Title: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 02, 2010, 12:23:35 PM still unsure about how i feel on this hand from the 1k main.
i don't think i actually have any relevant history with karl since we've only played like 3 times vs each other lifetime, but those times were either ages ago, plo or drunken sit n go's. even though we havent played together much we know each other and get on well and banter it up a bit. without saying too much for obv reasons, i think he views me as laggy and i'd assumed he's solid maybe a touch nitty, but that's come from opinions of others. fwiw i def think he's capable of doing some oddball stuff vs me because of the banter/fact we know each other. today karl has only been on the table 40 mins and neither he nor hero has done anything of note tho i'd been restricted by stack size during this time. interestingly karl had overlimped utg+1 with JJ early on with intentions of trapping me for my 16bb shove (only someone woke up with KK behind me). we haven't played any pots together, and i've only played one pot since my shove i think, which i took down on the button without showdown. anyways, blinds 150/300 w/25 i open for 600 with 9s 7s from utg+1 playing 8 handed with an 11.5k stack karl calls from the sb out of a ~25k stack and bb calls covering both of us. flop Tc 8h 4s they both check i bet 925, karl c/r to 2525, bb folds, hero shoves thoughts? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: TheChipPrince on March 02, 2010, 12:26:19 PM Min-raise pre-flop?
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 02, 2010, 12:28:28 PM Min-raise pre-flop? don't really wanna get into this but yeh it's something i'm trying Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: TheChipPrince on March 02, 2010, 12:38:57 PM Cool, whats ave stack?
Are you playing frustrated at all? Sounds like your trying to make something happen. Do you think you can shift him off a decent 10(+)x hands? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Rookie (Rodney) on March 02, 2010, 01:08:15 PM Apart from the min pre, which you said is something your trying, I think its fine.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 02, 2010, 01:14:50 PM Min-raise pre-flop? don't really wanna get into this but yeh it's something i'm trying You want people to share strat with you but you don't wanna share it back?! :P I pretty much play the hand the same way post flop. Prob fold pre though Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NoflopsHomer on March 02, 2010, 01:15:28 PM I don't think Karl is ever c/r folding here vs an UTG+1 open if you were LP I think this would be standard, his c/r looks designed to give you room to shove. Also if he had a 10-x hand, he's either c/calling the flop or c/r calling a shove.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 02, 2010, 01:26:55 PM Min-raise pre-flop? don't really wanna get into this but yeh it's something i'm trying You want people to share strat with you but you don't wanna share it back?! :P I pretty much play the hand the same way post flop. Prob fold pre though lol i hope ur joking i must of been one of the most frequent contributors to PHA in the last 3 months! Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 02, 2010, 01:33:41 PM Min-raise pre-flop? don't really wanna get into this but yeh it's something i'm trying You want people to share strat with you but you don't wanna share it back?! :P I pretty much play the hand the same way post flop. Prob fold pre though lol i hope ur joking i must of been one of the most frequent contributors to PHA in the last 3 months! Yeah bit tongue in cheek. I don't think you need to share insights into your own play when several people you might be playing against will read. What type of hands do you think Karl is raising you with here? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 02, 2010, 01:57:56 PM yh floppy makes a good point which is how often is karl really c/r folding here
i was thinking he would be calling any Tx hand he would play this way, but tbh i didn't think he would be c/r Tx very often. i thought it was more likely a sign he had a draw like QJs/Q9s/J9s/97s/96s/76s/75s/65s and think he has to be suited or else it gets folded pre edit: obv some of them shouldn't even be there at all pre, but yeh live pro's tsk tsk Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 02, 2010, 02:21:06 PM If you're planning on getting them in is there any merit to calling the flop and jamming any turn?
