Misclick leads to tough descison.....

[rcon]

Well said trishan

[gmatical]

Gooooooooood Afternoon Everybody,

I have thought of a number of scenarios that are 50/50 but are influenced by outside influences that are relevent - but I will not bother posting them because it is painfully clear that Garth (& Co.) is ruled soley by maths and +EV - no other influences have relevence.

Jo - not a great deal of 'agree to disagree' goes on here - it is clear to me that you understand what they are saying - but take the safe route instead.

For all you math fans out there, let me leave you with this.............

A texas millionaire was staying at a Las Vegas casino - and became upset at the preferential treatment one of the other gamblers was recieving. The Texan was upset that this other gambler was given the penthouse, a casino staffer to do his bidding as well as 2 beautiful young girls to keep him company.

He was so upset at this he collared the casino manager and demanded the same treatment. The Texan exclaimed "I have $4 million in the bank!!"

The other gambler heard this and approached the Texan "$4 million in the bank ey? I tell you what - i'll flip you for it"

The 'other gambler' was Kerry Packer.

Not surprisingly, the Texan scurried off with his tail between his legs.

So to all the mathematicians here - if Kerry gave you a 1 flip head start and offered you a 100 flip bet for your house/bank account/car/insert valuble item here - would you take the bet ?

Sometimes the edge does not justify the consequences of the loss.

Sometimes circumstances have an influence on decisions.

Pokerstove is not the ultimate decider of poker decisions. Why not take others thoughts on board rather then maths and maths alone?

Anyway, lets keep the tough decisions coming and keep the forum active with variety.

Oh, and by the way, i never 'disrespected' the 'forum regs', I just have noticed that some favour your opinion perhaps based on your position in (at?) 888pl rather then as a peer. But perhaps I am wrong, I don't claim to be right 100% of the time. Actually, my imput never suggests that I am right - it is just my thoughts or opinions.

I hope this forum continues to welcome the thoughts and opinions of all who post on it - whether they are the popular opinions or otherwise.
Peace Out

[bennymacca]

the thing you are missing in that story gmatical is the differences between the bankrolls of the texas millionaire and kerry packer.

that is the key difference.

of course i would never gamble for my house etc. is someone said i will bet you $200,000 and i have a 95% or even 99% chance of winning, there is no way in hell i would ever do it.

but if that same bet was $20, i would happily do it all day long.


hell, if you will give me a 1 flip head start, i will flip you for $1 a go right now, because that is within my bankroll, i will do that every time.


bankroll management is really really important in this example. perhaps the fact that mike obviously plays a few levels higher than the rest of us means that our opinion of the money involved changes. but if it is within mike's bankroll, it really shoulndt matter.

[Garth Kay]

Sorry Glenn, but your above post really does highlight some serious flaws in your understanding of poker.

I strongly suggest that you study bankroll management and try and analyse why the comments you have made in regards to the values of the bet are redundant.

If you are properly rolled for the stakes you are playing there should never be a justification made "that you don't call there cause it costs you too much".

To be quite honest most people respect my views and comments simply because I do know what I am talking about and I learn from and listen to those who I believe are my seniors. I will never say that I know the absolute ins and outs of poker, and I continue to learn and evolve. And I remember the early days when I thought I was king of the table because I knew there was a 38% chance my flush draw would hit on the turn or river. I don't think anyone should ever disregard what others have to say and all I have been trying to do throughout this discussion is to highlight and enlighten others to a new level of thinking.

With the help of many other seniors high stakes players I have evolved and educated myself and now understand the merits of fold equity (and the calculations involved), starting hand ranges, limbic brain science, MTT strategies, tournament equity, CeIV calculations, etc........ I find it quite suprising that two senior 888PL players, who I classified as decent players, are failing to fully comprehend the logic and fundamental issues on discussion here.

My results also speak for themselves and I will not hide behind them but you can decide if they sway you into believing anything I say has merits. I have played just over 20 live casino tournaments in my life, believe it or not, for winnings in excess of $45,000.
I am also labelled as a winning cash game player at crown and my views are comments are respected by my poker playing peers. My online results suck arse and don't speak volumes but for a period of time I was a winning 200NL and 100PLO winning player on Titan and Ladbrokes, but have not returned to these stakes for some time. I have never played well on stars or Tilt and only some four figure cashes have ever redeemed myself on these sites (again the data sample is miniscule with only 100 or so tournament and possibly 2,000 hands played on the majors). Currently on 888 I have played over 100 tournaments for a ROI of over 20%. I also have made close to 30 buyins from 5,000 hands at 50NL.

I don't think I will continue this discussion anymore, I have complete faith in my knowledge and understanding in this particular area and if you do not want to learn from or cannot understand what I am trying to say then the failing is with me. I will continue to educate those who request help from me, but I will not continue to argue points when the fundamental basics of poker are being questioned and argued.

I appreciate your thoughts gentleman, and there are many ways are hand can be played optimally but to completely disregard the merits of BRM or EV calculations to justify any poker argument borders on the ridiculous.

