Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[tikay]

The photo has an EPT sign in it, but the description titled at the bottom says GUKPT

ept deauville 2006 77 v ak i believe!!!!

Correct. And wrong - I think.

It was Deauville EPT 2006. I think the hands were John Hewston - who'd had three Premiums consecutive hands - had Jacks, & Jen, on the money Bubble, but playing to win the thing, took him on with A-K, & missed.

John had a mountainous stack by then, but got done by Two Pair v Better Two Pair.

[Laxie]

The photo has an EPT sign in it, but the description titled at the bottom says GUKPT

yep he has whooshed me before with that photo trick, plz dont fall into it aswell!

Laxie joins the KingPoker Whoosh Club. That photo-title was my curve-ball.

Sigh, at least im not alone now!

I don't like yer world...and I didn't give TK enough credit.  Was sure he was tech challenged.  Sigh.    

[tikay]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

[Claw75]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

[tikay]

One teaser before I go.

In the often fractious DC game at DTD last night, it all went off a couple of times, & here's one example.

Two Asian Gentlemen - & nobody else - were in a big Super-Stud hand.

Mr Low-Stack rams the Pot, & Mr Deep Stack calls. The Pot is, let's say for ease of explanation, about £500. Due to being Pot-Limit. Mr Low-Stack has about £25 "left behind".

After 4th Street, it's clear Mr Deep-Stack has the hand all wrapped up. But he never bets the "last" £25, & it's checked down. This is a sort of "custom" among the more chivalrous players these days - always leave the guy his Fare home.

As a result, they were openly, loudly, & repeatedly accused of soft play, & collusion, by two other players.

Harsh, I thought. OK, we play Cash to take other folks money, that's OK, but nobody else was in the hand, & I think in these circumstances, it was perfectly acceptable.

Interesting topic Tony.  As told, I see no wrong.  When I play, I wouldn't put anyone in for their singles, but would put them in (friend or not) for their last 25.  I do admit that when I see 2 players check it down with decent stacks, I do feel wronged -- I don't get to see another street for free, so I resent it when someone else does, even though I might not be involved in the pot.

Not betting the strength of the hand according to the pure poker situation (i.e. not allowing who the opponent is to influence) is a very slippery slope and it quickly becomes a game in which people don't want to play.

I have no problem with the checking it down when 2 players are in a pot and one of them has less than a bowl or rice remaining.

It does cause a problem on the next hand though. If the player with the bowl remaining say 11 left loses the pot but was never all in he can continue the next hand with just 11 and doesnt have to pull up. So on the next hand he just throws in his 11 looking for value and it ends up being 6 way action and the guy with the best hand cant reraise.

So imo if its checked down as only a bowl remaining it should count as an allin and the losing player should have to pull up as he was allin on the last hand.

Yes I agree, had the player with chips said to the player with £25 remaining "is that allin" ? and then it had been checked down everything would have been hunky-dory as the £25 player would then have been obliged to pull up in order to continue. And Tony there are still £1 chips in "play" for rake and tipping purposes in a £5/£5 game.

When Methusala, who's been playing Cash since before I was born, says I'm wrong, I must be out of step.

I still think it's OK. So there.

[tikay]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

1 minute is my normal duration. Maximum.

[celtic]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

1 minute is my normal duration. Maximum. including cigarette afterwards.

fyp

[Karabiner]

One teaser before I go.

In the often fractious DC game at DTD last night, it all went off a couple of times, & here's one example.

Two Asian Gentlemen - & nobody else - were in a big Super-Stud hand.

Mr Low-Stack rams the Pot, & Mr Deep Stack calls. The Pot is, let's say for ease of explanation, about £500. Due to being Pot-Limit. Mr Low-Stack has about £25 "left behind".

After 4th Street, it's clear Mr Deep-Stack has the hand all wrapped up. But he never bets the "last" £25, & it's checked down. This is a sort of "custom" among the more chivalrous players these days - always leave the guy his Fare home.

As a result, they were openly, loudly, & repeatedly accused of soft play, & collusion, by two other players.

Harsh, I thought. OK, we play Cash to take other folks money, that's OK, but nobody else was in the hand, & I think in these circumstances, it was perfectly acceptable.

Interesting topic Tony.  As told, I see no wrong.  When I play, I wouldn't put anyone in for their singles, but would put them in (friend or not) for their last 25.  I do admit that when I see 2 players check it down with decent stacks, I do feel wronged -- I don't get to see another street for free, so I resent it when someone else does, even though I might not be involved in the pot.

