Insane HH from Niagara 10k involving THE Vanessa Rousso (and Shaniac) - Page 18

WarDekar · #**171** 11-01-2007, 02:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Also does anyone here not think its worth it to muck the bottom 10-20% of hands from the BB when you are like 200-500 BBs deep? The EV you are giving up is so tiny but it will really really confuse people. They may see you do this two or three times and conclude that you simply must be a total poker idiot.

Also when the dealer asks you "option?". You should always say "No" and throw your cards in the muck. I'm actually not really joking, I think it may be worth it with stuff like 73o, 82o, 92o etc, assuming its like 4-5 handed to the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure I've ever been in that situation before honestly.

And your previous post made it sound like you were still trying to "prove" your point. And yes I'm just flipping out because Nate brought it up out of nowhere completely unnecessarily.

curtains · #**172** 11-01-2007, 02:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also does anyone here not think its worth it to muck the bottom 10-20% of hands from the BB when you are like 200-500 BBs deep? The EV you are giving up is so tiny but it will really really confuse people. They may see you do this two or three times and conclude that you simply must be a total poker idiot.

Also when the dealer asks you "option?". You should always say "No" and throw your cards in the muck. I'm actually not really joking, I think it may be worth it with stuff like 73o, 82o, 92o etc, assuming its like 4-5 handed to the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure I've ever been in that situation before honestly.

And your previous post made it sound like you were still trying to "prove" your point. And yes I'm just flipping out because Nate brought it up out of nowhere completely unnecessarily.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you see at first I made the response with only the first two sentences. I felt that it was clear I was joking. Then I decided to add a very long edit to it 5 minutes later.

WarDekar · #**173** 11-01-2007, 02:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
No, you see at first I made the response with only the first two sentences. I felt that it was clear I was joking. Then I decided to add a very long edit to it 5 minutes later.

[/ QUOTE ]

It read more like "Har har, these idiots don't know anything about maths! I'm going to mock them to further illustrate my point which they never even disagreed with!"

Sorry it's been a long day

curtains · #**174** 11-01-2007, 02:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, you see at first I made the response with only the first two sentences. I felt that it was clear I was joking. Then I decided to add a very long edit to it 5 minutes later.

[/ QUOTE ]

It read more like "Har har, these idiots don't know anything about maths! I'm going to mock them to further illustrate my point which they never even disagreed with!"

Sorry it's been a long day

[/ QUOTE ]

lol no I just was surprised that I got a reaffirmation 3 days after everyone agreed that what I was saying was obviously correct.

Nate. · #**175** 11-01-2007, 02:40 AM

OK, I have no idea who's being serious or not here. I'm pretty sure, though, that at least some people in this thread have thought that Hero's expectation was worse than -150.

If I fell for some sort of joke, sorry. Let me just say in the most constructive, communal spirit, that if it isn't very obvious to you that if the raise can't be worse than a 150-chip mistake, then you should take the opportunity to study up on expectation and so forth. It'll be fun.

Also keep in mind that I'm nothing special at poker. So please feel free to grin smugly at how silly and off-in-the-clouds and not-actually-good-at-poker I am, if I've offended or annoyed you.

Back to grad school.

--Nate

Ship Ship McGipp · #**176** 11-01-2007, 02:57 AM

i think my expectation of raising 74s from UTG against a field of 'typical' live 10k event with 400 bbs has this symbol in front of it

"+"

discuss

luckychewy · #**177** 11-01-2007, 03:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
i think my expectation of raising 74s from UTG against a field of 'typical' live 10k event with 400 bbs has this symbol in front of it

"+"

discuss

[/ QUOTE ]

you, antonius, and baltostar on a good day.

ASPoker8 · #**178** 11-01-2007, 03:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think my expectation of raising 74s from UTG against a field of 'typical' live 10k event with 400 bbs has this symbol in front of it

"+"

discuss

[/ QUOTE ]

you, antonius, and baltostar on a good day.

[/ QUOTE ]

However Baltostar's expectation is the most reasonable and the boundaries for his expectation are very clearly defined

curtains · #**179** 11-01-2007, 03:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
OK, I have no idea who's being serious or not here. I'm pretty sure, though, that at least some people in this thread have thought that Hero's expectation was worse than -150.

If I fell for some sort of joke, sorry. Let me just say in the most constructive, communal spirit, that if it isn't very obvious to you that if the raise can't be worse than a 150-chip mistake, then you should take the opportunity to study up on expectation and so forth. It'll be fun.

Also keep in mind that I'm nothing special at poker. So please feel free to grin smugly at how silly and off-in-the-clouds and not-actually-good-at-poker I am, if I've offended or annoyed you.

Back to grad school.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

People did think that and it may be true. That is completely different than what I was saying though.

Yoshi63 · #**180** 11-01-2007, 07:07 AM

Good thread, I enjoyed reading it. It taught me a few things, reminded me of a couple leaks, and made me LOL several times.

Curtains, these two things clearly go together and I agree are worth discussing:

[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically there should be no situation in which a raise will cost you more chips than you are putting in. This will only occur if you have some weaknesses that you will exhibit later in the hand. I don't think that I have to assume this will be the case when I discuss the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Also how come no one has addressed the idea of simply mucking in the BB? This should actually be a topic for discussion because I believe that many people here believe that we have -EV with the 74s hand. If you truly believe that, there should be hands that certain players should muck from the BB instead of taking their option. Please at least attempt to quantify the difference between those situations and this situation for me. I know that there are differences but lots of people seem to think the EV of UTG was worse than -150, so I think this is something that should at least be discussed.

[/ QUOTE ]

From a theoretical standpoint they hold no bearing b/c as it's been stated several times, you never have to lose more than you've already put in the pot. Even Rounders can teach us that. However, from a PRACTICAL standpoint, it's worth discussing. The BB example is no different than the 74s example, except that I think it's reasonable to assume that Hero is more likely to commit a mistake in a hand he's (presumably) incorrectly raised PF, than in a hand where he simply checked his option. It's not so much that he might feel more "committed" since he was the PFR, but rather since he miscalculated his EV preflop, he probably has more misconceptions of what is "correct" in different postflop situations for this hand.

I had some other comments I wanted to make, but I'm tired and losing train of thought so I'll just leave it at that and see if you (or anyone else) wants to continue discussing [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]