Overcard may get rid of him if he has the 10 or if he's on a draw similar to yourself he isn't going to commit with 1 to come. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Rookie (Rodney) on March 02, 2010, 02:27:24 PM If you're planning on getting them in is there any merit to calling the flop and jamming any turn? Overcard may get rid of him if he has the 10 or if he's on a draw similar to yourself he isn't going to commit with 1 to come. We aren't first to act on the turn. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 02, 2010, 04:29:01 PM If you're planning on getting them in is there any merit to calling the flop and jamming any turn? Overcard may get rid of him if he has the 10 or if he's on a draw similar to yourself he isn't going to commit with 1 to come. We aren't first to act on the turn. Interesting observation :) Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Rookie (Rodney) on March 02, 2010, 04:31:50 PM If you're planning on getting them in is there any merit to calling the flop and jamming any turn? Overcard may get rid of him if he has the 10 or if he's on a draw similar to yourself he isn't going to commit with 1 to come. We aren't first to act on the turn. Interesting observation :) ? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 04:46:45 PM yh floppy makes a good point which is how often is karl really c/r folding here i was thinking he would be calling any Tx hand he would play this way, but tbh i didn't think he would be c/r Tx very often. i thought it was more likely a sign he had a draw like QJs/Q9s/J9s/97s/96s/76s/75s/65s and think he has to be suited or else it gets folded pre edit: obv some of them shouldn't even be there at all pre, but yeh live pro's tsk tsk meh what sort of adjustment to his pre calling range do you think he'll make since you've minraised? This is dirty, i'd probably shove flop and then realise instantly he's likely not folding, and be like, SPAAAADES PLS or make me a straight ta. think it's a fold but I don't know how often i'd manage it rotflmfao Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: AlexMartin on March 02, 2010, 04:53:37 PM Dont think its close, think u played this pretty awesome. Hes got a fk load of air/draws here and he wont be calling off.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 02, 2010, 06:11:10 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NoflopsHomer on March 02, 2010, 06:25:59 PM Dont think its close, think u played this pretty awesome. Hes got a fk load of air/draws here and he wont be calling off. Surely if Karl has draws, he's gonna peel here rather than c/r and not be 3-bet blasted out of the pot. If Chris is viewed as a lagtard by Karl then the latter isn't going to c/r draws in a spot where he's liable to be forced to fold. Think Karl would much more likely c/jam the turn in this spot. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 06:27:00 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: George2Loose on March 02, 2010, 06:31:35 PM I doubt he's folding often enough here to make shove profitable. He probably has the same hand obv
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: George2Loose on March 02, 2010, 06:57:00 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Yeh this. Chris's standard raise post antes was 2* Don't know how it's working out for you Chris but with stacks so deep you were playing a lot of pots multi way. Obv post flop you have am edge (a huge edge on that table) but playing any hand multi way is tough esp with the fish we had on our table (me included) Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:14:46 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Yeh this. Chris's standard raise post antes was 2* Don't know how it's working out for you Chris but with stacks so deep you were playing a lot of pots multi way. Obv post flop you have am edge (a huge edge on that table) but playing any hand multi way is tough esp with the fish we had on our table (me included) Multi way has alot of relative position spots where you can pick up pots and cap solid players ranges more easily than in a HU pot. didn't look like there were many fish in the Walsall line up either. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Royal Flush on March 02, 2010, 07:17:57 PM Quote from: titaniumbean link=topic=47003.msg1143496#msg1143496 date=1267557286 didn't look like there were many fish in the Walsall line up either. [/quote orly? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: George2Loose on March 02, 2010, 07:19:01 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Yeh this. Chris's standard raise post antes was 2* Don't know how it's working out for you Chris but with stacks so deep you were playing a lot of pots multi way. Obv post flop you have am edge (a huge edge on that table) but playing any hand multi way is tough esp with the fish we had on our table (me included) Multi way has alot of relative position spots where you can pick up pots and cap solid players ranges more easily than in a HU pot. didn't look like there were many fish in the Walsall line up either. You should have seen our first table. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:20:31 PM How many runners in the comp?
