self a huge reward.i dont just play AA,KK.you simply cant do well with out risks.
however the situation has to call for it.
in both examples my bets were calculated somewhat leaving my self enough chips knowing that im still leaving my self enough stack to play with.
in the first example i was leaving my self with 30K which was playable for me.
in the second one i was leaving my self with about 18K .
also in the first example i wanted to win because second prise wasnt much at all.

handsfree

your begining to sound like gigabet:)

Gholimoli

handsfree wrote:

what you have described is the biggest flaw in my game. you got into a hand and didn't let go, just to strike luck on the river. this stubborness is something you need to stamp out. rely on your skill and not on your luck

If you think you can win or do well in a tourney with 300+ fields with out luck and by just “relying on your skill” then you’re seriously mislead.
You simply have to get lucky. as for releasing the hands when you miss well thanks for your smart comments but I really don’t need a lecture on releasing hands.
The truth is you will need to get lucky .and you will not get lucky pre-flop.
Read the post again .im trying to say that aggression is needed. i knew what I was doing and leaving my self with enough stack to play with in both cases but knowing if I won the pot I could do very well with them .
But hey you just rely on your skill and see how you get on.

pokypoky

Gholimoli tell me ur real name is Todo Leonidas....I love when my hunches are right.

fuzzbox

Gholimoli wrote:

i try to play the situation as much as i can.
the post ive made about passing ify situations have all ben near the end.
either FT or something like 15 people left.
i have felt comfortable with my stack that i could get do well with out the need to take huge risks.
in the two examples ive given i have risked just enough to give my self a huge reward.i dont just play AA,KK.you simply cant do well with out risks.
however the situation has to call for it.
in both examples my bets were calculated somewhat leaving my self enough chips knowing that im still leaving my self enough stack to play with.
in the first example i was leaving my self with 30K which was playable for me.
in the second one i was leaving my self with about 18K .
also in the first example i wanted to win because second prise wasnt much at all.

Gholi - you played both hands atrociously. I hate every street, apart from the river in both hands.

You tried real hard to give your money away - and only that both your opponents didnt raise the turn, were you able to escape with a lucky card.

Calculated aggression is one thing, but playing like this - is something totally different.

You open limp on the button in the first hand - yuck
You raise a flop bet on an ATT board - fair enough I suppose, but you could just fold.
You then go further to be the turn when you actually acquire some outs ... check through here every time

In the 2nd one
You call a raise OOP with KJ ... KJ !!
You then claim to somehow put him on "a weak Ace" - how did you manage to do that ? Did you do that because you wanted to move him off his hand, and you figure that the way to do that is for him to have "a weak Ace" - and this somehow justifies your play?
You lead into him on an Ace high board - even though you say that you put him on an Ace. When he calls you think that its clever to lead the turn ... because "you want to see a river".
You also say that "its ok to slowplay on such a drawless board" - an 8TA board is most certainly not drawless.

You were saved by the ineptitude of your opponents, rather than the shining brilliance of your play.

Apologies if this sounds harsh, but you played these hands real bad.

handsfree

yeah you do need luck but i have to agree with fuzzbox

jimbling

Hand 1.
I don't mind the call with 97s on the button (I personally wouldnt do it.. but hey). I'm fine with the steal attempt on the flop.... but the 10k bet on the turn... wtf? I don't believe your reasoning at all. my first problem is that on the turn you say he has to believe you've got something (ie he might fold to a big bet on the river). then after the river you say theres no way he'll let go of 3 tens.... which is it. and 10k was never going to chase him away..... and you could have gotton a free card.

To be honest.. you didnt make your own luck in this instance.. the ****e play by the villian did. You should have been put all in on the turn.

Hand 2.
again.... i think the call is fine here, since your on the BB and its only 2400 to call. But once that flop comes down id be checking to an UTG raiser.
you got very lucky.


I fully understand your logic of aggression, and I also agree with you that you have to get lucky at times... but id believe this is closer to just getting away with bad play to be honest.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

When he calls you think that its clever to lead the turn ... because "you want to see a river".

