Advanced S&G strategy? Or pure idiocy.... - Page 5

DevinLake · #41 08-10-2007, 04:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
LMAO

So I must have posted on the other forum as well? Wanna bet your life on that? Wait.. wouldn't want you to die here ;-)

I missed the point as many of you say? The point being on the bubble with AA you FOLD against short stack, not even limp?? hahaha

My guess is there's a bunch of low stakes n00bs here.. I'll move along now ;-) Ask Sklansky what he thinks of weak-tight players and those that back them up...... ;-))))

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe it wasn't you that posted it. But, the argument was pretty much the same as yours, and equally retarded.

I would gladly put a group of $6.50 grinders from this forum together to play against Sklansky in a $1000 STT. We would have no problem finding backers either. So, asking him his opinion on this is rather useless.

I'm going to reiterate, that I would not make this play. I'd shove. But, it's not terrible. OP certainly put more thought into than you are.

ymu · #42 08-10-2007, 04:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
LMAO

So I must have posted on the other forum as well? Wanna bet your life on that? Wait.. wouldn't want you to die here ;-)

I missed the point as many of you say? The point being on the bubble with AA you FOLD against short stack, not even limp?? hahaha

My guess is there's a bunch of low stakes n00bs here.. I'll move along now ;-) Ask Sklansky what he thinks of weak-tight players and those that back them up...... ;-))))

[/ QUOTE ]
You think he's folding AA because he's scared of losing don't you?

chuckpalms04 · #43 08-10-2007, 04:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
LMAO

So I must have posted on the other forum as well? Wanna bet your life on that? Wait.. wouldn't want you to die here ;-)

I missed the point as many of you say? The point being on the bubble with AA you FOLD against short stack, not even limp?? hahaha

My guess is there's a bunch of low stakes n00bs here.. I'll move along now ;-) Ask Sklansky what he thinks of weak-tight players and those that back them up...... ;-))))

[/ QUOTE ]

ban plz?

Jbrochu · #44 08-10-2007, 05:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LMAO

So I must have posted on the other forum as well? Wanna bet your life on that? Wait.. wouldn't want you to die here ;-)

I missed the point as many of you say? The point being on the bubble with AA you FOLD against short stack, not even limp?? hahaha

My guess is there's a bunch of low stakes n00bs here.. I'll move along now ;-) Ask Sklansky what he thinks of weak-tight players and those that back them up...... ;-))))

[/ QUOTE ]
You think he's folding AA because he's scared of losing don't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on guys, obvious troll... Or did you know that and you're leveling? Dammit, I never know if I'm getting leveled anymore. I guess I'm destined to remain a second level poster forever...

Pokerfarian · #45 08-10-2007, 05:47 PM

It's a decent, non-pure-idiotic idea. However, I don't think it's correct. The idea is to give up short term ICM equity in return for more later on, but (a) your giving up ALOT of equity by folding here, and (b) you won't make that much back because of the reasons above -- shortie may bust soon anyway, shortie is in the wrong position. Also you can often bully the other 2 anyway even after busting shorty.

vers · #46 08-10-2007, 08:21 PM

if both medium stacks are huge nits and you will be able to shove every single hand (not have to deal with mid stacks also mixing in shoves too) then it's an ok fold. I did pretty much the exact same thing today. On FTP I started w/ 6700 4 handed and got ITM with 12000 out of 13500 chips. Folding SB w/ even as good as AA is fine. Other idiot shortstacks who are not regular multitablers will think you're an idiot and get super pissed off. It's pretty funny lol.

mnlgrind · #47 08-11-2007, 12:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LMAO

So I must have posted on the other forum as well? Wanna bet your life on that? Wait.. wouldn't want you to die here ;-)

I missed the point as many of you say? The point being on the bubble with AA you FOLD against short stack, not even limp?? hahaha

My guess is there's a bunch of low stakes n00bs here.. I'll move along now ;-) Ask Sklansky what he thinks of weak-tight players and those that back them up...... ;-))))

[/ QUOTE ]

ban plz?

[/ QUOTE ]

plz!

JennGirlBad · #48 08-11-2007, 06:05 PM

This topic is touched on in Online Ace by Scott Fischman where he agrees in principle with this strategy so I feel it does have some merit. (Do any of the so-called shocked poker professors here have a bracelet?)

I would have completely agreed with the original poster if all 3 opponent stacks were a bit shorter and more even. This kind of move takes some deep thinking and I can see both sides of the story here... interesting.

JoeSchmo · #49 08-11-2007, 06:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This topic is touched on in Online Ace by Scott Fischman where he agrees in principle with this strategy so I feel it does have some merit. (Do any of the so-called shocked poker professors here have a bracelet?)

I would have completely agreed with the original poster if all 3 opponent stacks were a bit shorter and more even. This kind of move takes some deep thinking and I can see both sides of the story here... interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many of the worst high stakes Full Tilt SNG players have bracelets.

And I think most of this forum "gets" the idea behind the play. It's just debatable because of the specific hand details here.

DevinLake · #50 08-11-2007, 08:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This topic is touched on in Online Ace by Scott Fischman where he agrees in principle with this strategy so I feel it does have some merit. (Do any of the so-called shocked poker professors here have a bracelet?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I miss the single table tournament wsop event? I guess the DS event is close in format, is that the one he won?