Misclick leads to tough descison.....

[JMACK007]

Firstly, benny the cunt, I have put people on plenty of hands in the past and been correct, I am sure you have done the same. Basically, you know you are WELL behind here...

Garth, That would be fantastic! I would love to spend some time with you talking strategy and poker logic. You know my number, let's do it next week.

Cheers.

[JMACK007]

Download Poker Stove mate. It's a basic maths tool and it invaluable when studying/reviewing your hands, either live or online.

But I also think you are putting to much of your 888PL experience into this, I know that the average 888PL player wont even consider a 3 bet unless it is AA or KK, but in ring games a standard 3 bet can be something like QT suited.

Yeah, I know I need some of these toys. Time to move to the next level...

[AceLosesKing]

But I also think you are putting to much of your 888PL experience into this, I know that the average 888PL player wont even consider a 3 bet unless it is AA or KK, but in ring games a standard 3 bet can be something like QT suited.

This is pretty key tbh.

[bennymacca]

Firstly, benny the cunt, I have put people on plenty of hands in the past and been correct, I am sure you have done the same. Basically, you know you are WELL behind here...

jo, please re-read what i have typed above.

i KNOW that we are WELL behind here.

the point is, that even when we are behind, we can still be making a correct play to call, depending on what the pot odds are.



ill use a simple example

lets say you have to choose one of 3 doors, and you have to pay $10 to have a peek at one of the doors.

behind one of the doors is $35


would you play this game over and over again? you lose 2/3 times right?

[AceLosesKing]

Reminds me of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

[bennymacca]

Reminds me of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

nah that is slightly different. but we did have a good debate about it at one stage

[JMACK007]

ill use a simple example

lets say you have to choose one of 3 doors, and you have to pay $10 to have a peek at one of the doors.

behind one of the doors is $35


would you play this game over and over again? you lose 2/3 times right?

You can't say you lose 2/3 of the time here benny the cunt. You can only say that you have a 2/3 chance of losing EACH time you play....

[bennymacca]

you do realise that what you are saying is the same thing right?

semantics aside, what is your answer? would you play the game repeatedly?

[JMACK007]

No.

It's not the same thing at all.

In your reasoning, you are saying you are going to win 1/3 of the time, so your $30 will bring a $5 profit every 3 times.

But in reality, EVERY time you put your $10 on the line, you only have a 1/3 chance of winning. You might not pick the right door EVER!! (the odds are against you picking it).....

[bennymacca]

No.

It's not the same thing at all.

In your reasoning, you are saying you are going to win 1/3 of the time, so your $30 will bring a $5 profit every 3 times.

But in reality, EVERY time you put your $10 on the line, you only have a 1/3 chance of winning. You might not pick the right door EVER!! (the odds are against you picking it).....

dude, you could also go on a run where you pick the door 100 times in a row. that still doesnt change the fact that you have a 1/3 chance of picking the door, does it?

thats whats called variance.