Durrr V Isildur1...whats the damage so far?

corkie123 · 15-12-2009 8:46pm

Treehouse72 wrote: »

Poker by committee while multi-tabling HU doesn't really make sense and it is massively unlikely the CR boys were colluding. They have also categorically denied any shenanigans of this sort. And discussing hands/strategy away from the table is 100% standard and ethical. So I think the dark mutterings about Team CR is pretty unwarrented.

If they were tag-teaming, as seems likely as they lined-up to take on Isi one after another - then it is Isi's fault for not spotting this gathering storm. It is neither unethical nor forbidden to do this, so the CR boys were just maximising their edge away from the table so they owned when they sat in (individually). People - like Isi - who disgregard table selection and BR management really have nothing to complain about when poor game selection and busto-ness screw them up.

br management - table selection wat a load of crap from u who else plays 500/1k pot limit omaha but for a select few like cr boys , pa ,phil iviy , durrrr and small few others .now isildur went on a mind bending luck streak and its not what some of ye are calling great play for fck sake they were playing omaha one of the most volitile games there is .win big lose bigger thats what happened .

lol for the last few mths we had one big talking spree from this then the usual few nice pots happening between the regs .

nice one isidur ul son hope u be back bigger and better

:D

Treehouse72 · 15-12-2009 9:35pm

corkie123 wrote: »

br management - table selection wat a load of crap from u

Do we see Townsend playing Ivey? No. That one example shows you that game selection is possible at any level. Furthermore, we saw Isi sit there session after session, day after day agaisnt the top pros while they all took turns on him, having taken breaks from playing him to refresh and having had time to analyse his game - all this shows they were game selecting well, and him badly. A massive part of Isi's downfall is appalling game management. Appalling. Oh, and that's not to even mention that Omaha isn't even his speciality, NLHE is!! Jesus, he's game selecting so badly he's not even sitting in the right game! If you think all that is crap, fine. I say it is a major part in his demise.

As for BR management, Isi is FTP busto. I don't need to say anything else to prove my point. A busto poker player is a pathetic creature and allowing yourself to go busto is to fail as a player on some level. We may not be able to say that about Isi cause he has the talent to drop down and build it back up, and he might have more money away from FTP. But in general terms to say that BR management doesn't matter when the world is strewn with broke-ass busto losers - including many talented technical poker players - is really ridiculous.

aidankk · 15-12-2009 11:30pm

Treehouse72 wrote: »

Do we see Townsend playing Ivey? No. That one example shows you that game selection is possible at any level. Furthermore, we saw Isi sit there session after session, day after day agaisnt the top pros while they all took turns on him, having taken breaks from playing him to refresh and having had time to analyse his game - all this shows they were game selecting well, and him badly. A massive part of Isi's downfall is appalling game management. Appalling. Oh, and that's not to even mention that Omaha isn't even his speciality, NLHE is!! Jesus, he's game selecting so badly he's not even sitting in the right game! If you think all that is crap, fine. I say it is a major part in his demise.

As for BR management, Isi is FTP busto. I don't need to say anything else to prove my point. A busto poker player is a pathetic creature and allowing yourself to go busto is to fail as a player on some level. We may not be able to say that about Isi cause he has the talent to drop down and build it back up, and he might have more money away from FTP. But in general terms to say that BR management doesn't matter when the world is strewn with broke-ass busto losers - including many talented technical poker players - is really ridiculous.

so this describes 90% of poker players at numerous times, pretty fair i suppose, if a bit overboard on the "pathetic creature", as this would imply the absolute bottom of the barrel, and not the norm which it is.

Whyno · 15-12-2009 11:42pm

Phil Babbs bio on the hendon mob:

Phil is a former Irish international football player and Liverpool defender. Always a big fan of poker, Phil has been playing cards for 20 years, more recently he has been playing high stakes poker online causing waves.

They should update this to say the seas have now calmed and that Babb is making a comeback in soccer to repair his role.

Treehouse72 · 16-12-2009 1:30am

aidankk wrote: »

so this describes 90% of poker players at numerous times, pretty fair i suppose, if a bit overboard on the "pathetic creature", as this would imply the absolute bottom of the barrel, and not the norm which it is.

