Bubble!!!!!!!!

roryc

:mad: :mad: :mad:
JUST FINISHED 19TH IN THE FITZ GAME. MY HEAD IS SO WRECKED, WHAT A HORRIBLE PLACE TO FINISH. WAS HAVIN SUCH AGREAT NIGHT UP UNTIL THEN. HAD 3 BAD BEATS IN A ROW TO KNOCK ME FROM 45,000 TO 16000. ENDED UP GOING ALL IN ON 66 TO TRY STEAL BLINDS (2000 4000) BUT GOT CALLED BY QQ AND 33. QUEENS HELD UP AND IM OUT IN 19TH. CANT BELIEVE MY LUCK.

:mad: :mad: :mad:
OH YEH AND IM SURE BIG DRAGON WILL BE POSTING SOON TOO. HE GOT A HORRIBLE BEAT TO KNOCK HIM OUT. HE MADE HIS WAY FROM 4000 TO ABOUT 20,000 WHEN WE WERE DOWN TO THE LAST 3O AND THE SAW HIS QQ GET BEATEN BY A 10 WITH TWO RUNNING TENS ON TURN AND RIVER.

:mad: :mad: :mad:
WHAT A HORRIBLE END TO WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN MY FIRST MAJOR WIN. MY HEADS TOO WRECKED TOO EVEN MOAN ANY MORE ABOUT IT. IM GOING OFF TOO PUNCH A FEW WALLS.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!11 :mad:

nesf

Meet Mr Caps Lock. He doesn't like it when you leave him on all the time, and forget to turn him off.

It makes him sad.

Why do you make him sad?


Oh and hard luck on the bubble.

Doc Farrell

You did well to last so long in a very tough tourney. I got killed in the 30's. Who knows what Saturday may bring...
At least u know that u can go the distance.
D.

podgeen

Its an unfortunate position to get knocked out but well done on lasting so long. You have more experience now for the big one.

Lafortezza

roryc wrote:

ENDED UP GOING ALL IN ON 66 TO TRY STEAL BLINDS (2000 4000) BUT GOT CALLED BY QQ AND 33. QUEENS HELD UP AND IM OUT IN 19TH. CANT BELIEVE MY LUCK.

Why is this bad luck? Were sixes live that night?

Amaru

Thats exactly what i was thinking. It wasn't a beat, and you weren't favourite to win, so how is it bad luck? It just sounds like you were on tilt.

Fathead

the three bad beats followed by the steal running into queens surely counts as bad luck.....

roryc

what I meant was i was down to 16,000 with my big blind coming up next hand. I was set to lose 6,000 in blinds in the next two hands and I didnt put the two players that had flat called on much. I thought that 66 would have been a good enough hand to go all in on considering it would hav basically put the other two all in, and I would have been slightly ahead if i was called by 2 over cards. I didnt really want a caller anyway.

Maybe it was the wrong move but I had just lost 20,000 on AK vs QQ and wasnt ready to go down to 10,000 if I didnt get a hand on BB and SB. I really didnt think they had much. I was beating 33 but the other fella slow played his queens and caught me.

I still dont think I was playing on tilt or anything, but the blinds were too big to ignore.

Doc Farrell

roryc wrote:

what I meant was i was down to 16,000 with my big blind coming up next hand. I was set to lose 6,000 in blinds in the next two hands and I didnt put the two players that had flat called on much. I thought that 66 would have been a good enough hand to go all in on considering it would hav basically put the other two all in, and I would have been slightly ahead if i was called by 2 over cards. I didnt really want a caller anyway.

Maybe it was the wrong move but I had just lost 20,000 on AK vs QQ and wasnt ready to go down to 10,000 if I didnt get a hand on BB and SB. I really didnt think they had much. I was beating 33 but the other fella slow played his queens and caught me.

I still dont think I was playing on tilt or anything, but the blinds were too big to ignore.

It was the right move.

roryc

cheers des

denachoman

AK not holding up against QQ is hardly a bad beat - you're actually a slight dog.

Can you explain the hand you went out on a bit further? First you say you were called by the SB and BB with 33 and QQ - then you say the player with QQ slowplayed. Calling your all-in isn't exactly slow-playing.

bohsman

I seem to remember you asking me for advice on how to finish on the bubble with 30 left Im glad to see it worked

Doc Farrell

Anyone who questions Rory's all in move with sixes hasn't looked at how much he had left, how much the blinds were and where he was sitting. mother of jaysus............