Not betting the strength of the hand according to the pure poker situation (i.e. not allowing who the opponent is to influence) is a very slippery slope and it quickly becomes a game in which people don't want to play.

I have no problem with the checking it down when 2 players are in a pot and one of them has less than a bowl or rice remaining.

It does cause a problem on the next hand though. If the player with the bowl remaining say 11 left loses the pot but was never all in he can continue the next hand with just 11 and doesnt have to pull up. So on the next hand he just throws in his 11 looking for value and it ends up being 6 way action and the guy with the best hand cant reraise.

So imo if its checked down as only a bowl remaining it should count as an allin and the losing player should have to pull up as he was allin on the last hand.

Yes I agree, had the player with chips said to the player with £25 remaining "is that allin" ? and then it had been checked down everything would have been hunky-dory as the £25 player would then have been obliged to pull up in order to continue. And Tony there are still £1 chips in "play" for rake and tipping purposes in a £5/£5 game.

When Methusala, who's been playing Cash since before I was born, says I'm wrong, I must be out of step.

I still think it's OK. So there.

Tony, I am not suggesting that you are wrong here.

It's just that had the one guy said to the other "is that allin?" there would have been no argument and soft play would not have been an issue. 

[Dingdell]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

1 minute is my normal duration. Maximum. including cigarette and cuddle afterwards.

fyp

fyp

[gatso]

Tony, I am not suggesting that you are wrong here.

It's just that had the one guy said to the other "is that allin?" there would have been no argument and soft play would not have been an issue. 

that would actually make it wrong surely.

I'm still assuming it was the guys last hand as Tikay refers to 'fare home' (yes, I understand it wasn't literally his fare home).

so money that should've been in play is removed from the table after 2 players have discussed it. complicit ratholing imo.

it's like the difference between checking it down and agreeing out loud to check it down.

[celtic]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

1 minute is my normal duration. Maximum. including cigarette and cuddle and chat about good solid erections* etc afterwards.

fyp

fyp

* bridges and buildings obv

re-fixed yp.

[Karabiner]

Tony, I am not suggesting that you are wrong here.

It's just that had the one guy said to the other "is that allin?" there would have been no argument and soft play would not have been an issue. 

that would actually make it wrong surely.

I'm still assuming it was the guys last hand as Tikay refers to 'fare home' (yes, I understand it wasn't literally his fare home).

so money that should've been in play is removed from the table after 2 players have discussed it. complicit ratholing imo.

it's like the difference between checking it down and agreeing out loud to check it down.

It's a £500 pot, the £25 is relatively insignificant, it may or may not be the guy's case pony.

Now if the chipped up guy says "is that allin?" the £25 guy either pulls up again to play or leaves with his last £25 intact.

What is the harm in that ?

[Claw75]

what's my prize then?

3 minutes Poker Tuition with me. Listen up good, it won't take long.

you can get a lot done in three minutes.  Looking forward to it

1 minute is my normal duration. Maximum. including cigarette and cuddle afterwards.

fyp

fyp

you get a cigarette and cuddle after poker tuition?  Glad I'm not paying for it.

[gatso]

It's a £500 pot, the £25 is relatively insignificant, it may or may not be the guy's case pony.

Now if the chipped up guy says "is that allin?" the £25 guy either pulls up again to play or leaves with his last £25 intact.

What is the harm in that ?

tbh I don't think there is any harm in this as an isolated incident with those particular.

I would however be worried with it becoming the norm. once people start to accept it as normal it wouldn't take much for the amounts left behind to become larger and people wouldn't question it as it was accepted practice.

[tikay]

Tony, I am not suggesting that you are wrong here.

It's just that had the one guy said to the other "is that allin?" there would have been no argument and soft play would not have been an issue. 

that would actually make it wrong surely.

I'm still assuming it was the guys last hand as Tikay refers to 'fare home' (yes, I understand it wasn't literally his fare home).

so money that should've been in play is removed from the table after 2 players have discussed it. complicit ratholing imo.

it's like the difference between checking it down and agreeing out loud to check it down.

It's a £500 pot, the £25 is relatively insignificant, it may or may not be the guy's case pony.

Now if the chipped up guy says "is that allin?" the £25 guy either pulls up again to play or leaves with his last £25 intact.

What is the harm in that ?

Thank you Raph, you have "got it" better than I explained it.

I must emphasise, it was just the two of them in the Pot.