Is Hasuwip 2p2??

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
Lol peter, hasu is in fact the player that tilt the most. Seriously he tilts even more than me which is insane.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahaha i wonder if thats possible

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
Lol peter, hasu is in fact the player that tilt the most. Seriously he tilts even more than me which is insane.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, at least he doesn't play drunk:-)

[Sergey_rus]

Yep i dont drink at all. Too mad without it. So many people check this post so i have to try to post it there:
Im buying poker stars $ for webmoney. Pm/email/icq me if interested.
Min is 1000$. Great way to avoid paying taxes for guys who can work with webmoney and the only way for me to get big ammounts of money into Poker Stars.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you give example or examples of some plays you've seen or done that looked donkey but were genius? Not being sarcastic just interested in heairng a few hands if you have any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is the best example I can give, which just happened 5 minutes ago, that is 100% meta game considerations and hand range considerations and what your opponent thinks of your hand ranges and what you think his hand range is based on yoru hand range (see that is pretty simple isn't it [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img])


Ok this hand occured, 2:46am:

PokerStars Game #8578852935: Hold'em Limit ($200/$400) - 2007/02/23 - 02:46:50 (ET)
Table 'Majuba II' 6-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: AlexSem ($7700 in chips)
Seat 2: Baffa ($9580 in chips)
Seat 3: tiger76 ($9978 in chips)
Seat 4: JarleAA ($8117 in chips)
Seat 5: bshizzle ($7500 in chips)
Seat 6: PapaWarbucks ($36548 in chips)
Baffa: posts small blind $100
tiger76: posts big blind $200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to PapaWarbucks [7h 7d]
JarleAA: folds
bshizzle: folds
PapaWarbucks: raises $200 to $400
AlexSem: raises $200 to $600
Baffa: folds
tiger76: folds
PapaWarbucks: calls $200
*** FLOP *** [6c 4h 6s]
PapaWarbucks: checks
AlexSem: bets $200
PapaWarbucks: calls $200
*** TURN *** [6c 4h 6s] [4s]
PapaWarbucks: checks
AlexSem: bets $400
PapaWarbucks: raises $400 to $800
AlexSem: calls $400
*** RIVER *** [6c 4h 6s 4s] [Js]
PapaWarbucks: bets $400
AlexSem: calls $400
*** SHOW DOWN ***
PapaWarbucks: shows [7h 7d] (two pair, Sevens and Sixes)
AlexSem: mucks hand
PapaWarbucks collected $4295 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $4300 | Rake $5
Board [6c 4h 6s 4s Js]
Seat 1: AlexSem (button) mucked [Ad Th]
Seat 2: Baffa (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: tiger76 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: JarleAA folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: bshizzle folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: PapaWarbucks showed [7h 7d] and won ($4295) with two pair, Sevens and Sixes




Pretty simple.



Now, lets move on to this hand, 2:49am, with that 2:46am owning still fresh in his mind.


PokerStars Game #8578867989: Hold'em Limit ($200/$400) - 2007/02/23 - 02:49:01 (ET)
Table 'Majuba II' 6-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: AlexSem ($5400 in chips)
Seat 2: Baffa ($9580 in chips)
Seat 3: tiger76 ($7778 in chips)
Seat 4: JarleAA ($10307 in chips)
Seat 5: bshizzle ($7200 in chips)
Seat 6: PapaWarbucks ($39138 in chips)
Baffa: posts small blind $100
tiger76: posts big blind $200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to PapaWarbucks [8c Qc]
JarleAA: folds
bshizzle: folds
PapaWarbucks: raises $200 to $400
AlexSem: raises $200 to $600
Baffa: folds
tiger76: folds
PapaWarbucks: calls $200
*** FLOP *** [7d 4s 9s]
PapaWarbucks: checks
AlexSem: bets $200
PapaWarbucks: calls $200
*** TURN *** [7d 4s 9s] [3d]
PapaWarbucks: checks
AlexSem: bets $400
PapaWarbucks: raises $400 to $800
AlexSem: calls $400
*** RIVER *** [7d 4s 9s 3d] [8s]
PapaWarbucks: bets $400
AlexSem: folds
PapaWarbucks collected $3495 from pot
PapaWarbucks: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $3500 | Rake $5
Board [7d 4s 9s 3d 8s]
Seat 1: AlexSem (button) folded on the River
Seat 2: Baffa (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: tiger76 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: JarleAA folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: bshizzle folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: PapaWarbucks collected ($3495)



Basically, the board is giving me the possibility to rep a legit hand, and, since he's hand reading, and remembering that last hand, he's going to put me on a pair or a draw, so, basically I'm betting any low card river or any flush making or straight making river. I do this because I put him on unpaired high cards and feel like he's going to feel foolish calling me down with ace high yet again, and plus, he might take an attitude "if it's bricks I'm calling, if it makes a draw I'm folding" so I effectively have bought myself a zillion "imaginary outs." (this will be a big chapter in my lhe book that i'll never take the time to write [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])

All entirely dependent on knowing he's probably 3 betting me with QJo, JT, A9, etc, and also being aware that he is aware I'm opening a lot of hands (which is true, and he knows it, therefore he can believe I have those cards on the board).