Amaru

I still disagree. He has no idea what anybody else at the table has(because he's UTG), and he's playing all in on a middle pair(again, UTG). Granted, because you're supposed to muck more hands at that position, it might look like he's representing something higher, but he's also wide open to somebody actually having bullets or cowboys, or as happened here, Queens. It's a gutsy move, i'll give you that, but i think its the wrong one.

Culchie

He wasn't UTG ( I read it twice this time), 2 limpers before him ... good move I think, he has to move soon with the blinds so high, and coming round fast.

Amaru

Yeah, i just re read that there, and i'm a little confused. He says he was big blind next hand(leading me to believe he's UTG, and therefore first to act), and yet he says 2 people flat called? Am i missing something? Only thing i can think of is that he put all in post flop with 2 with SB and BB checking?

LordJimbo

I dont believe going all in with 66s and getting beat with a pair of queens is bad luck. If anything it was a bad move and a good call. Granted going in against overcards will have you as a small favourite but going all in whilst UTG (i agree with Amaru, did he not say that he was big blind next?)is pretty much 'gambling' that no one else has anything better. Also that late in the game is someone is going to call you, they will almost always know your trying to rob the pot.

Just my humble opinion, chew it up if you will...

kevthecelt

LordJimbo wrote:

Also that late in the game is someone is going to call you, they will almost always know your trying to rob the pot.

Just my humble opinion, chew it up if you will...

not really true, if anything, more peope play alot tighter when its so close to the money and are very selective about the hands which they would call a 'blind steal', also, when the blinds are up as high as they are at that stage of the tournament the average stack is pot committed even if they call, thats just my opinion anyway and thats the way it seemed to be happening when i was there

Hitman Actual

LordJimbo wrote:

I dont believe going all in with 66s and getting beat with a pair of queens is bad luck. If anything it was a bad move and a good call. Granted going in against overcards will have you as a small favourite but going all in whilst UTG (i agree with Amaru, did he not say that he was big blind next?)is pretty much 'gambling' that no one else has anything better. Also that late in the game is someone is going to call you, they will almost always know your trying to rob the pot.

Just my humble opinion, chew it up if you will...

Well, the table is either 6- or 7-handed at this stage. Rory has 16K with blinds of 2K/4K about to come through him, and he finds a pair of sixes UTG. Surely this is an obvious all-in. I cant see how his play is bad here. I understand what you're saying about going all in with low pairs (it's something I hate doing myself), but he doesn't have the option of waiting for anything better.

Culchie

I wouldn't call it bad luck or bad beat either, but under the circumstances, I wouldn't put it down as a bad play either.....just one of those situations where he had to give it a lash.

From what I read, there was two limpers before him, he was down to 4*BB in his stack ... he has to make some sort of a move fairly quick as the blinds are approaching and 66 is a 50/50 race with overcards .... he ran into slow played QQ ... c'est la vie.

Another thing that he had going for him, is that it was bubble time, far less chance of being called by any stack that his 16000 would put a big hole in.
Alot of players have 'tight sweaty cheeks' at bubble time.

Like the cards themselves, it's maybe a 50/50 call whether you make the play or not ... all down to personal approach ... some people are happy to limp into the money, others want a decent stack to attack the win.

ionapaul

LordJimbo wrote:

I dont believe going all in with 66s and getting beat with a pair of queens is bad luck. If anything it was a bad move and a good call.

I am fairly certain that what Rory meant by 'bad luck' was the three bad beats leading up to his all in, not the result of the all in itself. Am I the only one who reads it this way? Also, I don't think his all in was a bad move, though I agree the caller made a 'good call' - that said, assuming the caller had him well covered (as implied) it didn't take much thinking on the villian's part to call the shortstack, while holding the ladies! I might have even called myself, if I found myself in that position

roryc

hi!

might as well clear this up for everyone. i first started this thread at 4 in the morning after getting knocked out of the tourny. what i meant by 'bad luck' was that it was my first major tournament and i was 'unlucky' to come so close to the money and finish with nothing.

Surely it is 'unlucky' for anyone to finish on the bubble in a tournament?

Also I know that i was not unlucky to lose that hand. My 6 6 was clearly behind the queens. and as for bad beats, my A K was beaten by queens. not really a bad beat. what i was talking about was losing 3 hands on kickers previous to that hand.

I cant remember what position i was in. i thought i was BB next hand but i may have been mistaken.

anyway as i said it was 4 in the morning when i wrote the thread so i was was pretty pissed off! thanks for everyone who thought it was the right move, im still not sure myself!

the reason i played the hand was because i didnt want to just let the blinds kill me just for the sake of a few hundred euro. i wanted to actually have a chance of winning it. Surely this is how we should all play?

anyway im over it now! bring on thursdays freeroll! im all out of tickets!!!