|
Title: the re-raise Post by: byronkincaid on September 09, 2007, 10:30:24 PM I bet some money, my opponent raises, I look into his soul and think he's bluffing so I re-raise.
I bet some money, my opponent raises. half the people on this forum call this a re-raise. Why? Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: Dewi_cool on September 09, 2007, 10:32:50 PM if you have bet some money is this not a raise, therefore making any further raise a re raise?
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: byronkincaid on September 09, 2007, 10:33:42 PM no it's a bet.
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: MANTIS01 on September 09, 2007, 11:26:33 PM Lots make the mistake of thinking the first bet is a raise not a bet and so the first raise actually becomes the re-raise. This might originate from some casinos requiring an announcement of some kind and players say "raise" for want of something to say when in fact they should be stating the bet amount. So a catalogue of errors ensues. Interestingly though if the first to act makes the mistake of announcing a raise would it be incorrect then to just raise now the error has occurred...considering you can only re-raise a raise?
That soul-searching ability is a good quality to have I think. Did you learn it from a book? Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: byronkincaid on September 09, 2007, 11:27:43 PM i bought special shades. they were very expensive
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: doubleup on September 09, 2007, 11:31:09 PM i bought special shades. they were very expensive You did not - you sold your own soul to the devil and the devil in return gave you soul seeing and pedantry. Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: Robert HM on September 09, 2007, 11:32:13 PM I'll take glasses in part exchange for used copy of Caro's Book of Tells?
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: byronkincaid on September 09, 2007, 11:32:52 PM just trying to save people the time and hassle of writing "re-" all the time :)
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: bolt pp on September 10, 2007, 12:33:30 AM just trying to save people the time and hassle of writing "re-" all the time :) what about if i'm writing a post about Religious Education? Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: bolt pp on September 10, 2007, 12:46:36 AM Or posting about something regarding something else ;carlocitrone;
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: byronkincaid on September 10, 2007, 01:24:28 AM I am feeling particularly helpful tonight. My advice will save you lots of time and energy bolt. next time you're considering writing something similar to this
Quote I call his re raise and reassess on the turn The auto raise could be qj-qk which is what you're beating. If you look at whats beating you though.... q10 ,q9 ,910 ,99 also i think you can include aa-1010(it's not uncommon for weaker players to flat call with big pairs here and see multiway flops at this level) i think it's better to play this hand a lot more cautiously. This is definitely NOT the type of marginal situation i want to be getting all my money in with at this level, especially with how easy it is to stack opponent after opponent by just waiting for nut(or near) situations because you WILL get paid Even against a pair of nines and a flush draw your getting your money in when your winning but a rag to win the hand and racing for your stack, your putting the equity advantage back in the favour of the recreational player edit- sorry i didn't say what i would do on the turn Factoring in the two possible flopped straights as well i fold to any sort of proper bet on the turn though for the extra $2 on the flop i think you have to see if he fires the turn because so often at these stakes the flop auto raise is about the standard your opponents bluffing capabilities. even the jq is only going in a 6% rag for the race and i think if you're looking to build up a roll at these levels when all the money goes in i think you have to be looking at a lot more equity that 56% in the long term to achieve your goal. playing at $1/2 or less i approach it like this, fire up 4-6 tables and look to get blinded away, can you imagine the interminable task of anteing off 100 bb on 6 different tables!!! but thats what i look to do, no need to play poker here, the standard is still pretty bad. now if you sit there with the sole intention of just watching everyone else, folding hand after hand after hand at $1/2 and less i think you'd be surprised by the end of the session how many times you got payed with the nut hand, how many times you KNEW you had the best hand you'd look back at this aq situation and wouldn't even dream of using a buy in(or about 75% or whatever is was). I dont know how much you put into pokertracker ect but ive never used it for low limit poker($1/2 or less) because ABC poker has always surficed and although there is a steady improvement at these levels as people utilise the internet format to improve their game we are VERY far of from ABC not surficing!! give it a try, turn off poker tracker, fire up 4 tables, If theres a situation where theres ANY doubt, i mean ANY doubt fold it! play standard ABC, dont run ONE bluff(it doesn't really matter how rocked up you are, the traffic on these tables are vast and so many players are recreational and not there long enough to notice) bet your big hands(on every sreet, nothing too cute) underplay draws and i think you might be surprised by how easy it is to get paid and how unnecessary it is to be getting all your money in with AQ in such a marginal situation gl just copy/paste this sentence I'M A FKING NIT should save you enough time to lose a few more blinds :) Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: bolt pp on September 10, 2007, 01:29:49 AM REaction?
