High Stakes Poker thread (10/29 - spoilers possible)

[Micro Donk]

I forgive the mistake if people admit the reason why he made it is he was nervous and out of his element... Instead of just claiming it happens to everyone.

translation: i wont listen until they say im right

i need to quit posting in this topic

[cbloom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If jammie vbet a little lighter, and bluffed a little more solid, he would be good IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easier to say than do, but I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if he played his bluffs and vbets the same, and if he was more aggressive preflop and didn't call OOP with junk so much, and if he understood other peoples ranges and didnt try to bluff someone who was obviously picking him off ...

... he would be playing like PA or any of the other actual aggressive good players.

[inyourface]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If jammie vbet a little lighter, and bluffed a little more solid, he would be good IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easier to say than do, but I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if he played his bluffs and vbets the same, and if he was more aggressive preflop and didn't call OOP with junk so much, and if he understood other peoples ranges and didnt try to bluff someone who was obviously picking him off ...

... he would be playing like PA or any of the other actual aggressive good players.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Rousso can make aggressive calls, can Jman now be associated with aggressive folds?

[checktowin]

Hellmuth relies very heavily on the exclamation point in his writing.

[wins_pot]

Yo, I should have commented on the Hellmuth insurance thing earlier.

First off, Phil is one of my favorite guys in poker. He's not cheating anyone.

I'm going off memory here....
The deal was only partially clear in my head at the time of the insurance. it was obviously a good deal for me. when we chopped, i didn't know what we were supposed to do, though since insurance naturally is protection against something bad happening (in this case, a bad beat) and something bad didn't happen, my first thought was that a chop went to me. but then i started thinking about it and i realized that the deal was good for me even if a chop was a chop. so i was confused and decided to let it go. this is just what i remember thinking... as of now, i have no recollection of the cards and i haven't read the above.

The next day phil runs into mori at the coffee shop and tells mori that he should have paid me. Phil emailed me to tell me he owed me 10k. I thought about it some more and told him not to pay me. I said this b/c if i had won with a chop, then that implied some ridiculous vig for me (i still had a decent edge counting a chop as a chop). He insisted on paying me, I told him we'd flip a coin for it, then he said he'd pay me $6k. he paid me $6k the first time i saw him at the series.

ba

[OneTimeAce]

I wonder if they are gonna have huge pots being this deep.

And anybody know about the billionare?
He must be a fish.

[rakewell]

Thanks, Brandon, for posting your version events. Since I ragged on Phil in my blog (http://pokergrump.blogspot.com/2007/...d-at-math.html) for either misrepresenting what the deal was or reneging on it, I've posted an addendum that says:

This is pretty reasonable of Adams. Here's the math on what he's saying: Suppose the deal had been explicitly made that no insurance money went either way in the event of a chopped pot. There are 31 cards that win the whole pot for Phil, 7 for Eli, so the odds against an insurer having to pay out are 31:7, or 4.4:1. That's what Adams is calling the "decent edge counting a chop as a chop." On the other hand, if a chopped pot meant that Phil still had to pay his insurance "premium," then there are 37 cards on which he has to pay it (the 31 that are an outright win, plus the 6 cards that result in a split pot), and only 7 on which he collects insurance. 37:7 is 5.3:1, which is what Adams is here calling "some ridiculous vig for me" (32%, actually, compared to the 11% he decided was "decent").

In any event, it sounds like they ended up settling it like gentlemen.

[jjshabado]

Its interesting to me that the more I find out about Phil Hellmuth away from the poker table the more I respect him. It must just be his poker-ego that makes him come off as an ass so often. Well, that and he seems to have some dislike of money (as shown with his insurance deals).

[jok3rzwild]

Why are you chumps trying to defend Jmans poor play. suck it up and admit u didn't play your best. Simple as that.

In regards to the QQ. (Whats w/ the non-cont bet)

and the 10-7. c'mon were talking about thousands of dollars, I'm a low limit player and even I know to flip my hand over once the betting is over!

Either way, the dude looked scared [censored] less.

"If you can't spot the sucker you are the sucker"

[Micro Donk]

come it was almost dead.

but anyway, something ive noticed

the people who are attacking jman, ive never seen before and tend to give terrible analysis of hands

the people defending, seem to be proven online winners and seem to make more sense in analysis.

maybe its a coincidence