I think by small betting here, he's getting a cheap river. if he checks here his opponent will probably make a larger bet than the one he has called. I wouldnt do it myself but there is some logic in it.

jimbling

ianmc38 wrote:

I think by small betting here, he's getting a cheap river. if he checks here his opponent will probably make a larger bet than the one he has called. I wouldnt do it myself but there is some logic in it.

it was also just as likely that he'd face a reraise... but since it worked, i wouldnt down it too much.

fuzzbox

jimbling wrote:

it was also just as likely that he'd face a reraise... but since it worked, i wouldnt down it too much.

Just because it worked, doesnt make it a good play.

fuzzbox

jimbling wrote:

Hand 2.
again.... i think the call is fine here, since your on the BB and its only 2400 to call. But once that flop comes down id be checking to an UTG raiser.
you got very lucky.

Understanding the value of KJ Vs an UTG raiser is the first step
Understanding the value of position is the 2nd step
Understanding that the 2400 is not "only" 2400 is the 3rd step

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Gholi - you played both hands atrociously. I hate every street, apart from the river in both hands.

You tried real hard to give your money away - and only that both your opponents didnt raise the turn, were you able to escape with a lucky card.

Calculated aggression is one thing, but playing like this - is something totally different.

You open limp on the button in the first hand - yuck
You raise a flop bet on an ATT board - fair enough I suppose, but you could just fold.
You then go further to be the turn when you actually acquire some outs ... check through here every time

In the 2nd one
You call a raise OOP with KJ ... KJ !!
You then claim to somehow put him on "a weak Ace" - how did you manage to do that ? Did you do that because you wanted to move him off his hand, and you figure that the way to do that is for him to have "a weak Ace" - and this somehow justifies your play?
You lead into him on an Ace high board - even though you say that you put him on an Ace. When he calls you think that its clever to lead the turn ... because "you want to see a river".
You also say that "its ok to slowplay on such a drawless board" - an 8TA board is most certainly not drawless.

You were saved by the ineptitude of your opponents, rather than the shining brilliance of your play.

Apologies if this sounds harsh, but you played these hands real bad.

Fozz read the post again:
hand one:
1. i didnt open limp.if you read the post again it says UTG limps.me on button limp behind.

2.i dont raise the pot on ATT board i reraise.
BB bets out and im thinking why would he bet if he has the T.im trying to represent the T incase he has the A or he has feck all.i could just fold yeah but thats the whole point i want the pot.

3.if i dont bet the turn i have almost 0 chance of winning the pot unless i hit my 4 outs.i have reraised him on the flop and he could have called that with any A.if i show aggression here he will release the A .up untill the bet on the turn i wasnt sure he had the T and his call on the turn made me sure he had the T.


Hand 2:
1.ofcourse im going to call a raise with KJs when its only two of us in the hand.esp for that amount.

2.i put on weak A cuz given the player that was his likely holding.he could have AK or AQ or AJ or AA or KK but the pre-flop riased and playing with him for a while led me to believe that.

3.i lead to him because im done with the hand.if he raises thats me gone.if i check and he bets i deffo have to fold.so thats my last stab at the pot.

4.its clever to lead the turn .im trying to block him from making a huge bet that i can not call.if i check and he makes a pot sized bet i will have to fold.
half pot bet here is 8K.i lead for 4K on a nut flush draw.whats wrong with that?

5.the only valid point you made was the board not being drawless .i suppose its not that draw less but that wasnt my choice and it was the villains.

i got lucky yes.
villain played bad yes.
in both caes they played badley and got very lucky in the end.but thats my whole point.take advantage of these bad playes and not just when your holding AA,KK .

the important point is ,in both hands i was leaving my self enough chips to be able to play.

jimbling

fuzzbox wrote:

Just because it worked, doesnt make it a good play.

i know.. but a lot of poker play is situation based. and if gholi had some knowledge that convinced him that this player would allow him ( a decent % of the time) see a card with a small bet, but get a big raise if he checked then it would prove to be a good play.

ianmc38

I think he bet and you raised, not reraised. hand 1, I'm definitely checking behind on the turn and taking my free card though.

