I am a fish / donk - can you help me??

bops

5starpool wrote:

The bigger picture should not be big enough to see people calling raises with 73o. It is not as if you are getting correct odds to call here either preflop, on the flop, or on the turn, especially if one of the possible hands for UTG is AA which reduces your max outs to 6, and your odds from 6/1 to 8/1.

the bigger picture remark was with reference to my check on the river - i have no agrument for me calling preflop/flop on a maths basis - the turn is debateable tho...correct - i had him at that point limited to AA or KK - more likely AA...so I suppose 7/1 would be a fair guess...anyways not the point im gettin at...

5starpool

bops wrote:

the bigger picture remark was with reference to my check on the river - i have no agrument for me calling preflop/flop on a maths basis - the turn is debateable tho...correct - i had him at that point limited to AA or KK - more likely AA...so I suppose 7/1 would be a fair guess...anyways not the point im gettin at...

Well as for that, if you had him pegged (even with a 90% probability) on AA or KK then the check on the river is consistent with how you played the hand and he is certain to bet with eith of those given the river. Was there any flush draw on board?

bops

ianmc38 wrote:

I called a raise once with 37o. The flop was 337. LuckyLloyd was a witness. I stacked AK with it.

Bops like me (and unlike Gholimoli obviously) understands the concept of implied odds. He knew he could stack AA if he hit his straight. And he did while getting a good price on turn and river. If they'd bet the pot he'd probably have folded, but they priced him in.

Thanks ian - (great name that btw!! - im ianie on tribecca - bops is dead due to rake issues!!)
i honestly dont think you are being sarcastic here - so all the above is EXACTLY my thoughts on how I played this hand
...be careful undermining Gholi tho - he's not a very nice fella : )

nicnicnic

I know bops fairly well and he is a nice guy whom i love like a brother when extremely intoxicated. I haven't actually played that much with him and the first time i did play i thought him tight passive although he did beat me heads up in that tournament. I would imagine his game has improved since then

Bops I think i can get to the bottom of this seven rag syndrome you seem to be going through and as a psychologist yourself i would like you to digest my observations before dismissing them.

I believe it all stems back to the Irish Open this year when you came over the top of mister Black in the main event preflop with 7 4 os. Your cognitive thinking has somehow developed in a way that it assimilates any 7 rag as the nuts since that moment, now just call me Sigmund but get that super ego back in check man

ianmc38

LuckyLloyd wrote:

MMmmm...you did. This was on the same night that you donked €350 off to me on a hand after correctly declaring that I had you beat.

I went home that night thinking that you were truly a poker playing genius and that Phil Ivey would stand no chance against you heads up....

Stop bringing that up you fúcking fúcktard. If I'd known you better I would have folded. The only hand I could put you on that had me beaten was the one you held. If i'd known you were a rocky nut peddler that never bluffs back then (:p ) I obviously wouldnt have called.

Now please give me some respite and put that hand to bed else I'm gonna kick you very hard in the nads next time I see you. Either that or i'll pay somebody to mug you as you walk out of the SE, take 350 from your wallet and tell you we're quits (then get him to kick you in the nads and say how do you like demz apples).

Mmmmmk.

bops

LuckyLloyd wrote:

MMmmm...you did. This was on the same night that you donked €350 off to me on a hand after correctly declaring that I had you beat.

I went home that night thinking that you were truly a poker playing genius and that Phil Ivey would stand no chance against you heads up....

the kind of reply you would come to expect...sigh

ianmc38

PS Lloyd you played the hand terribly.

Gholimoli

here is the big picutre that i dont understand lads:

guy has $200 in his stack ,

he makes it $10 to play,
i suspect he has AA,KK and i have 73o but i know if he flop two pair or better i will stack him :
wow lets see

i think the odds of flopping two pair is something like 50:1(2%) (could be wrong about the odds here).

so we assume everytime we hit two pair we will stack him (winning $200) and everytime we dont we lose our $10.
lets do a simple EV for this genius idea:

i win $200 2% of the time so $200x2%=4
i lose $10 98% of the time so -$10x98%=-9.8

so over all my play has the EV of -5.8 .
sounds like a alot of FUN doesnt it.
i donno how i missed this big picture...

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

ianmc38

Thanks bro.

5starpool

Gholimoli wrote:

here is the big picutre that i dont understand lads:

guy has $200 in his stack ,

he makes it $10 to play,
i suspect he has AA,KK and i have 73o but i know if he flop two pair or better i will stack him :
wow lets see

i think the odds of flopping two pair is something like 50:1(2%) (could be wrong about the odds here).

so we assume everytime we hit two pair we will stack him (winning $200) and everytime we dont we lose our $10.
lets do a simple EV for this genius idea:

i win $200 2% of the time so $200x2%=4
i lose $10 98% of the time so -$10x98%=-9.8

so over all my play has the EV of -5.8 .
sounds like a alot of FUN doesnt it.
i donno how i missed this big picture...

