|
|
#121
06-18-2007, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
Got my 12k. In my reply to FT about shirt sizes for the gear, I asked if they'd send me a bathrobe to wear at teh event. btw, betgo's A2 hand was right on the bubble. Lose that A2 vs 33 and I think he'da bubbled. [/ QUOTE ] Yeh, there was another guy allin with the ante who lost, so I think I may still get the seat if I lose. I didn't steal quite enough at the end and cut it too close in both the Stars and Full tilt satellites. 
|
|
#123
06-18-2007, 02:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Got my 12k. In my reply to FT about shirt sizes for the gear, I asked if they'd send me a bathrobe to wear at teh event. btw, betgo's A2 hand was right on the bubble. Lose that A2 vs 33 and I think he'da bubbled. [/ QUOTE ] Yeh, there was another guy allin with the ante who lost, so I think I may still get the seat if I lose. I didn't steal quite enough at the end and cut it too close in both the Stars and Full tilt satellites. [/ QUOTE ] BTW chip leader at you final table is a buddy of mine so I told him to take it easy if you went all-in....when you last went in he had AQ suited...guessing you didnt want that call....
|
|
#126
06-18-2007, 02:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Got my 12k. In my reply to FT about shirt sizes for the gear, I asked if they'd send me a bathrobe to wear at teh event. btw, betgo's A2 hand was right on the bubble. Lose that A2 vs 33 and I think he'da bubbled. [/ QUOTE ] Yeh, there was another guy allin with the ante who lost, so I think I may still get the seat if I lose. I didn't steal quite enough at the end and cut it too close in both the Stars and Full tilt satellites. [/ QUOTE ] BTW chip leader at you final table is a buddy of mine so I told him to take it easy if you went all-in....when you last went in he had AQ suited...guessing you didnt want that call.... [/ QUOTE ] I don't know if what you say is true, but I didn't want the call, as there would have been a 1/3 chance I busted out with QQ.
|
|
#127
06-18-2007, 04:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
BTW chip leader at you final table is a buddy of mine so I told him to take it easy if you went all-in....when you last went in he had AQ suited...guessing you didnt want that call.... [/ QUOTE ] Please don't do that in the future. Soft-playing for whatever reasons is wrong.
|
|
#128
06-18-2007, 04:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] BTW chip leader at you final table is a buddy of mine so I told him to take it easy if you went all-in....when you last went in he had AQ suited...guessing you didnt want that call.... [/ QUOTE ] Please don't do that in the future. Soft-playing for whatever reasons is wrong. [/ QUOTE ] Is it really? (serious question) When I play in a sat event I take it easy on the shorties if I am going to make it...unless they where a-holes earlier or appear to have no idea what they are doing. But good players I take it easy on...is this wrong? I find myself of high moral character and dont see this as wrong...I would NEVER blatantly cheat....
|
|
#129
06-18-2007, 05:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
Is it really? (serious question) When I play in a sat event I take it easy on the shorties if I am going to make it...unless they where a-holes earlier or appear to have no idea what they are doing. But good players I take it easy on...is this wrong? I find myself of high moral character and dont see this as wrong...I would NEVER blatantly cheat.... [/ QUOTE ] Why are you doing this? Players at your table don't belong to some sort of brotherhood with you, that players at other tables don't. A bustout at your table is as good as one at a different table. If anything, you should be trying to get bad players to qualify, not good ones, so that in the target tournament competition is softer. If I'm short-stacked on the bubble of a satellite at a different table and see a big stack folding to a shorty when it's an obvious shove/call/whatever, I get mighty POed and suspicious. In this case you told your buddy to take it easy on betgo (whom I personally like as a poster here, and was rooting for) specifically. It is borderline collusion. There should be no "rooting" as it affects decision at the poker tables. Other shorties shouldn't be discriminated against on the basis of belonging to some forum/club/etc. I don't know how easy/mandatory calling with AQs in the hand you described is, so I won't pass judgement on that, but the very intention is aggravating to me. PS. I had no other "rooting" interests in that tournament, FWIW.
|
|
#130
06-18-2007, 05:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FTP 100-Seat Guarantee
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Is it really? (serious question) When I play in a sat event I take it easy on the shorties if I am going to make it...unless they where a-holes earlier or appear to have no idea what they are doing. But good players I take it easy on...is this wrong? I find myself of high moral character and dont see this as wrong...I would NEVER blatantly cheat.... [/ QUOTE ] Why are you doing this? Players at your table don't belong to some sort of brotherhood with you, that players at other tables don't. A bustout at your table is as good as one at a different table. If anything, you should be trying to get bad players to qualify, not good ones, so that in the target tournament competition is softer. If I'm short-stacked on the bubble of a satellite at a different table and see a big stack folding to a shorty when it's an obvious shove/call/whatever, I get mighty POed and suspicious. In this case you told your buddy to take it easy on betgo (whom I personally like as a poster here, and was rooting for) specifically. It is borderline collusion. There should be no "rooting" as it affects decision at the poker tables. Other shorties shouldn't be discriminated against on the basis of belonging to some forum/club/etc. I don't know how easy/mandatory calling with AQs in the hand you described is, so I won't pass judgement on that, but the very intention is aggravating to me. PS. I had no other "rooting" interests in that tournament, FWIW. [/ QUOTE ] I have to say I disagree with the notion that big stacks have an obligation to call a short all in if the big stack already has the seat locked up. And I probably would have done the same thing in the AQ spot. It is one thing if two players are actively colluding with each other, for example if the shorty raises all in minus one chip and the big stack calls and then folds the flop for one more. Obviously, that is an extreame example. However, as a big stack with a guaranteed seat there is no reason to play a hand other than for the notion that time is money. Picking and choosing who you try to take out isn't explicit collusion and I don't see it as cheating or wrong really. Obv it sucks for other shortstacks but it isn't their right to have big stack risk his chips in order for the shortstacks to have a better shot at qualifying.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