Sure, it's gambling, and sometimes I look retarded when he does call down with ace high or a small PP or even a big PP, but, the pot is getting big and I'm trying to level him using my best estimations of his hand ranges and what he's thinkign of my play at the time.

The standard "abc player" (see other thread too) probably check folds the flop, or the turn, assuming he even bothered to open with the hand.

The fact I rivered a pair is obviously irrelevent to the actual outcome.

[Victor]

omg i wanna have ur babies. teach me to peel every flop and bluff every street and still win.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
omg i wanna have ur babies. teach me to peel every flop and bluff every street and still win.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's hardly that simple, cuz i don't actually try to win every single hand

[Victor]

ya im just joking obv tho u post some pretty far out stuff in bbv.

[fishboy]

EEEEWWWW! I hate that play. No offense takes alot of courage to post it and i'm sure you are a good player. But i think this is spewing imo. It is not necessary to make these plays to win and if they are incorrect(probably are may become big leaks in one's play).

You assume on this hand that he wont call you with Ace high because he'll be embarrassed about the last one. You don't know that. What you do know is he called a checkraise on turn and a bet on river with only ace high. Sounds like a guy whose hard to bluff. Yes i would abc it and muck flop sometimes peel flop as you may get free card on turn from the last checkraise you made.

Again not insulting you i just don't like it. How do you know this is profitable play and not being a donkey? Can you really know? You seem confident its the right play but how do you know that?

Btw i think we played on party a few times(7 or 8 months ago) and had a conversation after you made some kind of similar play that i found outrageous and you tried to explain it. I was threebetman

[Mig]

[ QUOTE ]

The fact I rivered a pair is obviously irrelevent to the actual outcome.

[/ QUOTE ]

That fact is irrelevelant, but since the river completed all draws, it's pretty standard to fold A high here. If the river was Kh instead I can see him calling you pretty lightly. I think that river was the best card in the world to get a fold from him. On the turn he has to put you on a pair like your 77 hand or a draw and the river complete all , so no point calling down.

[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]
EEEEWWWW! I hate that play. No offense takes alot of courage to post it and i'm sure you are a good player. But i think this is spewing imo. It is not necessary to make these plays to win and if they are incorrect(probably are may become big leaks in one's play).

You assume on this hand that he wont call you with Ace high because he'll be embarrassed about the last one. You don't know that. What you do know is he called a checkraise on turn and a bet on river with only ace high. Sounds like a guy whose hard to bluff. Yes i would abc it and muck flop sometimes peel flop as you may get free card on turn from the last checkraise you made.

Again not insulting you i just don't like it. How do you know this is profitable play and not being a donkey? Can you really know? You seem confident its the right play but how do you know that?

Btw i think we played on party a few times(7 or 8 months ago) and had a conversation after you made some kind of similar play that i found outrageous and you tried to explain it. I was threebetman

[/ QUOTE ]

3BM: i think it's important to realize that he's not suggesting you take that line EVERY time that situation comes up -- and i think therein lies the biggest difference between the ABC vs. slLAG/tricky approach; An ABC player could essentially program a bot to play EXACTLY like he does; obv. this is a little theoretical, but if you went through every possible holding and every possible board, and every possible opponent action, the ABC-guy would program a bot to take the very same line in a specific situation every time it comes up.
The trickier player doesn't, and no, I don't think that I could have beat any of the 30/60 and up games with my 18/9 (full) predictable Ed Miller/SSHE game; you (or someone else) make the point in the other thread that you simply don't understand how you can get 'outplayed' if you're consistently playing ABC-TAG and only getting your $ in with the best of it -- the problem is that when facing a table of trickier opponents, you're simply not going to get dealt enough premium holdings / hit good flops to ONLY get your $ in with the best of it.
Think about it: if it were this easy, do you know how many of the hud-bot 10-tabling 2/4 players who follow SSHE and play 18/8 or something would dive into the 100/200 games? It's not just an insufficient bankroll; they're just not good enough yet.

End with a dumb anecdote: I remember when I was a 2/4 - 3/6 grinder, I was a pretty consistent 1.2 BB winner, and I knew I had an edge over a typical Party table b/c, well, i wasn't a spewtard. But I remember the 1 skill that I saw other players exercise, but which i didn't yet have myself, was the skilled use of stone-cold bluff raises in appropriate situations...and the extent of my n00b thinking at the time was that I understood that SOME bluffing was necessary, but I was simply clueless about what cards were good candidates for doing so...and that's a big area where my game has really evolved. I see those situations now. I understand what boards are ripe for bluff-raises with air; and like I've written in my blog, most low-limit players don't realize just how infrequently those moves need to succeed to be profitable in the long term.
alright, this post is not very coherent, but i just woke up.