I do agree with you though, putting in a blocking bet in situations like that can be very effective, as it gets you a relatively cheap look at the river when checking will lead to you folding 95% of the time when the villain bangs out a large bet.

jimbling

fuzzbox wrote:

Understanding the value of KJ Vs an UTG raiser is the first step
Understanding the value of position is the 2nd step
Understanding that the 2400 is not "only" 2400 is the 3rd step

your getting almost 3 -1 odds on this call... I think I would make this call regularly enough with KJs. It would also depend on the ability and style of the UTG raiser. many people raise from UTG with crap... as you can see from the result

Gholimoli

jimbling wrote:

Hand 1.
I don't mind the call with 97s on the button (I personally wouldnt do it.. but hey). I'm fine with the steal attempt on the flop.... but the 10k bet on the turn... wtf? I don't believe your reasoning at all. my first problem is that on the turn you say he has to believe you've got something (ie he might fold to a big bet on the river). then after the river you say theres no way he'll let go of 3 tens.... which is it. and 10k was never going to chase him away..... and you could have gotton a free card.

To be honest.. you didnt make your own luck in this instance.. the ****e play by the villian did. You should have been put all in on the turn.

Hand 2.
again.... i think the call is fine here, since your on the BB and its only 2400 to call. But once that flop comes down id be checking to an UTG raiser.
you got very lucky.


I fully understand your logic of aggression, and I also agree with you that you have to get lucky at times... but id believe this is closer to just getting away with bad play to be honest.

i reraise him on the flop.
he calls.this says he could have an A but more than likely a T.
on the turn he checks.
the check could mean an A as well.i make a big bet telling him ive got the T .
he calls letting me know he deffo got the T.

on the river he checks again.the pot is very very larg.he is pot commited.
there is noway his gonna put me on a str .his got trip Ts and the pot is just to larg for him to let go .so i go all in.

i dont deny i got lucky at all and i dont deny in both cases villains were donkeys.
i would not played the hands like that if i were in their position but i dont think i miss played any of them.
yeah most often these will not work and i wasnt counting on getting lucky on the river thats why i had left enough behind me to play the rest of the tourney.

fuzzbox

Gholimoli wrote:

Fozz read the post again:
hand one:
1. i didnt open limp.if you read the post again it says UTG limps.me on button limp behind.

Fair enough then.

2.i dont raise the pot on ATT board i reraise.
BB bets out and im thinking why would he bet if he has the T.im trying to represent the T incase he has the A or he has feck all.i could just fold yeah but thats the whole point i want the pot.

You did raise. He bet and you raised. Ok, you are making a play for the pot - I got that part. But he led into a multi-way pot ... and you think you can move him off his hand? Bleh.

3.if i dont bet the turn i have almost 0 chance of winning the pot unless i hit my 4 outs.i have reraised him on the flop and he could have called that with any A.if i show aggression here he will release the A .up untill the bet on the turn i wasnt sure he had the T and his call on the turn made me sure he had the T.

You have this backwards, if you bet the turn then you are often sacrificing your chance to win the pot by neglecting to take a free card. Your opponent has seen fit to present you with this chance, you really should take it.
When he leads the flop and calls the raise, he is now NEVER folding. Certainly not to a crappy small bet like that.

Hand 2:
1.ofcourse im going to call a raise with KJs when its only two of us in the hand.esp for that amount.

This is where your problem starts.

2.i put on weak A cuz given the player that was his likely holding.he could have AK or AQ or AJ or AA or KK but the pre-flop riased and playing with him for a while led me to believe that.

This is the 2nd part of your problem - once you put him on an Ace - then fold. The reality is that he could have a lot of hands, most of which have you beat, and some decisively so.
For one who claims to utilise the gap concept, you certainly make a problem for yourself here - not only do you have a trouble hand - but you have a trouble hand OUT OF POSITION.

Why not just light your chips on fire? At least you would keep warm.

3.i lead to him because im done with the hand.if he raises thats me gone.if i check and he bets i deffo have to fold.so thats my last stab at the pot.

Led to him where? On the flop? Great job - just give him the money instead?

4.its clever to lead the turn .im trying to block him from making a huge bet that i can not call.if i check and he makes a pot sized bet i will have to fold.
half pot bet here is 8K.i lead for 4K on a nut flush draw.whats wrong with that?

You have 12 outs here - so you can call a reasonable bet on the turn - but you would prefer not to be all-in. If you check - he might bet small, but if you bet - he might move-in. (I sure would). This would deny you the chance to hit your (now) excellent draw. This is not the worst part of your play, however

5.the only valid point you made was the board not being drawless .i suppose its not that draw less but that wasnt my choice and it was the villains.

i got lucky yes.
villain played bad yes.
in both caes they played badley and got very lucky in the end.but thats my whole point.take advantage of these bad playes and not just when your holding AA,KK .