What was solid player to fish ratio ? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: George2Loose on March 02, 2010, 07:23:13 PM How many runners in the comp? What was solid player to fish ratio ? No idea. I wasn't good enough to se more than our opening table Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:25:56 PM How many runners in the comp? What was solid player to fish ratio ? No idea. I wasn't good enough to se more than our opening table meh from seeing some of the line ups I think after day two it didn't look like a very soft field. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 02, 2010, 07:26:29 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Andy meet Mantis. All his PHA posts are tez Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Royal Flush on March 02, 2010, 07:29:07 PM How many runners in the comp? What was solid player to fish ratio ? No idea. I wasn't good enough to se more than our opening table meh from seeing some of the line ups I think after day two it didn't look like a very soft field. I saw the list of players on Day 2 and someone saying "zomg so tough" i assumed they were being sarcastic though. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:30:58 PM Overconfident much Flushy?
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:31:35 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Andy meet Mantis. All his PHA posts are tez I've never seen his posts and then instantly thought 'that's a level' rotflmfao Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 02, 2010, 07:33:29 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Where did I say the min raise pre reps strength? I said the complete strat put together reps strength. If hero isn't repping strength with this strat what is the strat designed to rep in your opinion? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:47:22 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Where did I say the min raise pre reps strength? I said the complete strat put together reps strength. If hero isn't repping strength with this strat what is the strat designed to rep in your opinion? We're not trying to 'rep strength' we're trying to allow for the fact you don't always have the nuts and yet you have to keep on playing so we are trying to keep our strategy consistent and give no information away through it. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Royal Flush on March 02, 2010, 07:49:24 PM Overconfident much Flushy? Not really pretty sure others were of the same opinion. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Royal Flush on March 02, 2010, 07:49:43 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Where did I say the min raise pre reps strength? I said the complete strat put together reps strength. If hero isn't repping strength with this strat what is the strat designed to rep in your opinion? Balanced ranges yo. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 07:52:51 PM Overconfident much Flushy? Not really pretty sure others were of the same opinion. Really though, when roughly half of the day 2 field are competent solid winning online and live players is your edge really that much that you can make such general sweeping statements about how easy it is? Every time i've in 1k+ events i've been amazing at how many numpties have 1k to lose, this comp really doesn't look the softest. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: AlexMartin on March 02, 2010, 08:36:20 PM Dont think its close, think u played this pretty awesome. Hes got a fk load of air/draws here and he wont be calling off. Surely if Karl has draws, he's gonna peel here rather than c/r and not be 3-bet blasted out of the pot. If Chris is viewed as a lagtard by Karl then the latter isn't going to c/r draws in a spot where he's liable to be forced to fold. Think Karl would much more likely c/jam the turn in this spot. meh, think his value range is pretty wide, i also think there are hands in his value range hes gonna raise fold (i know ridic but serious). Hes gotta call 10k into circa 5, hes gonna fold a shit tonne of hands here imo, any weird cr (99/77/ 10's) plus we foldout a lot of air that has us beat, random overs, gutter+over and stuff. Add our equity when called and this is deffo +EV, we can double our stack sometimes without showdown, i reckon at least 50% of the time this cr is air/weird value thats folding/draws that cant call, which is huge. If he has a set or AA or w/e gl to him, he aint got it enough. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 02, 2010, 08:38:23 PM I think min raising from EP and then betting less than half the pot into 2 players who have got you well covered is supposed to make you look strong isn't it? I mean you've got 9 high so obv you're trying to implement a strat that makes you look strong. So if you think you look strong what do you think a c-r from the sb means? Either he has you crushed or your look strong strat doesn't work. I would say he has you crushed thou. LOL level? The min raise pre is not to rep strength. That's com. Actually what would be more funny is if Chris comes on and says it is to rep strength rotflmfao Things like pot to stack ratio post flop, light 3 betting etc are more important factors that are influencing the preflop sizing i'd guess. Where did I say the min raise pre reps strength? I said the complete strat put together reps strength. If hero isn't repping strength with this strat what is the strat designed to rep in your opinion? We're not trying to 'rep strength' we're trying to allow for the fact you don't always have the nuts and yet you have to keep on playing so we are trying to keep our strategy consistent and give no information away through it. Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: doubleup on March 02, 2010, 09:48:37 PM we can double our stack sometimes without showdown, i reckon at least 50% of the time this cr is air/weird value thats folding/draws that cant call, which is huge. If he has a set or AA or w/e gl to him, he aint got it enough. dont understand what you mean? There's 5.5k in the middle, hero has about 10k and lets say 30% equity in a 25k pot when called. As far as the play goes villain has to fold a lot of the time to make it ev+ and surely its never going to be a hugely profitable spot. Is calling in position very bad? The hands that fold to a shove surely check the turn and give hero a free card? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 02, 2010, 10:47:46 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 03, 2010, 12:43:17 AM The hands that fold to a shove surely check the turn and give hero a free card? If I had to choose between a free card and the pot, I'd take the pot. Thusly, shoving is always better than calling. please use the word thusly more Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: AlexMartin on March 03, 2010, 06:35:48 AM we can double our stack sometimes without showdown, i reckon at least 50% of the time this cr is air/weird value thats folding/draws that cant call, which is huge. If he has a set or AA or w/e gl to him, he aint got it enough. dont understand what you mean? There's 5.5k in the middle, hero has about 10k and lets say 30% equity in a 25k pot when called. As far as the play goes villain has to fold a lot of the time to make it ev+ and surely its never going to be a hugely profitable spot. Is calling in position very bad? The hands that fold to a shove surely check the turn and give hero a free card? type obv, meant increase by 50% calling is pretty terrible imo, karl will always ship his draws and sometimes his air. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: doubleup on March 03, 2010, 11:00:37 AM The hands that fold to a shove surely check the turn and give hero a free card? If I had to choose between a free card and the pot, I'd take the pot. Thusly, shoving is always better than calling. And if you had to choose between going out of the tournament and staying in, what would you choose? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: doubleup on March 03, 2010, 11:03:41 AM calling is pretty terrible imo, karl will always ship his draws and sometimes his air. So he's going to ship when we hit as well? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 03, 2010, 12:08:48 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 03, 2010, 01:14:41 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. Are you taking the piss out of other people's poker theory?! Aahaha just laughed real hard! Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Cf on March 03, 2010, 01:32:27 PM A few people say he's not c/r folding but I don't see why not. Hero has a shortish stack so needs to get something going. Raising pre and cbetting on a T84r board seems a decent spot to pick up a smallish pot so I think he can be doing a c/r with air here. He might even have a ten he's not prepared to call a shove with, as by that point he's "found out where he is" (no disrespect to actual player in op lol, don't know how good he is). If he's on a draw himself then he's not getting the price to call (i make it ~8.5k into ~15.5k). And if he's got you crushed then meh, you've got outs.
I think the shove's profitable and i'd like to get our stack going at this point rather than fold and slowly dwindle. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 03, 2010, 01:35:08 PM Looks like Chris played it well to me.
