poker news
blondepedia
card room
tournament schedule
uk results
galleries
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
July 24, 2025, 06:30:36 AM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
Order through Amazon and help blonde Poker
2262399
Posts in
66606
Topics by
16991
Members
Latest Member:
nolankerwin
blonde poker forum
Poker Forums
Poker Hand Analysis
Theoretical WSOP Question
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
« previous
next »
Pages:
1
2
[
3
]
4
5
6
Author
Topic: Theoretical WSOP Question (Read 13111 times)
TheChipPrince
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8664
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #30 on:
June 09, 2010, 01:19:16 PM »
Quote from: The Camel on June 09, 2010, 12:51:45 PM
Quote from: Blatch on June 09, 2010, 03:13:37 AM
Gurantee no one would call with 22 here.
Probably are gonna side wider than what they actually would if in the actual situation.
I would say for me 66 up and AT up, maybe KQ
I guarantee I would call in these circumstances with 22 here.
You'd honestly call a pure 50/50 shot with 60 bigs in a comp where the field is not going to be great?
Logged
The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
RIP- TheChipPrince - $17,165
MC
Super
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 6260
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #31 on:
June 09, 2010, 01:38:29 PM »
Yeah, TT+, AK, AQs sounds reasonable to me...
Logged
"Success is not final, failure is not fatal"
@epitomised
outragous76
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 13315
Yeah Bitch! ......... MAGNETS! owwwh!
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #32 on:
June 09, 2010, 01:51:19 PM »
Quote from: TheChipPrince on June 09, 2010, 01:19:16 PM
Quote from: The Camel on June 09, 2010, 12:51:45 PM
Quote from: Blatch on June 09, 2010, 03:13:37 AM
Gurantee no one would call with 22 here.
Probably are gonna side wider than what they actually would if in the actual situation.
I would say for me 66 up and AT up, maybe KQ
I guarantee I would call in these circumstances with 22 here.
You'd honestly call a pure 50/50 shot with 60 bigs in a comp where the field is not going to be great?
welcome to 2010
Logged
".....and then I spent 2 hours talking with Stu which blew my mind.........."
McSnort
keep on snorting
Full Member
Offline
Posts: 113
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #33 on:
June 09, 2010, 01:52:30 PM »
has he looked at his cards?
Logged
Boba Fett
Doctor of Thugonomics
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2922
Pain is Temporary!
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #34 on:
June 09, 2010, 01:52:51 PM »
Depends on his stack in the Stud tourney imo
Logged
Ya gotta crawl before ya ball!
The Camel
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 17075
Under my tree, being a troll.
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #35 on:
June 09, 2010, 02:23:55 PM »
Quote from: TheChipPrince on June 09, 2010, 01:19:16 PM
Quote from: The Camel on June 09, 2010, 12:51:45 PM
Quote from: Blatch on June 09, 2010, 03:13:37 AM
Gurantee no one would call with 22 here.
Probably are gonna side wider than what they actually would if in the actual situation.
I would say for me 66 up and AT up, maybe KQ
I guarantee I would call in these circumstances with 22 here.
You'd honestly call a pure 50/50 shot with 60 bigs in a comp where the field is not going to be great?
The advantage you get by having a double stack in these tournaments is absolutely huge.
Yes, the field is weak, but there's also at least another 10 of these tournaments to play.
In the main event my range would be AA or KK. In a 3000 runner donkament I would insta call with 22.
Logged
Congratulations to the 2012 League Champion - Stapleton Atheists
"Keith The Camel, a true champion!" - Brent Horner 30th December 2012
"I dont think you're a wanker Keith" David Nicholson 4th March 2013
TheChipPrince
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8664
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #36 on:
June 09, 2010, 02:27:33 PM »
Quote from: The Camel on June 09, 2010, 02:23:55 PM
Quote from: TheChipPrince on June 09, 2010, 01:19:16 PM
Quote from: The Camel on June 09, 2010, 12:51:45 PM
Quote from: Blatch on June 09, 2010, 03:13:37 AM
Gurantee no one would call with 22 here.
Probably are gonna side wider than what they actually would if in the actual situation.
I would say for me 66 up and AT up, maybe KQ
I guarantee I would call in these circumstances with 22 here.
You'd honestly call a pure 50/50 shot with 60 bigs in a comp where the field is not going to be great?
The advantage you get by having a double stack in these tournaments is absolutely huge.
Yes, the field is weak, but there's also at least another 10 of these tournaments to play.
In the main event my range would be AA or KK. In a 3000 runner donkament I would insta call with 22.
Ok fair enough, I just dont see why when shoving>calling, we call 60 bigs instead of open shoving 59 bigs with 50% of our hands.
Logged
The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
RIP- TheChipPrince - $17,165
MANTIS01
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 6734
What kind of fuckery is this?
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #37 on:
June 09, 2010, 02:35:17 PM »
The guy has strolled over and jammed first hand. Why do we call light right now? He could go on to jam every hand and then we can readjust our calling range to a developing trend. Assigning a range first hand is based on no factual info of how villain is going to play this game? Calling all-in 1st hand on a perception of an image doesn't seem so smart. This wont be our only opportunity to snap if it carries on. Yeah, a quick easy double-up is useful, so villain can push a decent 1st hand for that very reason, and get the queue of heroes behind offering him that very thing. This may be true or it may not be true, but I wouldn't know cos he's just sat down.
