Set in live cash game v "Nitty reg"

[George2Loose]

norrrrrrrrrrrr

[kinboshi]

norrrrrrrrrrrr

Unfortunately, yes.

Why can't people debate and argue properly?  It's not a school playground where name-calling is the best we can expect.  Criticise a person's argument, his opinion, what he says - but calling names?  Hardly constructive and relegates any useful points the person may make as invalid.

[George2Loose]

norrrrrrrrrrrr

Unfortunately, yes.

Why can't people debate and argue properly?  It's not a school playground where name-calling is the best we can expect.  Criticise a person's argument, his opinion, what he says - but calling names?  Hardly constructive and relegates any useful points the person may make as invalid.

Fun to watch tho. I'd hate to be a mod

[titaniumbean]

norrrrrrrrrrrr

Unfortunately, yes.

Why can't people debate and argue properly?  It's not a school playground where name-calling is the best we can expect.  Criticise a person's argument, his opinion, what he says - but calling names?  Hardly constructive and relegates any useful points the person may make as invalid.

silly billy ...... 

[railtard1]

Fml, missed all the flaming. I can probably fill in the blanks tho:

Greekstein: I hate you Mantis and you're shit at poker
Mantis: some more verbose way of saying the same thing

Right?

It's possible railtard1 weighed in on Mantis' side in some unlikely alliance, much like Stalin and Roosevelt, but that's just my pick of the outsiders.

opted out init

[EvilPie]

norrrrrrrrrrrr

Unfortunately, yes.

Why can't people debate and argue properly?  It's not a school playground where name-calling is the best we can expect.  Criticise a person's argument, his opinion, what he says - but calling names?  Hardly constructive and relegates any useful points the person may make as invalid.

Wow!!!!

It's finally happened!!!

Dan has posted something worth reading on PHA!!!!!

[Nico29]

Wow toby is a nit.

[NoflopsHomer]

It's possible railtard1 weighed in on Mantis' side in some unlikely alliance, much like Stalin and Roosevelt, but that's just my pick of the outsiders.

[Cf]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[SuuPRlim]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[  ] am crushing, beating, have good equity vs opponents value range

[Cf]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[  ] am crushing, beating, have good equity vs opponents value range

huh?

Reread OP's description of villian.

"History shows he is raising QQ+ without AK" - So we can discount KK here. AK is possible.

"When in a hand he bets large proportions of the pot most of the time and is quite obv to me when strong / not folding made hands. - And this adds up to what's being done here.

So what could villian have? I read he could have any of the following here: AK/KT+/K8s+/88.

We lose to 88 and beat the rest. Can't see how this is ever a fold.

[SuuPRlim]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[  ] am crushing, beating, have good equity vs opponents value range

huh?

Reread OP's description of villian.

"History shows he is raising QQ+ without AK" - So we can discount KK here. AK is possible.

"When in a hand he bets large proportions of the pot most of the time and is quite obv to me when strong / not folding made hands. - And this adds up to what's being done here.

So what could villian have? I read he could have any of the following here: AK/KT+/K8s+/88.

We lose to 88 and beat the rest. Can't see how this is ever a fold.

We are ahead of the bulk of his pre-flop limping range that connects, but what hands from that range c/raise flop and bet £900 on the turn?
Seems like 88 every day to me - and if there are never any bluffs in his range and no draws. Does he take this line with KQ? If you're right charles and he has K8/K9+ in his range then its bad to fold, but if you counter the number of times he limps K8s as opposed to folding to the amount of times he limps KK without raising, then i dont think it makes any difference to our equity that he would probably raise KK pre.

But if we take KK out of the equaiotn then his range for value here is K8/88 and when you consider how is will 100% limp 88 but sometimes fold K8 pre its a fold imo

[MANTIS01]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[  ] am crushing, beating, have good equity vs opponents value range

huh?

Reread OP's description of villian.

"History shows he is raising QQ+ without AK" - So we can discount KK here. AK is possible.

"When in a hand he bets large proportions of the pot most of the time and is quite obv to me when strong / not folding made hands. - And this adds up to what's being done here.

So what could villian have? I read he could have any of the following here: AK/KT+/K8s+/88.

We lose to 88 and beat the rest. Can't see how this is ever a fold.

We are ahead of the bulk of his pre-flop limping range that connects, but what hands from that range c/raise flop and bet £900 on the turn?
Seems like 88 every day to me - and if there are never any bluffs in his range and no draws. Does he take this line with KQ? If you're right charles and he has K8/K9+ in his range then its bad to fold, but if you counter the number of times he limps K8s as opposed to folding to the amount of times he limps KK without raising, then i dont think it makes any difference to our equity that he would probably raise KK pre.

But if we take KK out of the equaiotn then his range for value here is K8/88 and when you consider how is will 100% limp 88 but sometimes fold K8 pre its a fold imo

We heard a lot in op about how hero sees villain but pretty much nothing about how villain sees hero. You can't really make assumptions about what villain's value range is without that info. Well you can if you're saying this guy is now a rich twat businessman, who never bluffs, is never interested in his opponents, never does anything but bet the nuts regardless of who he's playing, can't play poker for shit, tassles on his slip-ons, clueless donkey type of guy. And this complete walking disaster of a player is described in op as a "small winner" in this high stakes game. Sounds like a damn tough game.

[SuuPRlim]

[ x ] i have a set

[ ] i'm folding

If it's a cooler then fine, reload.

[  ] am crushing, beating, have good equity vs opponents value range

huh?

Reread OP's description of villian.

"History shows he is raising QQ+ without AK" - So we can discount KK here. AK is possible.

"When in a hand he bets large proportions of the pot most of the time and is quite obv to me when strong / not folding made hands. - And this adds up to what's being done here.

So what could villian have? I read he could have any of the following here: AK/KT+/K8s+/88.

We lose to 88 and beat the rest. Can't see how this is ever a fold.

We are ahead of the bulk of his pre-flop limping range that connects, but what hands from that range c/raise flop and bet £900 on the turn?
Seems like 88 every day to me - and if there are never any bluffs in his range and no draws. Does he take this line with KQ? If you're right charles and he has K8/K9+ in his range then its bad to fold, but if you counter the number of times he limps K8s as opposed to folding to the amount of times he limps KK without raising, then i dont think it makes any difference to our equity that he would probably raise KK pre.

But if we take KK out of the equaiotn then his range for value here is K8/88 and when you consider how is will 100% limp 88 but sometimes fold K8 pre its a fold imo

We heard a lot in op about how hero sees villain but pretty much nothing about how villain sees hero. You can't really make assumptions about what villain's value range is without that info. Well you can if you're saying this guy is now a rich twat businessman, who never bluffs, is never interested in his opponents, never does anything but bet the nuts regardless of who he's playing, can't play poker for shit, tassles on his slip-ons, clueless donkey type of guy. And this complete walking disaster of a player is described in op as a "small winner" in this high stakes game. Sounds like a damn tough game.

This is kinda gd point. From what i know of toby, id assume it would make this player a lot less likely to barrel thin for value.

You;d be very suprised how these super nitty guys can win in these games, because there are enough terrible players round these guys play incredibly tight and every night they make 1/2 hands and get paaiiiiiid huge. they obv do 4/5 of it back in limp folding and paying blinds, but still manage to make a small profit,

I find they dont really affect the game at all, cept when you 4bet and they cold 5 behind. that sucks

[DMorgan]

I find they dont really affect the game at all, cept when you 4bet and they cold 5 behind. that sucks

amen