[Personally I'd like to see a bit more evidence]

Interview with Nolan Dalla

http://www.pokerlistings.com/a-legend-lost-amarillo-slim-breaks-his-silence-pt-1-38457

Personally I'd like to see a bit more evidence before ever remembering the guy as a child abuser.

Oh dear mate

tapeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

that's not something I can help you with

delete the account. It got hacked a while back and he set up a new one that as far as i am aware is fine...

Sick result mate wd.

Also, found out yesterday from someone that you were on my right of day 1 in Notts UKIPT last year?! I think we had some battles right??

[No way do I think he has AA as much as 99 nor AK as much as AQ.]

Think all those calculations are some way of the true representative odds. Putting in AJ+ and 22+ means you are assuming he has AA as much as he has 99, or AK as much as he has AQ which is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off imo.

28+ = old imo. Middle aged is more to do with appearence and personality then the actual age

No way do I think he has AA as much as 99 nor AK as much as AQ.

But I don't think he has 22/J10s as much as he has larger pairs nor larger broadways.

Nothing can be perfect when assesing the range through stove, it's not way off, it's a range assesment.

Personally I think the villain's range is rather largely weighted to 55-JJ, AJ/KQ/+

Versus this range the results I posted above are largely the same.

Aks is a clear fave, AQo is a flip, Aj is a dog.

Sorry Dom didn't mean you personally think this, just meant 'your' as in the calculation is assuming

Pretty sure I'm not folding here. Not without either of them giving me a good reason to.

Think situations like this are really impossible to give accurate opinions on when not actually there.

I'm not taking too much notice of villian 1 given your dynamic and also positions/3bet size. If he's managed to find a K and a K or better then good luck to him, we'll just have to hit a run.

I think you just have to focus on villain 2 and try and profile him at the table. Where is he from, do you think he satellited in? You see some people do crazy shit with ~25bb in >1 day tournies so that they feel the £70 they spend on a hotel is more warrented or they don't want to spend 2 hours driving back to sit and grind a bowl. Did he snap jam? Does he look concerned that you being the original raiser are considering going in, does he look confident, or overly confident???

Do you have facebook or twitter?

All of the biggest heros in poker are actually middle aged

Think all those calculations are some way of the true representative odds. Putting in AJ+ and 22+ means you are assuming he has AA as much as he has 99, or AK as much as he has AQ which is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off imo.

28+ = old imo. Middle aged is more to do with appearence and personality then the actual age

Meh, I'm an idiot, I read the post wrong, didn't realise the guy raising river was the winning reg. Yeh a 5high flush is never winning.

Be more interesting if you had a T high flush

You can comfortably fold vs the other guy once he makes it 50. He always has you beat here.

Don't agree with this at all. Obviously he can have you beat, but the hand is played so passively the whole way through I'd expect him to raise all A's and even complete bluffs on this river (albeit I can't actually think of any bluffs he can have), it's live poker and nothing surprises me.

I think more interestingly, I know you are playing gbp, but what currency is he playing?

And yeh flatting the c/r is obv good as it keeps your range a whole bunch wider

I also echo that his 3bet on flop is also bad in that he loses to more hands then he beats when you c/r if you are playing a hand for value, which near enough always are

This isn't really the reason why I said I thought his flop 3bet was bad. With 44 he's flipping against AK/AA/KK. The reason I thought his flop 3bet was bad is because if he's looking for a good way to play against the c/r with his entire range then he might well have bet the flop with AQ/AJ but obviously these become pure bluff catchers against the c/r when you rep a completely polarised range, if he just calls the c/r, calls the turn and calls a shove on the river he still gets the money in against your value range but possibly keeps some bluffs in. Obv raising bluff catchers achieves nothing so if he wanted to continue in the hand with these after being check/raised on the flop then he should call so its still possible you have some bluffs, also calling the c/r with all his nutted stuff protects his bluff catchers and also makes it easier to get paid with his nutted hands when he can have some weaker parts to his range that could fold later streets. Basically, I don't think he should have a flop 3betting range here especially when 3betting the flop is not necessary for him to get all the money in, his entire range that wants to continue after getting check/raised should be flatting the check/raise imo.

I may have been rambling a bit but I hope that made sense

Erm I think that is pretty much what I said no?! Albeit in just 1 sentance. Or may be it is just what I thought.

You have kind of lost me, I'm tired and had a little to drink. Basically what I was trying to say was by 3betting flop he loses to 2 of your value hands and beats 1, if you are playing your hand for value, WHICH YOU NEAR ENOUGH ALWAYS ARE. Obviously if you are bluffing then I don't expect you/think this is ever the right board to 4bet bluff on.

Or even top pair