Talking a player into calling

[JungleCat03]

If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble nomatter what the pot-size. There's a few unique sat situations where I wouldn't, but 99.9% of the time I want it and want it badly.

Crazy!

Forget satellites, if you always want a call when you are dominating it's a mistake.

There are plenty of scenarios where picking up the pot uncontested with the best hand is FAR superior to receiving a call.

eg on 300 600 you raise to 2k, oppo makes it 6.5k and you shove for 10k total.

Let's say you have KK and they have AJ, it's far more profitable, ie you win more chips, by them passing here. If I thought that persuading them I have a big pair would make them pass, I would do everything in my power to do so. If they fold, they are making a very big mistake, and this directly correlates to chips being passed your way.

boring maths...in the above bit you net 14885.4 when they call, 17,400 when they fold. Tons of free extra chips, so you want a pass. In lots of situations you would be rooting for a call, but not here and not in many others.

Whats mick foley got to do with this?

pmsl.

also pmsl.

[Rookie (Rodney)]

I got a laugh from king comedy JC himself! I must have been funny!

[MANTIS01]

This is the op's question.

I think what I really want to hear your opinions on is whether its better to win a mid size pot for no risk (i.e. they fold) or a big pot with an element of risk although the odds are still firmly on your side.

Would I prefer to win a big pot with an element of risk although the odds are still firmly in my favour?

My answer

If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble nomatter what the pot-size

Absolutely no idea what you're chatting on about JC. It looks like you are putting my answer to this question into a completely different context you've plucked from somewhere where the odds are clearly not firmly on your side. So you see 19.4k as a medium pot but the extra 3.5k that your oppo would call makes it a BIG pot yes? I really don't get it and actually think THAT is pretty crazy.

Forget sats? 5 left with 4 seats paid & well stacked. No, I don't want to tangle with the CL for a big pot when the ss has 1 bb left. Why would you do that? Again pretty crazy thing to say if you ask me.

[JungleCat03]

This is the op's question.

I think what I really want to hear your opinions on is whether its better to win a mid size pot for no risk (i.e. they fold) or a big pot with an element of risk although the odds are still firmly on your side.

Would I prefer to win a big pot with an element of risk although the odds are still firmly in my favour?

My answer

If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble nomatter what the pot-size[/quote]

Absolutely no idea what you're chatting on about JC. It looks like you are putting my answer to this question into a completely different context you've plucked from somewhere where the odds are clearly not firmly on your side. So you see 19.4k as a medium pot but the extra 3.5k that your oppo would call makes it a BIG pot yes? I really don't get it and actually think THAT is pretty crazy.

The phrase in bold stands alone as an absolute and needs no contextualisation. I guess what you are now saying is that you expressed yourself clumsily and meant something like...

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A then in most scenarios clearly I want the call although the size of the pot is an important factor to consider and in some fairly common MTT situations I would prefer a fold. I apologize for my flagrant misuse of numbers and words senor cat, and promise to be more careful in the future. Sorry!"

I agree with that if that's what you are saying.

If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble nomatter what the pot-size. There's a few unique sat situations where I wouldn't, but 99.9% of the time I want it and want it badly.

Crazy!

Forget satellites, if you always want a call when you are dominating it's a mistake.

Forget sats? 5 left with 4 seats paid & well stacked. No, I don't want to tangle with the CL for a big pot when the ss has 1 bb left. Why would you do that? Again pretty crazy thing to say if you ask me.

Sometimes I do wonder if english is your first language

The reason I said forget satellites was that you were making reference to them as extreme occasions where you might not want business holding a dominating hand. Very true, but largely irrelevant as there are a host of more common or garden poker  situations where this is the case, one of which I posed.

Now off to bed with no supper for you, before I have to bring out the sock.



(still pmsl rookie...)

[MANTIS01]

JC, I'm afraid my use of the English language is so refined that I would find it difficult to express myself clumsily. In reality your comprehension of words is a little on the clumsy side.

The phrase in bold stands alone as an absolute

First off this is clumsy comprehension because a statement cannot stand alone as an absolute when it is an answer to a specific question that describes a specific situation. It can only stand alone as an absolute if you take it out of context and stand it alone yourself. Which you did.

The op asks would you take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. My answer is yes I would take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. For some reason you decide to illustrate a clear -EV situation and try to apply my answer to that instead.

Then in a vein attempt to go FTW you say that I should have said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A then in most scenarios clearly I want the call"

when I said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble...99.9% of the time"

My superior English skills suggest to me this is exactly the same statement. There is little need for me to qualify that to include -EV situations because the op asked only about +EV situations.
 
So if you read the thread less clumsily and leave my answers in the correct context then you say you agree with me? I know this.

I think rather than just seeing one of my posts and wondering how you can discredit you should tidy your own appreciation of debate before fool-posting. In fact the sock thing was the only worthwhile comment because at least it had humour. Bring out your sock if you will...you still lose internet again.

