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

[baltostar]

All joking aside, it might be right for even some good players to take a pass on their option and muck bottom 10-20% from BB.

Let's say you know you have a serious leak playing OOP 5+ handed. You've been working on your leak but you know you're still lame.

I've been stoving some stuff and 5+ handed limped pots are kind of a turning point where someone flopping 2P+ or big draws suddenly becomes much more likely. Big pairs are no longer likely to be ahead. Etc.

My point is that 5+ handed limped pots might present a significant additional card-reading burden and some good players might be -EV OOP with the crap hands. The best of those good players could do well to muck.

(Note: I'm talking about practical EV, not theoretical EV. I really see no point in discussing theoretical EV unless it's a shove or shove call decision.)

[stealthmunk]

I don't even understand what you clowns are arguing about.

However, there are definitely some situations where a player would be better off mucking his hand in the big blind rather than checking his option. If you want to take it to the extreme example, pretend, folds to button (superuser account lolz) sb folds, hero has the option with two cards.

Curtains obviously pointed out that hero could then obviously play unexploitably by just openshoving with the absolute nuts everytime. However, hero doesn't know that villian can see hero's cards, so he obviously won't play that way, hero will be outplayed.

Checking (although involving putting in 0chips obviously has a negative expected value in the long term (Yes reverse implied odds do exist .) of -X chips, when you consider hero has the option of folding too. Fold is the clear play.

Now, the question is as there are no superuser's live, how close is durrr to a superuser?

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, yep. The distinction that caused the original misunderstanding appears lost on the guy that's arrogantly lecturing everyone on the misunderstanding. Outstanding.

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, yep. The distinction that caused the original misunderstanding appears lost on the guy that's arrogantly lecturing everyone on the misunderstanding. Outstanding.

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon, I meant "immediate loss of more than 150 chips." Would it be hypocritical of me to say "you know I knew and meant that"?

--Nate

[dogsballs]

[ 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 think Tommy Angelo has the patent on this. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Nate.]

Everyone's heard far more from me than they wanted to in this thread, I think, but I'm sort of horrified at the way I came off, so just a quick thing:

A while back I didn't understand that hand A could be better than hand B, hot and cold, but that hand B would be preferable against an opponent's range. I made some comment that showed my ignorance of this and a friend of mine basically told me that I had a giant hole in my understanding and that I needed to plug it. I'm really grateful for the frankness. Anyway it really seemed to me that some people here had a basic conceptual gap and wouldn't be made to address it without a real exhortation. As obvious as it seems once you know it, it's the sort of thing that one could conceivably beat modern MTTs and not really understand.

So anyway, whatever. In a way it's too bad that this thread wasn't just about Ansky's dead-on comments.

--Nate

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, the question is as there are no superuser's live, how close is Vanessa Ruosso to a superuser?

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp