Insane HH from Niagara 10k involving THE Vanessa Rousso (and Shaniac) - Page 17

Ship Ship McGipp · #**161** 11-01-2007, 12:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
aejones--

He said that if you raise to 150 preflop, then the expectation of that raise can't be worse than -150 if you play perfect thereafter.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

oh ok, yea that's obvious.

Ship Ship McGipp · #**162** 11-01-2007, 12:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
someone quickly tell me what curtains said so i can tell you if he's right, i'm just too lazy to read this awful thread

[/ QUOTE ]

He said you are an implied millionaire.

[/ QUOTE ]

well then he's smarter than i thought

kleath · #**163** 11-01-2007, 12:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Of course some of the people disagreeing with Curtains are going out of their ways to argue against a related claim.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, exactly...

WarDekar · #**164** 11-01-2007, 12:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone--

Curtains is completely right here. If you don't agree with him--let me be blunt here--you do not have even a foggy theoretical understanding of poker. You know no more about poker than a guy who can't checkmate with two rooks against a naked king knows about chess.

Of course some of the people disagreeing with Curtains are misunderstanding him or going out of their ways to argue against a related claim. And whether or not many players would in practice be worse off than -150 chips is another matter. But Curtains certainly isn't twisting anybody's words.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude this is so ridiculous that people keep making it a point to say this over and over when it's so apoisjdfpoijaspdoifjpoaijsdpfoihjapouibeh;IDSBJV :bjk cKJASBC:B12 -B1

Sorry you tilted me so hard I can't even respond. It's so f-ing retarded

ChipRick · #**165** 11-01-2007, 01:25 AM

great thread,,,

Nate. · #**166** 11-01-2007, 01:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone--

Curtains is completely right here. If you don't agree with him--let me be blunt here--you do not have even a foggy theoretical understanding of poker. You know no more about poker than a guy who can't checkmate with two rooks against a naked king knows about chess.

Of course some of the people disagreeing with Curtains are misunderstanding him or going out of their ways to argue against a related claim. And whether or not many players would in practice be worse off than -150 chips is another matter. But Curtains certainly isn't twisting anybody's words.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude this is so ridiculous that people keep making it a point to say this over and over when it's so apoisjdfpoijaspdoifjpoaijsdpfoihjapouibeh;IDSBJV :bjk cKJASBC:B12 -B1

Sorry you tilted me so hard I can't even respond. It's so f-ing retarded

[/ QUOTE ]

WD--

Sorry, dude.

--Nate

curtains · #**167** 11-01-2007, 01:55 AM

Sorry I was wrong. Raising to 150 with 74s UTG has expected value of -200 because of bad position and stuff!

Thanks for coming along to give me further support!

Btw again, will someone ever broach my BB discussion that I mentioned earlier? Many people seemed to think that by just putting the 150 chips in and still having cards, that our hero's expectation would be less than 150. If that is true, then there probably are some spots where it is correct for hero to open muck from the BB. Why is this not true given that we think hero may be worth less than -150 chips in this spot?

If you personally believe that your EV would be worse than -150, then there are almost certainly spots where your EV from the BB is worse by checking your option instead of just mucking, solely because of the way that you play postflop. Correct me if I'm wrong and tell me why the two situations are completely different than each other. I'm not really saying that I'm right, I'm sure there are some differences, I'd just like someone to try to explain. I understand there are differences because in general we may simply play tighter postflop with our weaker hands when we haven't raised the pot, and that this psychological difference may cause us to play more correctly. However I think it merits a discussion given how many people flat out said they would rather throw 150 chips in the gutter than raise 74s UTG.

Maybe now that I've posted this question for about the 5th time someone will at least tell me why it's stupid? Also imagine how badly you would tilt your opponents if you kept mucking from the BB! Maybe it's worth it with really weak hands in very deep stacked events just to really [censored] with everyone's head.

WarDekar · #**168** 11-01-2007, 02:03 AM

OMG who are you even talking to Curtains? I never once said you were wrong, of course in your theoretical situation yes you can never lose more than 150 it's tilting because you ppl don't listen to anyone and continue to try and argue about something that no one is [censored] arguing about!

As for your BB discussion, while if you play well you of course should play your option, bad players I think it would actually be correct for them to fold. Think of situations where you flopped the 2nd nuts in the BB or something and stacked off, I mean yeah there will be times you double up as well but I think there's a cut off in a player's ability where they should probably just not be playing OOP at all whether they had to pay for it or not. But by that token, many players should not be playing any hands ever because they will always be -EV.

curtains · #**169** 11-01-2007, 02:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
OMG who are you even talking to Curtains? I never once said you were wrong, of course in your theoretical situation yes you can never lose more than 150 it's tilting because you ppl don't listen to anyone and continue to try and argue about something that no one is [censored] arguing about!

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? I'm not arguing about anything.

Multiple people said that they would rather simply throw the 150 chips away than be involved with 74s in EP. Multiple people also said they felt the hero's EV will almost always be worse than 150 chips. The hero is probably not a complete retard at poker. At least 3 very well respected posters suggested that the actual EV of the hand, as played with the players involved in the hand and etc, will be less than 150.

I'm only broaching the subject of why, if this is true, is it also not correct to open muck weak hands in the BB. Why are these two scenarios not related. In both spots we will be in a very weak position, and we will have a weak hand.

Also I have absolutely no idea why you think I'm still trying to argue my point? I was joking with my first two paragraphs because I was shocked that Nate came out of nowhere to revive this long settled debate.

curtains · #**170** 11-01-2007, 02:23 AM

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.