It was 15 preflop, not 10, and the odds of flopping trips or two pair is roughly 3.5% or ~28/1. Implied odds on that are good though, but I personally would think they are good enough against most players to justify, never mind the possibility of a K77 flop for example.

bops

nicnicnic wrote:

I know bops fairly well and he is a nice guy whom i love like a brother when extremely intoxicated. I haven't actually played that much with him and the first time i did play i thought him tight passive although he did beat me heads up in that tournament. I would imagine his game has improved since then

Bops I think i can get to the bottom of this seven rag syndrome you seem to be going through and as a psychologist yourself i would like you to digest my observations before dismissing them.

I believe it all stems back to the Irish Open this year when you came over the top of mister Black in the main event preflop with 7 4 os. Your cognitive thinking has somehow developed in a way that it assimilates any 7 rag as the nuts since that moment, now just call me Sigmund but get that super ego back in check man

Nicky Nicky Nicky....what can I say????
Honestly I do think you have hit the nail on the head buddy - honeslty!!
That play was and will remain the highlight in my short poker career for some time yet... For the record I knew 100% that he was at it - before i get more abuse : )

As a psychologist it is extremely difficult to analysize oneself - so I honestly do respect your opinion here...

It do find it very difficult to lay down any 2 cards at a cash table that are both below 8 - no joke...

But the fact remains that on a pure profit basis i have made a large loss with AA KK and AK whilst making a large profit with 7 rag or less...

100% truthful what more can I say????

White Knight

bops wrote:

I am successfully playing NL Hold’em for over 2 years.

Are you a winning online player?

Hectorjelly

Gholimoli wrote:

here is the big picutre that i dont understand lads:

i donno how i missed this big picture...

No no no, you are missing the BIG picture. Bops plays the player not the cards.

Hectorjelly

White Knight wrote:

Are you a winning online player?

you are missing the big picture (sigh)

bops

Gholi (sighhhhhhhhhhhh)

look! - just forget about it pleaseeeeeeeee !!!!!!!!

just wondering do you always bring your calculator with you when playing live tournies?? and is it allowed????



on a serious note: i (somehow) do value your opinions tho - thanks for the advice

ianmc38

Gholimoli wrote:

here is the big picutre that i dont understand lads:

guy has $200 in his stack ,

he makes it $10 to play,
i suspect he has AA,KK and i have 73o but i know if he flop two pair or better i will stack him :
wow lets see

i think the odds of flopping two pair is something like 50:1(2%) (could be wrong about the odds here).

so we assume everytime we hit two pair we will stack him (winning $200) and everytime we dont we lose our $10.
lets do a simple EV for this genius idea:

i win $200 2% of the time so $200x2%=4
i lose $10 98% of the time so -$10x98%=-9.8

so over all my play has the EV of -5.8 .
sounds like a alot of FUN doesnt it.
i donno how i missed this big picture...

Gholi if you add the times we hit straights, flushes and boats, then we have an EV of like +loads

jimbling

bobs man.... u really need to turn that sarco meter up a few notches. :eek:


Okay, I'm gonna be a bit controversiol once again and come to the aid of bobs.... well slightly anyway.

I reckon I will be one of the few (if not the only) people on boards that you will get any support from. And thats purely cause most here consider me a donk as well

But I think you really need to sit back and think a bit more about the reasons you do things.
I know where you're coming from. I understand the "concept" you seem to play your game by. Basically, playing -EV at times leads players who can only think in +EV ways to pay you off at times they might not usually do so. Another way of putting this is play like a donk occasionally to lead people to believe that you are a donk.
A lot of successful players play in a manner similar to this - doyle for example believes it's very beneficial for him to stick all his chips in on draws etc, even when not getting the correct odds. The reason for this is that you are less likely to get bluffed, and more likely to get paid off with a made hand.

There is a difference though... I don't think doyle, or any other semi-successful player would ever ever raise pf from utg with 72o. Thats the worst hand in poker ffs. Thats just purely terrible play. You don't need to go to these extremes. And in your 73 hand.... you might have gotten away with too if it wasn't for those pesky short stacks.
If both players had deep stacks such as yourself then the matter would be slightly improved. But by the time you were calling the turn with your draw (and at no stage were you getting correct odds) you had no implied odds. And it wasn't even a good draw.

I posted some remarks recently that caused a "sort of" similar reaction to this, so people might consider us to have a similar mindset. And to a certain degree they’re probably right.
I do believe strongly in mixing up my game. I believe in playing looser and more aggressively when my confidence is up, and when I'm running well. I will play much tighter and EV orientated when I am not feeling the game.

I agree with some of your concerns about the +EV mathematical method. But to me, its just missing some parts of the formula, rather than the whole thing been useless.
I did spend a lot of time on the EV curve when I first got involved in poker. And I'm still learning. You can’t play around with the rules until you actually know them. And I don’t plead that I do know them quite well enough (but I admit that that is a flaw, not an advantage), but like you I play predominantly for fun and a hobby, although I do like the extra pocket money.