Logged
Tikay - "He has a proven track record in business, he is articulate, intelligent, & presents his cases well"
Claw75 - "Mantis is not only a blonde legend he's also very easy on the eye"
Outragous76 - "a really nice certainly intelligent guy"
taximan007 & Girgy85 & Celtic & Laxie - <3 Mantis
byronkincaid
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 5024
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #38 on:
June 09, 2010, 02:46:46 PM »
has anyone come up with a durrr range. he is doing this with AA, 72o? or has he not looked at his cards?
Logged
gatso
Ninja Mod
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 16192
Let's go round again
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #39 on:
June 09, 2010, 04:16:11 PM »
Quote from: TheChipPrince on June 09, 2010, 02:27:33 PM
Ok fair enough, I just dont see why when shoving>calling, we call 60 bigs instead of open shoving 59 bigs with 50% of our hands.
shoving is not better than calling when this deep. we virtually never get called unless we're crushed. calling is great if we know we're up against atc, wp matt, everyone's going with the level, no way are you ever contemplating folding JJ here
Logged
If you get to the yeasty clunge you've gone too far
outragous76
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 13315
Yeah Bitch! ......... MAGNETS! owwwh!
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #40 on:
June 09, 2010, 04:24:53 PM »
Quote from: MANTIS01 on June 09, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
The guy has strolled over and jammed first hand. Why do we call light right now? He could go on to jam every hand and then we can readjust our calling range to a developing trend. Assigning a range first hand is based on no factual info of how villain is going to play this game? Calling all-in 1st hand on a perception of an image doesn't seem so smart. This wont be our only opportunity to snap if it carries on. Yeah, a quick easy double-up is useful, so villain can push a decent 1st hand for that very reason, and get the queue of heroes behind offering him that very thing. This may be true or it may not be true, but I wouldn't know cos he's just sat down.
this is a daft post as we know the villain and we know his M.O. If he wakes up at the top of his range we jsut have to bink - like he is trying to do -
Logged
".....and then I spent 2 hours talking with Stu which blew my mind.........."
pleno1
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 18912
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #41 on:
June 09, 2010, 04:40:33 PM »
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt
6,770,450,016 games 18.981 secs 356,696,170 games/sec
Board:
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 58.796% 58.36% 00.44% 3951119484 29620272.00 { 77 }
Hand 1: 41.204% 40.77% 00.44% 2760089988 29620272.00 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T4s+, 94s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, A2o+, K8o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o, 86o+, 76o }
Logged
Quote from: TightEnd on December 16, 2013, 12:59:59 AM
Worst playcalling I have ever seen. Bunch of fucking jokers . Run the bloody ball. 18 rushes all game? You have to be kidding me. Fuck off lol
pleno1
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 18912
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #42 on:
June 09, 2010, 04:49:14 PM »
tighter range
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt
5,023,899,936 games 13.883 secs 361,874,230 games/sec
Board:
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 56.950% 56.50% 00.45% 2838568896 22537380.00 { 77 }
Hand 1: 43.050% 42.60% 00.45% 2140256280 22537380.00 { 22+, A2s+, K9s+, Q9s+, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A2o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o, 98o, 86o+, 76o }
Logged
Quote from: TightEnd on December 16, 2013, 12:59:59 AM
Worst playcalling I have ever seen. Bunch of fucking jokers . Run the bloody ball. 18 rushes all game? You have to be kidding me. Fuck off lol
david3103
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 6089
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #43 on:
June 09, 2010, 05:39:26 PM »
Quote from: Boba Fett on June 09, 2010, 01:52:51 PM
Depends on his stack in the Stud tourney imo
Vital information omitted from the question
imo
imHo
imVHo
Logged
It's more about the winning than the winnings
5 November 2012 - Kinboshi says "Best post ever on blonde thumbs up"
MANTIS01
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 6734
What kind of fuckery is this?
Re: Theoretical WSOP Question
«
Reply #44 on:
June 09, 2010, 05:41:02 PM »
Quote from: outragous76 on June 09, 2010, 04:24:53 PM
Quote from: MANTIS01 on June 09, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
The guy has strolled over and jammed first hand. Why do we call light right now? He could go on to jam every hand and then we can readjust our calling range to a developing trend. Assigning a range first hand is based on no factual info of how villain is going to play this game? Calling all-in 1st hand on a perception of an image doesn't seem so smart. This wont be our only opportunity to snap if it carries on. Yeah, a quick easy double-up is useful, so villain can push a decent 1st hand for that very reason, and get the queue of heroes behind offering him that very thing. This may be true or it may not be true, but I wouldn't know cos he's just sat down.
this is a daft post as we know the villain and we know his M.O. If he wakes up at the top of his range we jsut have to bink - like he is trying to do -
You really have abs no idea what's going on in Tom Dwan's mind when he sits down Guy, you really don't. Guessing at something doesn't make it a truth. You know villain? How well do you know villain? You've seen him play on the telly? Passing up K high or 2-2 here isn't letting a golden opportunity slip through your fingers. Maybe you wanna try trading some balls for some brains. If I was Dwan I reckon I'd be loving moving from table to table jamming strength and getting snapped off by jokers who "know me".
Logged
Tikay - "He has a proven track record in business, he is articulate, intelligent, & presents his cases well"
Claw75 - "Mantis is not only a blonde legend he's also very easy on the eye"
Outragous76 - "a really nice certainly intelligent guy"
taximan007 & Girgy85 & Celtic & Laxie - <3 Mantis
Pages:
1
2
[
3
]
4
5
6
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Poker Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Rail
===> past blonde Bashes
===> Best of blonde
=> Diaries and Blogs
=> Live Tournament Updates
=> Live poker
===> Live Tournament Staking
=> Internet Poker
===> Online Tournament Staking
=> Poker Hand Analysis
===> Learning Centre
-----------------------------
Community Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Lounge
=> Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
Loading...