There's no point raising 79s to then get all passive on the flop because you've only got an up and down straight draw. If you raise these sort of hands you should be fist pump shoving this flop when given the opportunity especially when you've got FE and nut outs. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: AlexMartin on March 03, 2010, 03:02:25 PM calling is pretty terrible imo, karl will always ship his draws and sometimes his air. So he's going to ship when we hit as well? ofc, problem is we dont hit that 1 card enough of the time to make it profitable.... someone do the math on this, shove>fold>call and its not close imo. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 03, 2010, 03:09:16 PM calling is pretty terrible imo, karl will always ship his draws and sometimes his air. So he's going to ship when we hit as well? ofc, problem is we dont hit that 1 card enough of the time to make it profitable.... someone do the math on this, shove>fold>call and its not close imo. 7.84 > 1.62 > 0.41 something like that anyway. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 03, 2010, 04:44:21 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. How likely is he to have hit the board, how many combinations of hands does he play this way that beat us compared to how many we can get folds from. That's the game. Not sitting there playing tight and respecting min-raise strength. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: doubleup on March 03, 2010, 05:27:39 PM ofc, problem is we dont hit that 1 card enough of the time to make it profitable.... someone do the math on this, shove>fold>call and its not close imo. One card? If we assume say that hero has 6 clean outs (thats surely not unreasonable) and villain pushes any turn, a call is def more profitable than a fold, but now agree prob not better than a push (mainly because I stoved some villain hands and heros equity when called is higher than 30%). Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 03, 2010, 05:40:27 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. How likely is he to have hit the board, how many combinations of hands does he play this way that beat us compared to how many we can get folds from. That's the game. Not sitting there playing tight and respecting min-raise strength. Ok, so we push because villain is unlikely to have hit the board and we can get him to fold most of his hands. So you would push with any random hand in this spot right? Also you would push with overpairs and sets because of your "we are trying to keep our strat consistent and not give info away" theory. Why would you push with overpairs and sets if you don't think villain will call? And if you don't push when you're strong you're not range balacing anymore right? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 03, 2010, 05:57:23 PM Personally I try not to do too much of my range balancing in all in showdown pots.
I think Mantis might well be talking gonads here. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: 810ofclubs on March 03, 2010, 06:38:55 PM There's no point raising 79s to then get all passive on the flop he isnt 1 of the more passive players ive met Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: AlexMartin on March 03, 2010, 07:50:24 PM ofc, problem is we dont hit that 1 card enough of the time to make it profitable.... someone do the math on this, shove>fold>call and its not close imo. One card? If we assume say that hero has 6 clean outs (thats surely not unreasonable) and villain pushes any turn, a call is def more profitable than a fold, but now agree prob not better than a push (mainly because I stoved some villain hands and heros equity when called is higher than 30%). i meant the turn.......as in we get 1 street to hit. me and u aint on same page double :) Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Cf on March 03, 2010, 09:13:28 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. How likely is he to have hit the board, how many combinations of hands does he play this way that beat us compared to how many we can get folds from. That's the game. Not sitting there playing tight and respecting min-raise strength. Ok, so we push because villain is unlikely to have hit the board and we can get him to fold most of his hands. So you would push with any random hand in this spot right? Also you would push with overpairs and sets because of your "we are trying to keep our strat consistent and not give info away" theory. Why would you push with overpairs and sets if you don't think villain will call? And if you don't push when you're strong you're not range balacing anymore right? There's balancing our range and there's playing the situation. In this spot we've be c/raised by possibly a non premium holding and a push has a decent change to get through. If it doesn't then we at least have some outs. I'm going to go with what I believe is the more +EV play in this spot rather than worry too much about range balancing. And if he doesn't call then they obv don't know what we had. We can balance our range later on when we get into the same situation and push with a set and get a call by someone thinking we're semi-bluffing again. And also, just because I played a hand a certain way doesn't mean i'm neccesarily going to play it the exact same way again. And finally, this sutation is clearly diff than pushing with 2 random cards. Big difference in equity. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Cottonbud on March 04, 2010, 03:43:44 AM Get it in and Get there obv!