In both cases, you got reasonably large portions of your stack in with crappy draws. This is not good play, and does not take advantage of "these bad players".

In both cases you got a lot of money in on the river - but the cost of getting there is prohibitive.

the important point is ,in both hands i was leaving my self enough chips to be able to play.

The important point, in both hands, is that you are doing your best to p1ss your tournament chips up the wall.

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Understanding the value of KJ Vs an UTG raiser is the first step
Understanding the value of position is the 2nd step
Understanding that the 2400 is not "only" 2400 is the 3rd step

value of KJs against UTG raiser .is this a joke?
i have to call 2400 to see the flop.
i my self make a UTG raise with 44 sometimes as do many players.
how bad is KJ v 44 ?
yes he has position on me but its not like im calling an all in raise .
im capping the action here which is the most important thing.
i would have folded if i was UTG+1 simply because i wasnt sure if it was only 2400 that i had to pay.

3.2400 is not just 2400 i dont understand that man so your gonna have to explian.

Hectorjelly

Gholimoli wrote:

i dont deny i got lucky at all and i dont deny in both cases villains were donkeys.
i would not played the hands like that if i were in their position but i dont think i miss played any of them.

in both hands the villains got you to put a substantial proportion of your stack in drawing to runner runner cards, I wouldnt call them donkeys. And in both hands your aggression didnt pay off, neither of them folded, you just got lucky.

ionapaul

Gholimoli wrote:

the important point is ,in both hands i was leaving my self enough chips to be able to play.

As someone mentioned earlier, isn't this what Gigabet was theorising about a few months ago?

fuzzbox

Gholimoli wrote:

value of KJs against UTG raiser .is this a joke?
i have to call 2400 to see the flop.
i my self make a UTG raise with 44 sometimes as do many players.
how bad is KJ v 44 ?
yes he has position on me but its not like im calling an all in raise .
im capping the action here which is the most important thing.
i would have folded if i was UTG+1 simply because i wasnt sure if it was only 2400 that i had to pay.

3.2400 is not just 2400 i dont understand that man so your gonna have to explian.

If I was to guess and say that I reckon that you have rather mixed results in cash games - would I be correct?

The C Kid

I have been left speechless by this thread.

fuzzbox

Hectorjelly wrote:

in both hands the villains got you to put a substantial proportion of your stack in drawing to runner runner cards, I wouldnt call them donkeys. And in both hands your aggression didnt pay off, neither of them folded, you just got lucky.

That is totally unfair.




...he had a gutshot in the 2nd one.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

You have this backwards, if you bet the turn then you are often sacrificing your chance to win the pot by neglecting to take a free card. Your opponent has seen fit to present you with this chance, you really should take it.
When he leads the flop and calls the raise, he is now NEVER folding. Certainly not to a crappy small bet like that.

I think this is important. You are never ever buying the pot now. Villains play stinks of slow-played trip tens. We found that out on the flop. You don't need confirmation of this on the turn. Take your free card. He'll lead the river and you can make a cheap fold when you miss or get them all-in when you hit like you did in this case. Turn bet was throwing away chips.

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Fair enough then.



You did raise. He bet and you raised. Ok, you are making a play for the pot - I got that part. But he led into a multi-way pot ... and you think you can move him off his hand? Bleh.



You have this backwards, if you bet the turn then you are often sacrificing your chance to win the pot by neglecting to take a free card. Your opponent has seen fit to present you with this chance, you really should take it.
When he leads the flop and calls the raise, he is now NEVER folding. Certainly not to a crappy small bet like that.



This is where your problem starts.



This is the 2nd part of your problem - once you put him on an Ace - then fold. The reality is that he could have a lot of hands, most of which have you beat, and some decisively so.
For one who claims to utilise the gap concept, you certainly make a problem for yourself here - not only do you have a trouble hand - but you have a trouble hand OUT OF POSITION.

Why not just light your chips on fire? At least you would keep warm.



Led to him where? On the flop? Great job - just give him the money instead?



You have 12 outs here - so you can call a reasonable bet on the turn - but you would prefer not to be all-in. If you check - he might bet small, but if you bet - he might move-in. (I sure would). This would deny you the chance to hit your (now) excellent draw. This is not the worst part of your play, however



In both cases, you got reasonably large portions of your stack in with crappy draws. This is not good play, and does not take advantage of "these bad players".