[bolt pp]

JC, I'm afraid my use of the English language is so refined that I would find it difficult to express myself clumsily. In reality your comprehension of words is a little on the clumsy side.

The phrase in bold stands alone as an absolute

First off this is clumsy comprehension because a statement cannot stand alone as an absolute when it is an answer to a specific question that describes a specific situation. It can only stand alone as an absolute if you take it out of context and stand it alone yourself. Which you did.

The op asks would you take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. My answer is yes I would take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. For some reason you decide to illustate a clear -EV situation and try to apply my answer to that instead.

Then in a vein attempt to go FTW you say that I should have said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A then in most scenarios clearly I want the call"

when I said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble...99.9% of the time"

My superior English skills suggest to me this is exactly the same statement. There is little need for me to qualify that to include -EV situations because the op asked only about +EV situations.
 
So if you read the thread less clumsily and leave my answers in the correct context then you say you agree with me? I know this.

I think rather than just seeing one of my posts and wondering how you can discredit you should tidy your own appreciation of debate before fool-posting. In fact the sock thing was the only worthwhile comment because at least it had humour. Bring out your sock if you will...you still lose internet again.

 

It's the best post i ever read on blonde

  please respond JC, best of blonde coming up........

[JungleCat03]

JC, I'm afraid my use of the English language is so refined that I would find it difficult to express myself clumsily. In reality your comprehension of words is a little on the clumsy side.

The phrase in bold stands alone as an absolute

First off this is clumsy comprehension because a statement cannot stand alone as an absolute when it is an answer to a specific question that describes a specific situation. It can only stand alone as an absolute if you take it out of context and stand it alone yourself. Which you did.

The op asks would you take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. My answer is yes I would take on a +EV gamble whatever the pot size. For some reason you decide to illustrate a clear -EV situation and try to apply my answer to that instead.

Then in a vein attempt to go FTW you say that I should have said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A then in most scenarios clearly I want the call"

when I said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble...99.9% of the time"

My superior English skills suggest to me this is exactly the same statement. There is little need for me to qualify that to include -EV situations because the op asked only about +EV situations.
 
So if you read the thread less clumsily and leave my answers in the correct context then you say you agree with me? I know this.

I think rather than just seeing one of my posts and wondering how you can discredit you should tidy your own appreciation of debate before fool-posting. In fact the sock thing was the only worthwhile comment because at least it had humour. Bring out your sock if you will...you still lose internet again.

lol

I knew that little joke about english would touch a nerve. I apologize to the OP that the thread has been somewhat derailed by pedantry but meh what the hell, sometimes it's fun!
 

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A then in most scenarios clearly I want the call"

when I said....

"If I have K-K and my oppo doesn't have A-A I want the gamble...99.9% of the time"

My superior English skills suggest to me this is exactly the same statement.

Nope, not the same. If you think most = 99.9% then good luck to you. There are some excellent remedial maths courses available if you browse the net.

I tend to ignore spelling and basic comprehension mistakes on the net as

a) usually it's apparent from context what people are saying and

b) it just makes you look like a nit-picking twat if you correct people for grammatical slips.

HOWEVER, I have decided to make an exception in your case as you have trumpeted your "refined" english skills. SO...

First off

Then in a vein attempt to go FTW

English lesson no 1.

vain = futile

vein = the thing that throbs on your head when you attempt to perform basic arithmetic.

I can't really put it down to a typo as the letters are just too far away on the keyboard but I suppose it is possible that your cumbersome ego nudged your typing fingers sufficiently to account for this.

Lesson no 2.

You have one last chance to start differentiating between loose and lose. As pedantic pet poker peeves go, this is one of the most annoying.

Loose = your use of language.

Lose = the verb best used to describe your handle on the plot.

JC, I'm afraid my use of the English language is so refined that I would find it difficult to express myself clumsily.

Don't do yourself a disservice! You manage to muddle through superbly well!

As an addendum, I would point out I do think you write some nice stuff sometimes. If you work out what all the words you use mean, I foresee a bright future ahead of you!

[totalise]

Rookie,

what are your thoughts regarding the origional post?


Mantis,

sterling work showing JC how bad his english is!

[Royal Flush]

JC FTW!

[bolt pp]

 

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: Royal Flush

JC FTW!

If you get your money in this bad Flush it surprises me you play poker successfully.

JC, I see you as a kind of official representative of Blonde. You are a hero member, a member of the update team, and do valuable work moderating the Child Board. I bet that Child Board moderating is rewarding work? What a good idea when it was set up. It was felt the board would benefit the many potential Blonde Members out there who wanted to get involved but felt intimidated.

JC I made a couple of valid contributions in this thread to pass on my thoughts to fellow members, all of which were positive. The thread was turning into quite an interesting discussion between fellow members. You turn up and your first word is CRAZY!!! as a response to my opinions. You go on to give me what looks like some kind of spelling test in your latest post along with general personal slurs etc...