Another part of your post you mention mood.... its obvious you let your emotions run your poker. This is never a good state (although almost everyone does this to some degree) for your game to be in. And mood is not the same as playing differently when confident. You should never do something in poker just because you “feel like it”. i.e. I think ill raise with 72o cause im bored.

You talk about seeing the bigger picture, and again I actually do think that can be limited by the maths mentality at times. But to be honest, you seem to go waaaaay beyond the bigger picture. man... you're outside the frame...... you're looking at the whole museum and the picture is just all muddled.


So, after all that what’s my point? Basically you play the way you play. You make money from the way you play, so not much of an issue really. You should probably tone it down a bit, but that’s up to you. But why try and convince people here that you're method is correct.
You say you were looking for a debate, but there is no poker forum in the world that you are going to find someone on your side of the argument – i.e. agreeing that raising UTG with 72o is a good play – even occasionally.
You act surprised about the +EV gang mentality, but that’s what the poker forum is for. They teach poker here - The only way you can "teach" poker is by teaching the proper way - the Mathematical way. So obviously pretty much everybody here is going to play that way.
There is a lot of people here that do make they're money from poker...and most others aspire to do so. Grinding out the dosh by playing correctly is the safest way to make money playing poker.
Then you come along and try and tell people they're doing it all wrong. :eek:


Note: I wrote this pretty quickly (busy day) and without a re-read, so apologies for spelling/grammar errors. And hopefully I have not phrased something badly enough to injure any thin skinned soul.

mewso

2 schools of thought here:-

The Poker Snob(s) - some of whom almost sneer at others play and can't seem to make a point or disagree without being condescending in some manner.
The Lunatic - who likes a gamble and thinks the snobs are a joke who take the game far too seriously.

The reality is of course that there are far more schools of thought than that but the 2 above tend to think only in those terms making them effectively as bad as each other. Those who fall in between or around these types are far more relaxed and accepting about these things probably due to experience.

By the way one mans fun is another mans boredom. Some folks may enjoy using Pokertracker, analysing their game and so on. Just a thought.

Gholimoli

ianmc38 wrote:

Gholi if you add the times we hit straights, flushes and boats, then we have an EV of like +loads

thats right + the what HJ pointed out about him playing the player ,the picture gets so big that it dosent fit on my pocket calculator and i think thats the reason why im missing the big picture.
on this basis does any one know of a big screen phone/calculator/MP3 player where i can tune in to this big picture .
i would much appreciated.

BOPS can you give me an inch size just how big my screen needs to be to fit the full big picture?

White Knight

Hectorjelly wrote:

you are missing the big picture (sigh)

cheers found it .. thanks for the advice

http://www.biggerpicture.org/

MrPillowTalk

I have limited experience playing you on tribeca.

From what I saw you were quite good at getting value on your strong hands however there are gaping big holes in your game that you are going to have to address. I thought you were a bit passive also. I think you may be telling yourself a poker lie as regards your profitability (but I could be wrong) just my impression.

I dont play "by the book" at all however if I have 27 utg it goes in the muck regardless of my read. You have made no reference to positional play at all really, and if you want to play this type of style successfully you should be demonstrating a far greater understanding of what you are talking about.

As regards your comments on pokertracker not really being poker:

-when a boxer has a fight he doesnt just get in the ring sight unseen, he and his trainer go through the stylistic tendancies of the opponent to identify weaknesses.

-when Urd play a european match against an unusual opponent scouts are sent to watch the opponent preceding number of matches to obtasin information regarding their style and ability.

Pokertracker allows you to analyse the tendancies and style of opponents not played regularly, it makes no sense not to use it.

My 2 cents, also when I met bops recently he seemed a nice chap, just to add.

ianmc38

Based on the above, i'm a snobby lunatic

Gholimoli

ianmc38 wrote:

Based on the above, i'm a snobby lunatic

now ive never seen you Ian and i dont know you but but i would say your just a retard who dosent know nothing about the bigpicture or poker .
now plz shut up.

jimbling

bops wrote:

But the fact remains that on a pure profit basis i have made a large loss with AA KK and AK whilst making a large profit with 7 rag or less...

100% truthful what more can I say????

wow.... you're definitely doing something seriously wrong/weird if that's the case.



guys... take it handy will ye... no need for such an almighty piss take. christ.... ye're in a right mood today :eek:

also, pillow (good post by the way) just reminded me about the pokertracker remarks... that was just silly too. I mean how could you say gathering information on your opponents is not real poker? or do you mean you treat it like cheating or something?

Hectorjelly

Gholimoli

jimbling wrote:

I mean how could you say gathering information on your opponents is not real poker? or do you mean you treat it like cheating or something?

use the FORCE Luke ,the force is with you...

MrPillowTalk

Hectorjelly wrote:

lmao

5starpool

Gholimoli wrote:

now ive never seen you Ian and i dont know you but but i would say your just a retard who dosent know nothing about the bigpicture or poker .
now plz shut up.

Leave that Irishman alone, and go back to Israel. or North Korea or wherever you are from.

azzeretti

I feel a locking coming on......

Anyone see the darts last night? Go on Anto!