In both cases you got a lot of money in on the river - but the cost of getting there is prohibitive.



The important point, in both hands, is that you are doing your best to p1ss your tournament chips up the wall.

i dont agree with anything you said here Fozz.
"once you put him on an A then fold".are you joking me? you telling me you never fold you top pair bad kicker?
are you telling me you never fold your TPTK?
are you telling me you never tried to move any one of a hand?
if the answer to any of them is yes then we have nothing to talk discuss.
if the answer is yes then stop preaching that its bad.
"he could have alot of hands most of them which have you beat" .
so what?
thats not the point is it?
the point is finding out how much he likes his hand.
the onyl way to do that is to bet?
yes you sacrefice chips but the point was i could play with my remaining stack in both cases if they didnt work.and i knew if they did work i would go very deep.

bohsman

Welcome to my player notes.

Gholimoli

Hectorjelly wrote:

in both hands the villains got you to put a substantial proportion of your stack in drawing to runner runner cards, I wouldnt call them donkeys. And in both hands your aggression didnt pay off, neither of them folded, you just got lucky.

they dont have to fold for my agrression to pay off.
i got lucky yeah yes but had i checked on any of the streets i feel i would have been faced with a bet that i could not call.
i call them donkeys cuz they played the hand bad and in both cases they could have taken a larg pot on the turn.

The C Kid

RoundTower wrote:

Your other 493 posts have been on the subject of passing up edges, even huge edges, early in the tournament so that you can keep limping on rather than building up a big stack. Why the change?

This thread is all part of the masterplan.

handsfree

handsfree wrote:

your begining to sound like gigabet:)

you heard it first here. goli is the new gigadebt

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

i dont agree with anything you said here Fozz.
"once you put him on an A then fold".are you joking me? you telling me you never fold you top pair bad kicker?
are you telling me you never fold your TPTK?
are you telling me you never tried to move any one of a hand?
if the answer to any of them is yes then we have nothing to talk discuss.
if the answer is yes then stop preaching that its bad.
"he could have alot of hands most of them which have you beat" .
so what?
thats not the point is it?
the point is finding out how much he likes his hand.
the onyl way to do that is to bet?
yes you sacrefice chips but the point was i could play with my remaining stack in both cases if they didnt work.and i knew if they did work i would go very deep.

You think he's a bad player and you try to push him off a hand? Words can't describe both these plays. I'll try anyway though. Terrible, awful, retarded, horrible, shocking. :eek:

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

they dont have to fold for my agrression to pay off.
i got lucky yeah yes but had i checked on any of the streets i feel i would have been faced with a bet that i could not call.
i call them donkeys cuz they played the hand bad and in both cases they could have taken a larg pot on the turn.

Donkey see donkey do.

Hectorjelly

Gholimoli wrote:

they dont have to fold for my agrression to pay off.
i got lucky yeah yes but had i checked on any of the streets i feel i would have been faced with a bet that i could not call.
i call them donkeys cuz they played the hand bad and in both cases they could have taken a larg pot on the turn.

Either they have to fold or you hit runner runner. You played both hands very badly, as others have mentioned the turn bet in the 1st hand is terrible, you dont have to worry about a bet from your opponent as he has checked.

In the 2nd hand, whilst getting an opponennt to fold top pair is - EV you played it in such a way so that he will never ever fold, those small bets are terrible unless you are actually building a pot.

I like how the 1st guy played his hand, he confused you with his flop bet and got you to put a lot of your stack in practically drawing dead. And based on the rest of the hand I think you would of bet the river as well, had you missed.

This thread should be called the value of misplaced aggression and getting lucky!

Gholimoli

cardshark202 wrote:

Donkey see donkey do.

i really dont think your in any position to Criticize anything .
TBH i think your a parrot at best who just like repeating with out understanding what it is being said. you reads a few replies and see what all the name players have said then jump in there and chew on what they have spat out.

