|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: $60k-$80k | |||
| 0-20% |
   
|
2 | 11.11% |
| 20-40% |
  
|
7 | 38.89% |
| 40-60% |
  
|
8 | 44.44% |
| 60-80% |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 80-100% |
  
|
1 | 5.56% |
| Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
10-23-2007, 05:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
what happened w/the hand when gold had 88 and farha had i think two spades.
it seemed jamie, after thinking sammy had folded, turned up his cards. but farha hadn't folded. i didn't understand if farha was claiming he didn't see the cards but was trying to get his money back from the pot or? 
|
|
#2
10-23-2007, 05:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
Gold is probably reasonably rolled for the 500K game after endorsements and whatever. Esfandiari I wouldn't have a clue.
fizresh: Farha was saying he hadn't seen Jamie's hand, and I think the offer he made was to take his own money back and let Jamie have the rest of the pot, in case Jamie was worried he'd seen the hand.
|
|
#4
10-25-2007, 06:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
[ QUOTE ]
Gold is probably reasonably rolled for the 500K game after endorsements and whatever. Esfandiari I wouldn't have a clue. fizresh: Farha was saying he hadn't seen Jamie's hand, and I think the offer he made was to take his own money back and let Jamie have the rest of the pot, in case Jamie was worried he'd seen the hand. [/ QUOTE ] not to start an argument.. but i thought that what little backing gold had .. he lost around feb or march of this year.
|
|
#5
10-25-2007, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
It seems pretty logical that the last thing you want to do on tv AND against this line of pro players is overplaying queens and loosing one BI on the first hand you play, with such a board.
Now of course he could have played the hand better. But are you seriously judging a player on one hand played live and on tv (with the pressure and everything). I'm new to this forum, i don't give a ... about jman, but if there are blind fans out here, you are just the extreme opposite. Which is no good either. ps: sorry if my english is bad, it's not my birth language.
|
|
#6
10-23-2007, 09:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
Anybody else having reception problems. For the second Monday in a row, GSN has been crappy during HSP. It almost looks like a scrambled signal or old internet video that was buffering at 56K.
No problems with any other channels on my cable just GSN. Just wondering if I'm the only one. Sucks because I just couldn't watch it. I have HSP set to record whenever it comes on so I got to see last weeks when it aired a second time later in the week, hopefully it will be ok this week the second time around. Sorry if someone else already posted I didn't want to read through the thread since I've not seen the show yet. Thanks.
|
|
#7
10-23-2007, 02:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
You don't do that to a man with allergies!
funniest comment of the night.
|
|
#8
10-24-2007, 01:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
Jamie Gold should learn not value betting your hands on the river when you are ahead 99% of the time while at the same time continually bluffing at every opportunity may be seen as exploitable.
|
|
#9
10-24-2007, 01:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: High Stakes Poker thread (10/21) (spoilers to come)
lol. 90% of people commenting in this thread have not read the Jman NVG thread which was linked to, in which he explained:
- That he played pretty tight because he only had 720K with him. It's not that he isn't rolled for the game, but that he could only move 720K in time. It's not like you can just fly to Vegas and withdraw 1 mill from a kerbside ATM. - That he only played FIFTY HANDS in his whole time there. I don't think you can draw any firm conclusions about him from 50 hands. People talk about how we criticise other pros on this forum on the basis of what we see on TV, but that's (mostly) actually HANDS THEY'VE PLAYED. You don't see me joining in on this nonsense about how Harman is a nit, for instance. - That he would "salivate" over the prospect of playing virtually anyone at the table HU, live. - That he has never been called a nit before in his life (usual epithets are more stuff like "station", "lagtard", etc). The QQ hand was questionable, but reasonable. He didn't bet the flop because he was vs aggro players and couldn't stand a raise. The turn he was sandwiched in between Farha, who bet, and the other guy. He could certainly have played the hand other ways, but his line was reasonable. You can't draw any conclusions one way or the other from his play on HSP, but the fact that he plays nosebleed games online and wins (and that most (all?) of the people at that table don't) is evidence that he's probably pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