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 04, 2010, 03:41:00 PM Yeah, pretty interesting break down of our long-term goals utilising this strat. Pretty much misses the point thou. Villain has been at the table only a short time and hero hasn't done anything. So the point is how villain comprehends this strat right now in this 1st hand. I said there's a good chance villain sees our strat as strength all things considered. So I don't know how chatting about the consistency of our strat into the future really helps much when we're trying to deduce the strength of our oppo's hand right now. We look pretty strong for someone not repping strength imo. is villian a tard or been on the moon for a few years? Any regular poker player is not going to be overawed by the strength of a cbet especially not on a T high dry board. It's not back in the day where a flop check raise is not allowed because it's rude. People play the game; you know, the one where you don't base what you do solely on your cards. Oh ok, so in this specific hand you think villain is c/r bluffing because poker is a game where you don't need the cards to make the moves. Good theory. How likely is he to have hit the board, how many combinations of hands does he play this way that beat us compared to how many we can get folds from. That's the game. Not sitting there playing tight and respecting min-raise strength. Ok, so we push because villain is unlikely to have hit the board and we can get him to fold most of his hands. So you would push with any random hand in this spot right? Also you would push with overpairs and sets because of your "we are trying to keep our strat consistent and not give info away" theory. Why would you push with overpairs and sets if you don't think villain will call? And if you don't push when you're strong you're not range balacing anymore right? There's balancing our range and there's playing the situation. In this spot we've be c/raised by possibly a non premium holding and a push has a decent change to get through. If it doesn't then we at least have some outs. I'm going to go with what I believe is the more +EV play in this spot rather than worry too much about range balancing. And if he doesn't call then they obv don't know what we had. We can balance our range later on when we get into the same situation and push with a set and get a call by someone thinking we're semi-bluffing again. And also, just because I played a hand a certain way doesn't mean i'm neccesarily going to play it the exact same way again. And finally, this sutation is clearly diff than pushing with 2 random cards. Big difference in equity. Yep there's balancing our range and playing the situation. Regards playing this particular situation I don't think the FE is near what you think it is. I don't think villain is pure bluffing here and pushing will pick up a call. I don't believe most would jam the top of their range and I give credit to villain to see that. We push cos villain prob hasn't hit this board and wont be able to call and I think villain will see that quite clearly. The fact that we can only balance our range by pushing strength later in a similar spot means we have been all-in in this spot hoping to bink a card to stay in. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 04, 2010, 04:01:11 PM Yep there's balancing our range and playing the situation. Regards playing this particular situation I don't think the FE is near what you think it is. I don't think villain is pure bluffing here and pushing will pick up a call. I don't believe most would jam the top of their range and I give credit to villain to see that. We push cos villain prob hasn't hit this board and wont be able to call and I think villain will see that quite clearly. The fact that we can only balance our range by pushing strength later in a similar spot means we have been all-in in this spot hoping to bink a card to stay in. You give credit to villain for spotting our bluff jam but he still needs something decent to call our shove. He may put us on a semi bluff which means he can call fairly light. There aren't many draws out there though. 79 and 9J are it so unless villain can put us specifically on one of those hands what does he think we're spewing with? He either thinks we are a complete spewtard who's got air or we've got a very strong holding. We're actually making a very well disguised semi bluff here. Villain has no idea what we've got. We could have air or a monster. Actually we've got neither but that's his problem to work out. We also have the benefit that he's probably missed the board anyway so will fold. He probably folds small pairs as well. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 04, 2010, 04:52:34 PM Yep there's balancing our range and playing the situation. Regards playing this particular situation I don't think the FE is near what you think it is. I don't think villain is pure bluffing here and pushing will pick up a call. I don't believe most would jam the top of their range and I give credit to villain to see that. We push cos villain prob hasn't hit this board and wont be able to call and I think villain will see that quite clearly. The fact that we can only balance our range by pushing strength later in a similar spot means we have been all-in in this spot hoping to bink a card to stay in. You give credit to villain for spotting our bluff jam but he still needs something decent to call our shove. He may put us on a semi bluff which means he can call fairly light. There aren't many draws out there though. 79 and 9J are it so unless villain can put us specifically on one of those hands what does he think we're spewing with? He either thinks we are a complete spewtard who's got air or we've got a very strong holding. We're actually making a very well disguised semi bluff here. Villain has no idea what we've got. We could have air or a monster. Actually we've got neither but that's his problem to work out. We also have the benefit that he's probably missed the board anyway so will fold. He probably folds small pairs as well. I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 04, 2010, 06:02:49 PM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MC on March 04, 2010, 06:04:19 PM If we shove we are risking ~10k to win ~4.5k which is a very reasonable risk vs reward ratio. Villain is getting less than 2:1 and can forseeably fold. Ok it sucks when he has a set or J9s, but, meh, I think shoving is probs the best option...
