Interesting to see the spoilt arse putting it down to team orders in the press conference.

Another thing to consider - witrh bookies and exchanges offering big markets on qualifying winners, with huge in-play swings seen on the Betfair market, surely a team instruction of this sort would raise questions about corruption?

I mean - in-play, Hamilton was the fastest and was always gonna get pole, pushing Alonso's price up to 3.55 at one point.  Then, a 'team instruction' that has only one outcome causes him to win the session - I'm not a betting guru but I do know a little bit, and it smells funny to me.

Good post!

I have noticed an unexpected, positive side-effect of tilt, however:  When tilting (I suffer from all of those varieties described above), I tend to get very 'vocal' in the chatboxes - I'm not one of those fools that types in such illuminating comments as 'fuk of retard' and 'u gayboy' etc, however I do occasionally rant and rave at anyone who cares to listen.  (Particularly during 'Vendetta Tilt' episodes.)  Aside from making me seem like an utter buffoon, it draws everyone's attention to me, and the way I am playing.

This, when combined with the most awful illogical, stupid poker that naturally accompanies an episode of tilt, means that - even after I have donked off a pile of chips - I can sleep safe in the knowledge that people have attached little tags to my poker 'identity' that say such things as "Terrible player, will raise UTG with J-4o and then call pot-size bets on the turn and river with nothing but a gutshot straight draw" and "This guy is capable of moving all in from an early position with A-2s" ...

And so the tilt, while expensive, does lay the foundations for future victories!

My response is based on the assumption that the guy who made the mistake immediately mentioned this before a hand was dealt, and that he did in fact try and get support to the table straight away.

There are two kinds of people in the world - decent, and otherwise.  The decent ones give him his money back, minus their loss on tournament fees.  Everyone else does not.

Like finding a wallet in the street with £500 cash in it, and loads of ID.  The decent ones trace the owner and return it, including the cash.  The others say "Well, shouldn't have lost it in the first place." and steal the money.

Unfortunately, Earth 2007 looks after the latter group, while the former lose out.

Quote from: UpTheMariners on Today at 04:25:03 am
if your a ev+ player surely you want as much on there as possible? Providing you've got the right bankroll


That's a fair point Mariners - if the amount on the table becomes a disproportionately high percentage of your bankroll, then it may be a good idea to leave.

I think this is the point I was concerned about...  Initial bankroll of $2,800, so I sat down with $400 (maybe too much?  BR management isn't my strong point), or 14% of my BR on the table and vulnerable to being broke in one hand.

Having worked it up to $1,800, BR would be $4,200 - of which 43% was on the table and vulnerable.

As for the comments on the defenition of 'ratholing' - I did feel like telling the CL that he could stick my chips up his ass after the hand.

In seriousness though, I understand that sneaking chips off the table during a live cash game is wrong, and I understand why - but I still think that in the above situation, if I choose to leave the game for half an hour before coming back with less chips, I don't think I'm being really unfair on the other players, I'm just effectively saying "Look, I had a good session and won a lot of cash.  I'm gonna go cool it for a while, reassess my bankroll, and may come back for another session later." Surely that's not frowned on... it's not like I won one huge hand to quadruple my stack, and then got up and ran away!

This is true, but that's what I meant - cash out, go get something to eat, come back later.  Or join another 4/8 table right away, depending - the same players are sitting at most of them anyway!

I'm not sure why it's not allowed, I can't see how it's wrong or disadvantages anyone.  As long as the number of chips you have available for a hand is clear to the other players when the hole cards are dealt, and does not change during the course of a hand, I can't see the big deal?

He was two seats behind me, and the fateful hand was:

DH:  

CL:  

Chips went in on a     board, after he check-called his flopped house.  He hadn't re-raised me pre-flop, so couldn't put him on queens... cest la vie.  Maybe a better player wouldn't have gone broke here, but never mind!

It wasn't the hand that troubled me, more the wisdom (or otherwise) of being so overstacked in a cash game...

DH

Something happened to me in an online cash game yesterday, that made me consider something I haven't before:

Having been playing well and building a bankroll, I moved up to a $800 max buy-in NLHE cash game on Mansion (4/8 blinds).

I bought in for $400, and had the right cards at the right time to make it up to $1800 in a few hours.  As players were coming and going, 7 of the other 8 stacks were between $400 and $800 because of the max buy-in of $800.  There was one guy with about $4500, who I think had been playing the same table since Easter.

Here's what happened - I got into one of those hands where you are destined to lose a lot of money, with the chip monster, and sure enough I donked off the whole $1800 in one hand.  I got around to thinking:

If you are in my situation (before the carnage hand!) does it make any sense to have $1800 on the table, when only one of the other stacks has more than $800, and the exception is the guy who has you covered?  Obviously, if you are short stacked at a cash table, you are reducing your potential winnings in one hand because you can't take the maximum bite from another stack.  However, when only one player has the chips to double you up in the event that you flop the quads/whatever then would it make more sense to take some chips off the table (ie. stand up, wait, rejoin the game)?

I think if this arises again I will do that - my reasoning is that I chose the $800 max buy-in because that's about the maximum loss I can stand to take from one horrific hand without having getting stomachache... so the $1800 felt bad, even though it was chips I hadn't brought to the table myself.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this, or any advice?

DH

The team is void of creativity and is left with nothing but hard grafters

Admittedly I only see about 50% of the matches, but for me the main thing that has been wrong with the England setup for the last five years is the total lack of 'hard grafters'!  

Sure, a lot of the players do a great job for their club, but for whatever reason they have not produced for the country.  If Lampard - or anyone else for that matter - was to be seen working his cajones off in every match (as any player graced with the shirt damn well should do) then it wouldn't matter if we lost every game - no-one would boo him.  English fans sometimes have unrealistic expectations, but on the whole they respect players who work hard.

As for the Estonia game... no doubt it will be yet another pathetic, half-arsed game of football, which we will probably win 2-1 and then have to listen to the lazy sods papping on about how we've 'turned a corner' and got things 'back on track'.  Estonia - no goals, no points in the group so far.  With the standard of players McLaren has available to him, if he wants anyone to think we might qualify for (or win) the Euro Champs then that team has to beat Estonia by six or seven clear goals, if you ask me.

I can't believe that, having belatedly joined what appears to be a great poker forum, my first post is in the 'Big Brother 8' thread.  Shocking...

Anyway... hello folks.

Ironside - I wouldn't write off that bet if I were you.  When I heard the rumour that they were filling the house with females only, my initial thoughts were that they were setting up a 'ratings revival' for halfway through the series, when they fire a load of blokes into the fray to see what happens.

I haven't looked at live odds, but if you can get good odds against a male winner now, it might be worth bunging a tenner on.

DH