Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Televised Poker

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:23 AM
Chilltown Chilltown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 276
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

Cooler hand. Jamie got outdrawn, PA got outdrawn, cards played themselves on the turn. No real need for 12 pages of repeated analysis like the Brunson Gold hand. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:24 AM
limon limon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: los angeles
Posts: 1,478
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry limon, but what the hell are you talking about? PA's play was +EV no matter how you look at it. If Jamie has a set or hits a set with PA's gin card then PA is getting Gold's enitre stack. Also, I think you are hugely overestimating Jamie's ability. I think Jamie loses a fairly large chunk of his stack with AA or 2 pair there as well. And also you seem to be ignoring that PA could be calling with the best hand. That obviously wasn't the case in that instance, but Jamie does like to bluff a lot. How does running it 3 times prove that PA was lost????? He had the best hand, but Jamie had 10 outs and PA had ~365k invested in that hand. He obviously just wanted to reduce his variance and it worked out for him. Instead of a 365k loss he took a 125k loss from Jamie drawing out.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think the crux of this problem is that everyone is hugely UNDERESTIMATING jamies ability. ive actually logged alot of hours w/ jamie and he is a losing player but not crazy or stupid. and on the scale of losing players in the la 10-20+ nl hes a piker at best (PRE WSOP WIN)
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:24 AM
botulism botulism is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Making Moves....
Posts: 69
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So calling 15k to win 365k is a bad play ? Guess some people have never played deep stack NLHE ... If Jamie bets the pot which is 31k or just about close to it I could possibly see folding but betting half the pot is an easy definite call.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol....this is gonna get real dumb real quick. in my 17 years as a pro ive never played deep stack nl. why dont you enlighten me on how he was callling 15 to win an assured 350 and then, after he hit his underwear filling cream dream, he still lost the pot? maybe you need to recheck your maths you badasss deep stack nl pro you...

[/ QUOTE ]

You claim to be a pro for 17 years, yet make a comment like this? Combine that with the fact that you seem like you're ready to squeeze the head off of a pigeon, and I'm starting to worry.

Do you tilt in poker as much as you're tilting in this thread?

[/ QUOTE ]
You save your first post in almost a year and half for this?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:27 AM
Devilboy666 Devilboy666 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 65
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
lol....this is gonna get real dumb real quick. in my 17 years as a pro ive never played deep stack nl. why dont you enlighten me on how he was callling 15 to win an assured 350 and then, after he hit his underwear filling cream dream, he still lost the pot? maybe you need to recheck your maths you badasss deep stack nl pro you...

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that Patrick should have folded?

Here's how I see it:

Let's say Patrick has enough of a read on Jamie to put him on KK-JJ.

With QQ or JJ he has 4 outs or about 11 to 1 to make the nuts on the turn, which will hold up 77% of the time. To break even he needs to get $200k more in the pot which is certainly possible considering how Jamie plays. Maybe slightly harder with JJ because Jamie has more hands to worry about that beats him.

If Jamie has KK he only has 2 outs to make the nuts on the turn meaning he can't even break even by stacking Jamie (if Jamie only had $350k left) but he also wins with an A here. If Patrick thinks he's good enough to play his top pair profitably against Jamie then this is not that bad of a play.

I think with these possibilities calling the 1/2 pot size bet on the flop is reasonable even without considering the chances of making the nuts on the river. Adding AA to Jamie's range complicates things a bit but Patrick still might be able to make a profit here.

Disclaimer: I'm not a pro by any means so feel free to rip my logic to pieces.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:29 AM
curious123 curious123 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: not impressed by your perforaments
Posts: 585
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry limon, but what the hell are you talking about? PA's play was +EV no matter how you look at it. If Jamie has a set or hits a set with PA's gin card then PA is getting Gold's enitre stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of limon's points is that you will not get Jamie's entire stack. In fact, v. a set, he only gets a bit over half of it.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:36 AM
Chino Brown Chino Brown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 149
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry limon, but what the hell are you talking about? PA's play was +EV no matter how you look at it. If Jamie has a set or hits a set with PA's gin card then PA is getting Gold's enitre stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of limon's points is that you will not get Jamie's entire stack. In fact, v. a set, he only gets something like 54% of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain. Jamie committed his entire stack with a set even though there were possible straights.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:37 AM
limon limon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: los angeles
Posts: 1,478
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry limon, but what the hell are you talking about? PA's play was +EV no matter how you look at it. If Jamie has a set or hits a set with PA's gin card then PA is getting Gold's enitre stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of limon's points is that you will not get Jamie's entire stack. In fact, v. a set, he only gets something like 54% of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain. Jamie committed his entire stack with a set even though there were possible straights.

[/ QUOTE ]

big difference between committing it and getting it (see also: results)
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:40 AM
Devilboy666 Devilboy666 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 65
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

I don't follow Limon. After the turn Jamie only has 22% equity in that pot.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:42 AM
Chino Brown Chino Brown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 149
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

So when all the money went in Jamie was 23% to win. What am I missing here?
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 11-13-2007, 12:43 AM
limon limon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: los angeles
Posts: 1,478
Default Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho

[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow Limon. After the turn Jamie only has 22% equity in that pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

sure glad you could see the turn coming. and i agree, pa played the hand decent once he had the nuts...yay pa! stop bothering me im biting the head off a pidgeon!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.