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 05, 2010, 01:55:43 AM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. What's that? Villain will have a hand some % of the time and he will not have a hand some % of the time. Yeah, that's about the size of it. I kinda figure our job is to decipher what % of the time he does have a hand really. By the way, I think your attitude in this thread has been a bit of a joke. You sound like a Greekstein fanboy. This should be a worrying and rather depressing revelation for you. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: titaniumbean on March 05, 2010, 03:48:02 AM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. What's that? Villain will have a hand some % of the time and he will not have a hand some % of the time. Yeah, that's about the size of it. I kinda figure our job is to decipher what % of the time he does have a hand really. By the way, I think your attitude in this thread has been a bit of a joke. You sound like a Greekstein fanboy. This should be a worrying and rather depressing revelation for you. That is below the belt!! rotflmfao I hadn't read your sentence after the one I've just rushed to highlight and refute. Nice read. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 05, 2010, 01:21:50 PM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. What's that? Villain will have a hand some % of the time and he will not have a hand some % of the time. Yeah, that's about the size of it. I kinda figure our job is to decipher what % of the time he does have a hand really. By the way, I think your attitude in this thread has been a bit of a joke. You sound like a Greekstein fanboy. This should be a worrying and rather depressing revelation for you. No, your advice is just absolutely terrible. Pretty much always too. I just highlight it a lot. Think its important that people learning the game or who aren't familiar with PHA know your advice is generally poo. Have a nice weekend bud. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MANTIS01 on March 05, 2010, 02:18:59 PM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. What's that? Villain will have a hand some % of the time and he will not have a hand some % of the time. Yeah, that's about the size of it. I kinda figure our job is to decipher what % of the time he does have a hand really. By the way, I think your attitude in this thread has been a bit of a joke. You sound like a Greekstein fanboy. This should be a worrying and rather depressing revelation for you. No, your advice is just absolutely terrible. Pretty much always too. I just highlight it a lot. Think its important that people learning the game or who aren't familiar with PHA know your advice is generally poo. Have a nice weekend bud. Here you go my friend I’ve got some advice for you…and it’s not poker advice either…so hopefully you won’t think it’s tez. Whether you choose to act upon it or not is entirely up to you. Anyway, I think you should try and find yourself a girlfriend as soon as possible. I think if you could manage to get some regular sex in your life, indeed any sex at all in your life, you wouldn't get so anxious about other people's poker opinions. Releasing all that pent up frustration would probably allow you to express yourself in a more congenial way in day to day life. Now I’ve seen a couple of photos of you on this forum so I know you face some challenges when it comes to developing relationships with women, some challenges bigger than others in fact, but I reckon there must be a young lady out there, ravaged by loneliness, who would find your company appealing. One thing though, when you meet her don’t blow it by allowing her to discover you’re a geeky little internet troll because she wont find that sexy at all. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Dubai on March 05, 2010, 02:29:04 PM Why are there 5 pages for a basic hand that only the Original Poster can answer because its based purely on his interpretation of the % of times Karl is raise folding and the % of times Karl is raise calling- this can only be determined by knowing how Karl perceives OP, table dynamics and how good Karl is. Then it requires a simple bit of maths to tell us our overall equity and requires no discussion.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 05, 2010, 02:57:05 PM Here we have 5 pages for a basic hand that only the Original Poster can answer because its based purely on his interpretation of the % of times Karl is raise folding and the % of times Karl is raise calling- this can only be determined by knowing how Karl perceives OP, table dynamics and how good Karl is. Then it requires a simple bit of maths to tell us our overall equity and requires no discussion. Discuss: FYP Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 05, 2010, 03:02:50 PM Why are there 5 pages for a basic hand that only the Original Poster can answer because its based purely on his interpretation of the % of times Karl is raise folding and the % of times Karl is raise calling- this can only be determined by knowing how Karl perceives OP, table dynamics and how good Karl is. Then it requires a simple bit of maths to tell us our overall equity and requires no discussion. flame wars for 3/4 this tho innit Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Cf on March 05, 2010, 03:03:30 PM I do love Mantis/Greekstein posts