In fairness I wasn't really talking about all poker players here. I meant top pros who end up in bustoville for stupid reasons like bad BR management and bad table selection. Those are idiotic reasons for serious players to bust. That guy sitting in the gutter telling his bad beat stories was what I mean by "pathetic creature"...I didn't mean recreational dudes who put $100 online and blow it. Not at all.

zuutroy · 16-12-2009 1:32am

Treehouse is right imo.

corkie123 · 16-12-2009 2:50am

is that why he was playing 6 tables last night with cole south great to be bustoville treehouse72

Treehouse72 · 16-12-2009 1:07pm

corkie123 wrote: »

is that why he was playing 6 tables last night with cole south great to be bustoville treehouse72

No need to be so confrontational.

I stand by my posts, which are just opinions.

Ace2007 · 16-12-2009 2:15pm

Treehouse72 wrote: »

No need to be so confrontational.

I stand by my posts, which are just opinions.

your opinion was that he was FTP busto, but if he was playin last nite on FTP then he wasn't FTP busto - so you can't stand by an opinion that is factually wrong.:)

DeadMoney · 16-12-2009 4:30pm

Ace2007 wrote: »

your opinion was that he was FTP busto, but if he was playin last nite on FTP then he wasn't FTP busto - so you can't stand by an opinion that is factually wrong.:)

So what, he may have reloaded. Once the guy has money on other sites he is obviosuly not 'busto'. Just bcoz he lost all his ftp roll doesn't mean we wont see him reload every now and then and 6 table 5/1K HU. I'd say even a huge degenerate like Isildur would not let himself go totally broke and I'd imagine he would keep at least enough of a roll to play something like 25/50. Very unlikely he will go on another huge rush again at the nosebleeds.

Treehouse72 · 16-12-2009 5:04pm

Ace2007 wrote: »

your opinion was that he was FTP busto, but if he was playin last nite on FTP then he wasn't FTP busto - so you can't stand by an opinion that is factually wrong.:)

Wow, great post, thanks for that. I have now seen the light and can declare that table selection and BR management don't matter. Thanks for putting me straight and apologies for suggesting otherwise previously.

Insanodude · 16-12-2009 5:19pm

Treehouse72 wrote: »

Wow, great post, thanks for that. I have now seen the light and can declare that table selection and BR management don't matter. Thanks for putting me straight and apologies for suggesting otherwise previously.

No need to be bitter just because you were clearly wrong with your busto comment :S

bubbleking · 16-12-2009 5:40pm

i was watching it the other night - Isildur kept having to split tables when he won a stack to keep 4 tabling Townsend. eventually Townsend ground him down until Isuldur had no money left to reload - hence busto. he just reloaded since then id say

cliff notes - Treehouse is right

Ace2007 · 16-12-2009 6:03pm

bubbleking wrote: »

i was watching it the other night - Isildur kept having to split tables when he won a stack to keep 4 tabling Townsend. eventually Townsend ground him down until Isuldur had no money left to reload - hence busto. he just reloaded since then id say

cliff notes - Treehouse is right

if you can reload your not busto:rolleyes:

mdwexford · 16-12-2009 6:07pm

So much fail in this thread.

Treehouse is obv talking sense fwiw.

Treehouse72 · 16-12-2009 6:39pm

Ace2007 wrote: »

if you can reload your not busto

Oh holy mother of God. Do you understand the difference between "busto" and "FTP busto", which is the phrase I used? One is broke, and the other is broke on this site. Neither is good. In my post I used the phrase "FTP busto" specifically to say that things were not going well for him on that site. If I'd meant "busto" I would have said "busto".

So what does "FTP busto" mean and why does it matter? For starters, if Isi has to continually shift money around like this, it simply proves that his BR management is a shambles. It is distracting and undisciplined to waste your time on this nonsense. It is, in simple terms, bad bankroll management.

Second is a question of the absolutes. Isi is unlikely to have deposited significantly less on FTP than he thought he needed in the first place, so the matter of busting that amount (several times) is no small one even if he has more money elsewhere, which of course he does.

Third, being underrolled on a site effects your play even if you have more money in reserve or on other sites. Anyone with a split roll will tell you that it is only human not to want to bust any of your sites, and that it is easy to play scared/spew money in an effort not to. And this despite the fact it wouldn't be real busto if you lost it since you have more money elsewhere. A pro would rather bust 50 BI's out of a single 100 BI roll, than have a 100 BI roll evenly split on 2 sites and bust one of those 50 BI mini-rolls. That would feel like busto, even if it wasn't. There is a major psychological element at play here that is very strong.

Finally, I think some people see $0 as busto. For a professional, busto is 30 BI's. Anyone who isn't rolled properly in a game is just a glorified shot-taker, and that's what they all are except for Ivey, Antonius and perhaps a couple of others (maybe Durrr long term, maybe Townsend eventually). It's certainly what Isi is.

CHD · 16-12-2009 6:40pm

Bicker bicker bicker busto obv no but yeh kinda is.

tiptap · 16-12-2009 6:46pm

Treehouse72 wrote: »

Third, being underrolled on a site effects your play even if you have more money in reserve or on other sites. Anyone with a split roll will tell you that it is only human not to want to bust any of your sites, and that it is easy to play scared/spew money in an effort not to. And this despite the fact it wouldn't be real busto if you lost it since you have more money elsewhere. A pro would rather bust 50 BI's out of a single 100 BI roll, than have a 100 BI roll evenly split on 2 sites and bust one of those 50 BI mini-rolls. That would feel like busto, even if it wasn't. There is a major psychological element at play here that is very strong.

This statement is complete and utter nonsense.

digiman · 16-12-2009 7:08pm

I actually agree fully with treehouses's statement you bolded.

16-12-2009 7:12pm

The last two pages hurt my head.

jbravado · 16-12-2009 8:13pm

As per usual Treehouse is posting total sense. Nosebleeds have different rules and I cant see how anyone could possible describe themselves or anyone else busto with 30 buyins for the big games though but in poker terms I get what your saying.

DeadMoney · 16-12-2009 8:28pm

tiptap wrote: »

This statement is complete and utter nonsense.

Lol, you cant just say something like this and then not even enlighten people with your crazy theory about how players with split roles don't mind busting their whole roll on one particular site. Actually you know what.....please don't!:rolleyes:

tiptap · 16-12-2009 8:36pm

DeadMoney wrote: »

Lol, you cant just say something like this and then not even enlighten people with your crazy theory about how players with split roles don't mind busting their whole roll on one particular site. Actually you know what.....please don't!:rolleyes:

To say anyone is ridiculous...as to why ?
I'll tell you why, I personally know of three people who have between 200k and 800k in bankrolls across multiple sites....where none of these players have this problem.....that's my reason

phantom_lord · 16-12-2009 8:37pm

DeadMoney wrote: »

Lol, you cant just say something like this and then not even enlighten people with your crazy theory about how players with split roles don't mind busting their whole roll on one particular site.

he probably does it all the time, and it never bothers him.

Lurker1977 · 16-12-2009 8:41pm

digiman wrote: »

I actually agree fully with treehouses's statement you bolded.

+1.

tiptap · 16-12-2009 8:43pm

phantom_lord wrote: »

he probably does it all the time, and it never bothers him.

*clap* *clap* *clap*

a147pro · 16-12-2009 9:09pm

tiptap wrote: »

To say anyone is ridiculous...as to why ?
I'll tell you why, I personally know of three people who have between 200k and 800k in bankrolls across multiple sites....where none of these players have this problem.....that's my reason

from the manner and stakes at which he was previously playing, and the fact that he took his first night off after losing the 4 mill, and the fact that he told Hastings he was busto, he was clearly FTP busto

it is also clear that he didn't exercise good or even any bankroll managment or game selection and this is why he went busto (failure to exercise good bankroll managment possibly why he won so much in the first place too)

nobody cares about who you personally know. if they were about to lose all their roll on one site, they would play differently. in any event, he was playing having lost several million dollars, so he was definitely playing differently

tiptap · 16-12-2009 9:18pm

a147pro wrote: »

from the manner and stakes at which he was previously playing, and the fact that he took his first night off after losing the 4 mill, and the fact that he told Hastings he was busto, he was clearly FTP busto

it is also clear that he didn't exercise good or even any bankroll managment or game selection and this is why he went busto (failure to exercise good bankroll managment possibly why he won so much in the first place too)

nobody cares about who you personally know. if they were about to lose all their roll on one site, they would play differently. in any event, he was playing having lost several million dollars, so he was definitely playing differently

This really isn't difficult to understand.
My whole point in this is the statement where he used the word ANYONE.
I was asked to back up my statement, so I did...

Robbie444 · 16-12-2009 10:25pm

tiptap wrote: »

To say anyone is ridiculous...as to why ?
I'll tell you why, I personally know of three people who have between 200k and 800k in bankrolls across multiple sites....where none of these players have this problem.....that's my reason

I sure hope you have your roll spread out over a few sites so!

tiptap · 16-12-2009 10:29pm

Robbie444 wrote: »

I sure hope you have your roll spread out over a few sites so!

and what does this have to do with my statement refering to three close people that I know ?

You think the above graph tells you everything ... lol....very very naive sir

Durrr V Isildur1...whats the damage so far?

Comments