|
|
#61
11-13-2007, 12:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
[ 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... 
|
|
#62
11-13-2007, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
I'm just surprised Jamie actually realized he was beat when PA snapcalled. In the past he has proudly flipped over his cards in similiar situations.
|
|
#63
11-13-2007, 12:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
[ 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. 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 ] he called 15k to win 380k and got himself in a gigantically massively +EV spot which is all that matters. limon, I know you're a smart dude from your golf thread, but PA's play really is standardish/fine there. for some reason these televised poker threads just have to include retarded debate.
|
|
#64
11-13-2007, 12:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
[ 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 seriously don't get why he called?
|
|
#66
11-13-2007, 12:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
[ 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?
|
|
#68
11-13-2007, 12:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 ] this is the way i post. go back a decade on this forum and my posts will look the same. never mad, always an azzhole, usually drunk. (and yay i got ur 1st post!...cherry=popped)
|
|
#69
11-13-2007, 12:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
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.
|
|
#70
11-13-2007, 12:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/12 - 500k Buyin - Part 2 Spoilers aho
[ QUOTE ]
100 0000 $ for the first working Tube-link [/ QUOTE ]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