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: NigDawG on March 05, 2010, 03:05:39 PM I do love Mantis/Greekstein posts meh not in pha tho imo should have a sub section for fights Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Dubai on March 05, 2010, 03:06:36 PM Anyone suggesting bet folding probably thinks its ok to stack off with T9s here tho, and our hand is better than weak top pair.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Cf on March 05, 2010, 03:06:50 PM I do love Mantis/Greekstein posts meh not in pha tho imo should have a sub section for fights True - mods, make it happen. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: StuartHopkin on March 05, 2010, 04:47:07 PM I do give credit to villain. People are banging on about how they've spotted a good SPR jamming spot considering how the board's come down like it's a special secret nobody else can see. Yet nobody considers whether villain has manufactured such a situation for them to spot. Villain isn't blind to the situation he's creating. So why is he creating it? Villain isn't raising without a plan right? So he's either raising to call or raising to fold. If he's raising to fold he's bluffing because he thinks hero is weak. Why does he think hero is weak? Is it because he views hero as someone who min raises from ep and takes weak stabs at pots with no hands when he gets short stacked? I also give villain credit for not raising to "find out where he stands" or betting for info. So what's he raising for? Just some random bluff right? omg, get over the preflop minraise. villain some % of the time will be raising because it's hard for us to hit the board, some % of the time he will have air or a hand he cant call it off with and will fold, some % of the time he will have a hand he lol snaps a shove with. stop levelling yourself before you've even started. What's that? Villain will have a hand some % of the time and he will not have a hand some % of the time. Yeah, that's about the size of it. I kinda figure our job is to decipher what % of the time he does have a hand really. By the way, I think your attitude in this thread has been a bit of a joke. You sound like a Greekstein fanboy. This should be a worrying and rather depressing revelation for you. No, your advice is just absolutely terrible. Pretty much always too. I just highlight it a lot. Think its important that people learning the game or who aren't familiar with PHA know your advice is generally poo. Have a nice weekend bud. Here you go my friend I’ve got some advice for you…and it’s not poker advice either…so hopefully you won’t think it’s tez. Whether you choose to act upon it or not is entirely up to you. Anyway, I think you should try and find yourself a girlfriend as soon as possible. I think if you could manage to get some regular sex in your life, indeed any sex at all in your life, you wouldn't get so anxious about other people's poker opinions. Releasing all that pent up frustration would probably allow you to express yourself in a more congenial way in day to day life. Now I’ve seen a couple of photos of you on this forum so I know you face some challenges when it comes to developing relationships with women, some challenges bigger than others in fact, but I reckon there must be a young lady out there, ravaged by loneliness, who would find your company appealing. One thing though, when you meet her don’t blow it by allowing her to discover you’re a geeky little internet troll because she wont find that sexy at all. Post of the year so far in my opinion! Awesome work Mantis! Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: Royal Flush on March 05, 2010, 04:49:24 PM Ha incred.
Mantis>GreekyGeeky Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: GreekStein on March 05, 2010, 04:51:55 PM Ha incred. Mantis>GreekyGeeky lol was a good one. I forgot Mantis crushes the Lothario scene even harder than does the poker. All those incredible pictures of his poker tracker and his girlfriend have me waving the white flag. Both beautiful. Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: EvilPie on March 05, 2010, 05:13:37 PM Mantis for mod.
Title: Re: GUKPT Walsall vs Mickey Mahrenholz Post by: MC on March 08, 2010, 11:16:45 AM |