|
|
|
|
#1
11-20-2007, 10:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: THE FIRST BET IS A BET, THE SECOND ONE IS A RAISE
[ QUOTE ]
lolol, ship me monbnieze and i will btw post+1 [/ QUOTE ] Imageshack ftw? 
|
|
#2
11-20-2007, 10:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: THE FIRST BET IS A BET, THE SECOND ONE IS A RAISE
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] lolol, ship me monbnieze and i will btw post+1 [/ QUOTE ] Imageshack ftw? [/ QUOTE ] check ur inbox broheim
|
|
#4
11-20-2007, 11:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: THE FIRST BET IS A BET, THE SECOND ONE IS A RAISE
preflop:
"xxxxxxxx yyyyyyyyy bets $_______"
|
|
#7
11-20-2007, 11:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: THE FIRST BET IS A BET, THE SECOND ONE IS A RAISE
[ QUOTE ]
cuz ur raisin from 0 to $bet, sklansky would agree. [/ QUOTE ] oh yeah, good catch
|
|
#8
11-20-2007, 02:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: THE FIRST BET IS A BET, THE SECOND ONE IS A RAISE
I almost made a BBV post last week.
I was playing 1/2 NL on stars against a player who claimed to be Craig Tapscott. He wirtes several articles a month for Card Player. We got into a heated discussion over this, obviously he was claiming that the initial bet = a raise, and the initial raise = reraise. This close minded [censored] had only one piece of evidence to prove his case: He writes articles for Card Player. WTF?? I told him he was an idiot obv, but he kept saying to read his past articles. He claimed that he was right because Cardplayer prints his articles, so they must be correct He continued to go on about how the initial bet is a raise. I asked him why, as a writer for Cardplayer, he uses terminology opposite to Cooke's Rules of Real Poker. His response: Ask SBRugby, and all the other High Stakes Pros. They (occasionally) use the term raise instead of bet, so they must be correct. This idiot could not back up his claim with anything but "Hey im a poker writer, you have to trust me". I have the chat to prove this. Also he played a SOLID 30/6/1 game, and berated the deepstacked fish until they left the table.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
