Razz - single-table sat . - defending bring-in - Page 3

SGspecial · #21 10-23-2007, 01:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
yeah that's almost (I don't wanna say never but close enough) not applicable in limit games.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, people get themselves into a lot of trouble trying to directly apply NL concepts to limit games, esp. razz.

p.s. kudos to Adanthar for continuing to contribute to the stud forum while handling a lead role in the AP fraud investigation team. Adanthar for mod... oh wait, how about for "Master Juggler"?

Praxising · #22 10-23-2007, 06:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, people get themselves into a lot of trouble trying to directly apply NL concepts to limit games, esp. razz.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this one works, tho,' in certain circumstances, I think this hand is a good example. Even in limit games, you can pressure an opponent, and the same pressure can bring desireable, if different, results.

[ QUOTE ]
p.s. kudos to Adanthar for continuing to contribute to the stud forum while handling a lead role in the AP fraud investigation team. Adanthar for mod...

[/ QUOTE ] Kudos for sure, but the best candidate around here for mod, SG, is you. (Love Adanthar but he is not voluble enough for mod.)

RustyBrooks · #23 10-23-2007, 07:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
(Love Adanthar but he is not voluble enough for mod.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, he's already a mod [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Praxising · #24 10-23-2007, 10:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(Love Adanthar but he is not voluble enough for mod.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, he's already a mod [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh-oh. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

ChipsAhoya · #25 10-23-2007, 10:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
(Love Adanthar but he is not voluble enough for mod.)

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL I've had to look up two non-leet words on the 2+2 boards and Prax has written both of them...

-ChipsAhoya

Andy B · #26 10-24-2007, 12:00 AM

I think that's one of three Prax words that I've had to look up myself. When Mat designates moderators, I don't think that his first question is, "is this guy voluble?"

Praxising · #27 10-24-2007, 12:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think that's one of three Prax words that I've had to look up myself. When Mat designates moderators, I don't think that his first question is, "is this guy voluble?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not? You are. Not as in "doesn't know when to shut up" but Adanthar can really be the soul of brevity. Besides, the point was I think SG would be a kick-ass moderator.

Now, since we are discussing terms unfamiliar, can anyone explain what "playing behind" means on High Stakes? They explained it - I still don't get how Hellmuth can bet money that isn't on the table. I thought that was what "table stakes" meant.

RustyBrooks · #28 10-24-2007, 12:51 AM

In general poker terms playing behind means that you have given someone your money but have not yet received chips. On High Stakes Poker I assume it means that these bastards are good for 100k and are being loaned chips by somebody, either another player at the table or possible the tv show or the house I guess.

SGspecial · #29 10-24-2007, 09:39 AM

I must say that's the first time I've been called voluble, and there are very few things I have yet to be called. Thanks for the vote of confidence prax, but this is the "stud" forum encompassing all stud games and, by my own admission, I'm a one trick pony.

Praxising · #30 10-24-2007, 06:15 PM

Thanks, Rusty. So when Hellmuth bets more money then he has on the table, he has already stated, given, something (!) the total and everyone knows he has "virtual" (but also real) money that should be considered his stack? So when someone asked Elezra how much he had left, and he gave them a total that was what was on the table plus 50k he was playing 50k behind, I guess. Is it because the money takes up too much room on the table?

[ QUOTE ]
I must say that's the first time I've been called voluble, and there are very few things I have yet to be called. Thanks for the vote of confidence prax, but this is the "stud" forum encompassing all stud games and, by my own admission, I'm a one trick pony.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what they think mods should be doing here, but I used to own a mwessage board and mods are not supposed to be experts on topics, no one can be in all the topics that come up, they are supposed to be able to speak clearly, explain the hows and whys of the board, welcome new posters, keep people in line, hopefully in a firm but friendly fashion and have a boatload of tact, a lot more than I sometimes exhibit. A really good mod also starts new threads on interesting topics and questions when the conversation flags and is available to lurkers by PM for answers to questions some folks just don't have the nerve to post. Like: "what does playing behind mean?" They never make anyone feel stupid and are the main reason really successful forums are really successful.

They need to keep their forum cleaned up, remove old threads, sometimes combine things, depends on how much authority the list owner gives them. I know a wonderful AOL mod who would be perfect for this forum and I don't think he knows one thing about poker.

But, maybe the LO here wants some sort of topic expertise. You may be Razz Doctor, but I am Forum Queen and you'd make a really good mod on any board you cared to put the time into. I have spoken.

And I think we're off-topic. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]