Gholimoli

handsfree wrote:

you heard it first here. goli is the new gigadebt

first of all i think Giga was a class player.
his knowledge of the game is certainly beyond yours and my comprehension.
unfortunately you and the likes of you are uncomfortable with others achievements and hate that you cant do it your self.
so you have no choice but to read about their success and wish it was you ,seen as your incompetence denies you achieving the same goals. however when something turns bad for them you cant help it but be happy and get some sort of satisfaction that they are now in a way as unaccomplished as you are. you make jokes about it to make you feel better. this is sad really.
so yeah Giga lost all his money.
yes he had gambling problems blah blah blah .his poker skills still was beyond what you will prob ever achieve and his consistent results has shown this.

bohsman

Not sure why you posted either of these hands, HJ has it spot on, two players let you put a lot of chips at risk drawing very slim and you got lucky.

ianmc38

There seems to be a bandwagon being jumped on here by everyone. I doubt many save a handful can boast the results Gholimoli has achieved over the past few months. yes, parts of the hands were played badly, he got a few things wrong. Certainly doesnt make him a donkey....

pokypoky

Gholimoli wrote:

they dont have to fold for my agrression to pay off.
i got lucky yeah yes but had i checked on any of the streets i feel i would have been faced with a bet that i could not call.
i call them donkeys cuz they played the hand bad and in both cases they could have taken a larg pot on the turn.

This is the part of your logic that is deeply flawed I think. U say that unless u bet u will be faced with a bet u can't call. Why cant u call it? Because it would be incorrect play. So by betting you are somehow trying to justify continuing in a pot that you have absoultely no chance of winning bar a miracle. Especially the set of 10s hand, where u claim there is some sort of fold equity. There is as much fold equity in my little finger. Why cant you just fold on the flop?

Gholimoli

pokypoky wrote:

This is the part of your logic that is deeply flawed I think. U say that unless u bet u will be faced with a bet u can't call. Why cant u call it? Because it would be incorrect play. So by betting you are somehow trying to justify continuing in a pot that you have absoultely no chance of winning bar a miracle. Especially the set of 10s hand, where u claim there is some sort of fold equity. There is as much fold equity in my little finger. Why cant you just fold on the flop?

i don’t know if your handycapped or what is wrong with your little finger but mine folds quit nicely.

kinaldo

can everyone please stop calling people donkeys and parrots it's insulting to the animals

jimbling

no need for all the aggression people......

as I said, I know the reason you posted these hands.. but it backfired on you for one simple reason. In either of these hands, you WOULD NOT have won chips if you DIDNT hit the cards you needed. The result: instead of it showing the value of calculated aggression, it showed the value of uncalculated aggression.

you tried to steal... you got caught... you got lucky. This is not how one should want to collect chips.

pokypoky

Gholimoli wrote:

i don’t know if your handycapped or what is wrong with your little finger but mine folds quit nicely.

hey im the best folder on this site, little finger included.

handsfree

ianmc38 wrote:

There seems to be a bandwagon being jumped on here by everyone. I doubt many save a handful can boast the results Gholimoli has achieved over the past few months. yes, parts of the hands were played badly, he got a few things wrong. Certainly doesnt make him a donkey....

true but it would help his game if he acknowledges that these are poor plays. he says that he can afford to sacrafice a block of chips in order to gain a more useful block of chips, however most of the time you are going to double people up with moves such as these.

Iago

Well the next few BSOP heats should be interesting anyway

Norwich Fan Rob

my 2 main concerns would be as follows:

a) trying to get villians to fold top pair is defo - EV, if u think he has Ax, and flop comes A high, break him if u have a hand, fold if u dont. I would need decent notes of an individual before giving them the credit to fold top pair.

b) Playing KJ oop is dangerous, u are likely up against AK, KQ, QQ, AJ, many hands that u will connect with on the flop, and possibly go broke. I would prefer to play something like 78s than KJ. Yes u could be up against 44, 55 etc, but u wont/shouldnt get any action unless they hit a set and will have to fold to a continuation bet more often than not if u miss.

also, villian really should have moved in on the turn in example one, i woulda taken the free card myself. You are even more likely to get paid on the river if u take the free card and hit. (and i dont think u should be moving here on the river if u miss)

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

i really dont think your in any position to Criticize anything .
TBH i think your a parrot at best who just like repeating with out understanding what it is being said. you reads a few replies and see what all the name players have said then jump in there and chew on what they have spat out.

If I'm a parrot at best, what am I at worst? Parrots can learn and are quite advanced little birds so I'll take that as a complement. Cheers gholi.