Is that your own opinion or is it what the books say? :) Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: Robert HM on September 10, 2007, 01:36:22 AM REtreats ;scarymoment;
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: ifm on September 10, 2007, 01:50:25 AM Amazing
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: bolt pp on September 10, 2007, 01:56:10 AM REally? ;carlocitrone;
http://www.blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=23815.msg485136#msg485136 Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: UpTheMariners on September 10, 2007, 05:34:43 AM forget your reraise discussion im ALL IN
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: kinboshi on September 10, 2007, 09:38:11 AM Re-re-raise, when the crowd say bo selecta!
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: MANTIS01 on September 10, 2007, 10:04:09 AM Is having sex twice in one night a re-raise?
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: kinboshi on September 10, 2007, 10:11:12 AM Is having sex twice in one night a re-raise? You've lost us there. Twice in a night? Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: AlexMartin on September 10, 2007, 12:04:34 PM I got in trouble in a Luton comp once for saying bet and not raise as the preflop opener. I tried to explain but was met with so much resistance i shutup. True story.
Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: AndrewT on September 10, 2007, 12:59:33 PM I got in trouble in a Luton comp once for saying bet and not raise as the preflop opener. I tried to explain but was met with so much resistance i shutup. True story. But pre-flop, hasn't the opening bet already been made (by the big blind), so you can either call this bet or raise it. The action has already been opened, so you can't bet. Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: MANTIS01 on September 10, 2007, 01:01:08 PM I despise such nonsense and feel it is my duty to have fun with it.
At Star City in Birmingham you MUST state your INTENTION before you act. If you do not do this your actions are invalid. I found this out when I pushed all-in over the top of a raise and the dealer pushed my chips back and told me I could now only call. I got the TD and had a fun time arguing the point. The rule is that unless you STATE your action your INTENTION is unclear. "Of course" I say, "pushing your stack across the bet line in unclear." So for the rest of the tournament every time I wanted to just call a raise I silently pushed all-in. This turned into a call but the rest of the table thought my INTENTION was to push and therefore got out of the way and allowed me to go HU with the original raiser. But going all-in was not my INTENTION so that rule was exposed as complete piffle. And I don't play there because of it. NB: Pre-flop the first action is indeed a raise because of the forced bb bet...but post-flop the first action is a bet Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: doubleup on September 10, 2007, 01:15:23 PM I despise such nonsense and feel it is my duty to have fun with it. At Star City in Birmingham you MUST state your INTENTION before you act. If you do not do this your actions are invalid. I just cannot understand how this simple action causes so much idiocy, confusion and potential angle shooting. Why can't everywhere in the world agree that in pl or nl games you make up your bet behind the line and put in the chips and thats it. Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: MANTIS01 on September 10, 2007, 08:36:59 PM Agreed. I think e.g. for a tournament to enforce the entrants to use speech, something that is affected by emotion, is a poor show. Surely concealment of information is the right of the player? A bet pushed over the bet line in one fluid motion is a bet and that's about as simple as it gets.
So you've got to state your INTENTION? What about those players who weren't really paying attention, missed a raise coming in, and said CALL thinking they were just limping? Why were they not enforced to call the raise? They stated their intention! But the TD argued that this was not their intention. I argued that the rule is STATE YOUR INTENTION...so why can people state their intention to avoid ambiguity and not really mean it? There is so much inconsistency in poker! Title: Re: the re-raise Post by: AlexMartin on September 10, 2007, 10:30:15 PM I got in trouble in a Luton comp once for saying bet and not raise as the preflop opener. I tried to explain but was met with so much resistance i shutup. True story. But pre-flop, hasn't the opening bet already been made (by the big blind), so you can either call this bet or raise it. The action has already been opened, so you can't bet. Aha i see, no-one at the table actually gave me any explantation whatsoever. Cheers andrew. |