Now JC, I was wondering how this sort of behaviour fits in with your own personal Blonde-related goals. Blonde's owners must really appreciate your efforts to spread their "happy poker" message to everyone. You stamp on normal happy threads with insults, and your posts are immediately negative and insulting. You are the very person the Child Board was set up because of. And you moderate it. I bet those new members you've encouraged to have more confidence and get involved are well impressed. With a clumsy life strat like this god only knows what your poker's like.

Attention Newbies! Sorry about JC's crazy outbursts. But don't worry. You will see the light if you follow the word of the Mantis from now on. Another thing JC, I've made loads of posts now and you still haven't spotted that Mantis flaming has 0 effect. So why are you still doing it? 

With all these mad leaks going on in your life, like messing up the Blonde message, showing yourself up in front of the Newbies, spoiling a good discussion between members, using a strat against me that's no good etc...your actual poker strat must be pretty beatable imo. Why are you shooting yourself in the foot all the time by using a strat that has no effect on me but is only detrimental to those you are trying to help? Yep, you're one smart cookie alright!

Result: Mantis wins

Oh, and Flush loses.

[bolt pp]

Already best of blonde!

[byronkincaid]

MANTIS 4 MOOD MOD!!!

[JungleCat03]

Posted by: Royal Flush

JC FTW!

If you get your money in this bad Flush it surprises me you play poker successfully.

JC, I see you as a kind of official representative of Blonde. You are a hero member, a member of the update team, and do valuable work moderating the Child Board. I bet that Child Board moderating is rewarding work? What a good idea when it was set up. It was felt the board would benefit the many potential Blonde Members out there who wanted to get involved but felt intimidated.

JC I made a couple of valid contributions in this thread to pass on my thoughts to fellow members, all of which were positive. The thread was turning into quite an interesting discussion between fellow members. You turn up and your first word is CRAZY!!! as a response to my opinions. You go on to give me what looks like some kind of spelling test in your latest post along with general personal slurs etc...

Now JC, I was wondering how this sort of behaviour fits in with your own personal Blonde-related goals. Blonde's owners must really appreciate your efforts to spread their "happy poker" message to everyone. You stamp on normal happy threads with insults, and your posts are immediately negative and insulting. You are the very person the Child Board was set up because of. And you moderate it. I bet those new members you've encouraged to have more confidence and get involved are well impressed. With a clumsy life strat like this god only knows what your poker's like.

Attention Newbies! Sorry about JC's crazy outbursts. But don't worry. You will see the light if you follow the word of the Mantis from now on. Another thing JC, I've made loads of posts now and you still haven't spotted that Mantis flaming has 0 effect. So why are you still doing it? 

With all these mad leaks going on in your life, like messing up the Blonde message, showing yourself up in front of the Newbies, spoiling a good discussion between members, using a strat against me that's no good etc...your actual poker strat must be pretty beatable imo. Why are you shooting yourself in the foot all the time by using a strat that has no effect on me but is only detrimental to those you are trying to help? Yep, you're one smart cookie alright!

Result: Mantis wins

Oh, and Flush loses.

Apologies for my tardy(*) response.

*used in the sense of belated...probably...

I didn't realise I would upset you so, please forgive me. I have never thought of myself as the evil tyrannical figure you appear to view me as, stomping on happy threads, laughing maniacally as I crush the aspirations of well meaning but ultimately cat-foddery donks beneath my hefty paws of justice.

I like to think of myself as more of a jovial fellow, who likes to crack a joke here and there, offering up what small pieces of wisdom I have learned from my time playing poker and always striving to better myself.

Now you have framed me as the Idi Amin of the hand analysis board though, I have to admit it has its pull. I can maim, mutilate and mangle indiscriminately, lashing cruel claws out at those foolish enough to cross me. Sounds like fun!

In that vein  (cough), let me just point out that if you set yourself up as the ultimate doyen of poker analysis and resplendent wordsmith-ery, impervious to reproach, don't be surprised if you hear a quiet mewing from the lofty heights of your self appointed pedestal just before you feel two paws shoving you hard in the back and sending you hurtling back to earth with the rest of us mere mortals...

Quick word of advice (even though I know you now have your fingers in your ears, singing "la la la la la lalalalala")

Don't take things so seriously. I've never EVER mocked someone who has asked a genuine poker question, however apparent the answer would seem to me. Blonde is great because everyone gets to have a say, including you. Equally I'm entitled to turn on my BS detector when reading posts and if it starts beeping, then I have to act on it. Can't help myself.

Anyway best of luck to you, it's all good fun. If I meet you at a casino sometime I will happily buy you a drink (or get you a carrot - whichever you prefer) and chat merrily about any subject of your choosing.

laters dude

[Rookie (Rodney)]

Rookie,

what are your thoughts regarding the origional post?

I don't talk when i'm in a hand. Why?