#51
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] About the M concept: in most of the strategy posts I've been reading, the medium and short stack decisions are seldom based on an M number; rather, the "number of big blinds" count seems to be the only metric that matters, and the concept of stack-to-pot size seems largely forgotten. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know where you read that, but it's hideously wrong. Stack-to-pot is what matters, regardless of what you call it. Measuring in terms of BB causes all kinds of problems - the most obvious is that you're not accounting for antes. [...] This is why BB-to-stack can't be used universally, but a stack to pot measurement can. It's also important when you're considering bet sizes, you can't just bet x BB, you will often have to adjust to structures that aren't nice and neat 1x/2x SB/BB that a lot of people are used to online. [/ QUOTE ] Man, you're preaching to the converted here, I agree with you 100%. But go check the MTT strategy forums and count the threads where the metric is #BBs vs the threads where it's M. Either I've picked a freaky sample or indeed BBs are what most people refer to these days. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
[ QUOTE ]
thats cuz hes a breast lookin specialist, his eyes are really lookin at her chest the whole time. Thats what makes him so good at poker, it looks like hes lookin at the board but hes really lookin at ur face. [/ QUOTE ] Here's someone who hasn't mastered this ability. He tries to hide his peeks in blinks and nods, but he's not fooling anyone. Kimberly and Sexton |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
[ QUOTE ]
Man, you're preaching to the converted here, I agree with you 100%. But go check the MTT strategy forums and count the threads where the metric is #BBs vs the threads where it's M. Either I've picked a freaky sample or indeed BBs are what most people refer to these days. [/ QUOTE ] I think the size of the Big Blind is more accessible of a number than the starting size of the pot. The BB size is always prominently shown on the of the window you're playing on while the starting pot, is only shown at the start of a hand (or one has to do a quick mental calculation). It's not a lot of work, but it's some, and the easy/lazy way is to base decisions off the BB. Also, I've noticed that a lot of HH converters don't bother with antes or the starting pot size, which makes using the starting pot in calculations slightly harder. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
Harrington is a master of his time. 15 years ago
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
This is kind of splitting hairs. In later stages of tournaments, where one has to play a lot of shove-it-in poker, a "10BBs remaining" situation is approximately equal to a "5M" situation. I think that M is a slightly better indicator, and stack-to-pot considerations are still valid, of course.
However, if every poker authority/commentator/writer/whatever referred exclusively to "BBs remaining" rather than "M", they would still be referencing the same basic concept. Different terminology, differently scaled ruler--no big deal.. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
Harrington ownz
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
[ QUOTE ]
This is kind of splitting hairs. In later stages of tournaments, where one has to play a lot of shove-it-in poker, a "10BBs remaining" situation is approximately equal to a "5M" situation. I think that M is a slightly better indicator, and stack-to-pot considerations are still valid, of course. However, if every poker authority/commentator/writer/whatever referred exclusively to "BBs remaining" rather than "M", they would still be referencing the same basic concept. Different terminology, differently scaled ruler--no big deal.. [/ QUOTE ] I think there's more than that, to the extent that another 2+2er recently was telling me of how the concept of M is obsolete and the metric for the knowledgeable player is the #BB which in the presence of antes is refined into the "effective big blind", equal to 2/3 of the starting pot. Seems like efforts are being made to refine that measure, which wouldn't be the case if it was just an arithmetic convenience. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
The girl giving the interview needs to be hit in the face.
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
that girl on the interview is so hot, she is my favorite, forget about dan.....
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No love for Harrington
Dan looks like a mummy in the two CP videos. He doesn't change that impression even after he starts speaking.
|
|
|