Glenn, I love you witty contributions but sometimes your rebuttals border on ignorance and disrespect. And yes I know my arrogance is creeping through here but from what I have seen you contribute in this thread has me bewildered as I did have you labelled as a decent player and perhaps an equal to me, now not so much. And yes I am been irrevocably arrogant right now, but all decent poker players think they are the best.

Jo, your record speaks volumes and your situational awareness is second to none from what I have seen from an amateur player. But there is so many more levels of thinking and strat awaiting you, poker is not just tournaments where you are pushing around 10BB's all the time. I understand you are set in your way of thinking, and obviously your style of play has been very succesful (so I might be the fool to be questioning this) but I STRONGLY believe with some additions to your game and further enlightenment/education you would become a very strong opponent and a welcome addition to the Australian tournament world and the reg roster; your game is nowhere near as strong as it could or should be as highlighted by your comments.

Do not take these as insults gentleman, these are not what they are meant to be, I am sincerely trying to assist you both here in offering you some advice and trying to highlight some areas where your game could improve. I am more than willing to sit down in person to discuss anything with either of you, but then again I am sure that at this moment in time my words will reek of ignorance, obnoxiousness and disrespect; this could not be further from the truth.

I have made similar comments to players who have been in your place before and eventually they have grown into better players because of it. Right benny the cunt?

[bennymacca]

I have made similar comments to players who have been in your place before and eventually they have grown into better players because of it. Right benny the cunt?

well said garth.

while i was reading your post above, i did think about the times where you (sometimes harshly) told me that i was completely wrong in the way that i play. ill admit that when garth first said these things to me, i hadn't met him in person, and i thought he was a tool. but that was my own ego getting in the way.

after a while, the breakeven results continued, and i started to question my game. i revisited a lot of the comments that garth had made, and found a lot of truth in them. and now that i have met and spoken to garth numerous times, it was my interests he had at heart.

i know garth will agree that i have improved significantly in the last couple of years, to the point where i wouldn't be an easy opponent on the poker table now. still a long way to go though, especially in the online setting where i overvalue fold equity too much.

i really do think that the key people in the improvement of my game have been garth (who i still see as a few levels above) and my bro and aaron who are peers who i respect as players and play with a whole lot.


but the crux of what i am saying is, you can debate with your peers (which is what we are doing here), but sometimes arguing with someone who is clearly above your level of play is a bit silly. usually there is a reason why they are above you, so it would be silly to dismiss their comments and stay set in your ways.


garth is by no means a professional or world class at poker, he will admit this himself, but he is clearly better than what we are.

why not embrace what he has to say. the worst thing it will do is open your eyes to a different type of play, even if that just re-enforces the things you do well and finds a few leaks that you didn't know you had. i am telling you this from personal experience, and my game has improved because of it


(you can pay me later for the ego boost garth )

[gmatical]

Glenn, I love you

C'mon Garth, lets keep our love a secret, don't tell the whole world!

[gmatical]

Sorry Glenn, but your above post really does highlight some serious flaws in your understanding of poker.

I appreciate your thoughts gentleman, and there are many ways are hand can be played optimally but to completely disregard the merits of BRM or EV calculations to justify any poker argument borders on the ridiculous.

Glenn, I love you witty contributions but sometimes your rebuttals border on ignorance and disrespect. And yes I know my arrogance is creeping through here but from what I have seen you contribute in this thread has me bewildered as I did have you labelled as a decent player and perhaps an equal to me, now not so much. And yes I am been irrevocably arrogant right now, but all decent poker players think they are the best.

What you seem to have missed with my posts is that I DO UNDERSTAND what you are saying, I DO UNDERSTAND the mathematical impacts and the small edge in calling. It is not naiviety (sic?), its a different train of thought.

Good players should also be able to recognise that there are better edges to exploit just around the corner and that the $X mis-click should be a $X lesson not a reason to gamble another $X.

If this example offered similar odds calculations and OP had a better starting hands and the villan was a wild cat with a huge range - i would probably lean towards the gamble (with the tiny edge advantage).

Now, Now, Now - do not jump all over me and say "you should be able to see that it is the same thing as the first hand etc.." I feel the misclick has influence. Many on this thread do not - and thats cool with me.

My thoughts should also be cool with you.

Good hand discussion threads should not be about bombarding those who disagree with your thoughts - be they right or wrong. It should be a by-product that hopefully opposing opinions take each others point of view on board to improve their game.



Whether you take my resonses as disrespectful - I don't set out to do this. Tone is hard to convey in writing. From now until eternity take my tone to always be tounge in cheek humour, without angey insults. I will also not be insulted by arrogance or insults comming my way.

Just a point on our records and skill levels - i think (without having played together) our skills are the same. I have 11 poker books in my library, watch and download many different tv programs and am familiar with most of the elements you mentioned at the start of your recent post. I am very level headed, never go on tilt, and love all elements of the game.

I think you would be better served to post your thoughts on hands - without getting frustrated if people do not immediately take your thoughts on board. If people disregard your thoughts - well it is their loss. Taking this thought press on board might make you happier posting in these hand discussion threads.

benny the cunt, I do take on board what Garth says, I hope this post has made this clear. I would hope that you see the benefit in hearing a different thought process and the merits of discussing these. I am sure you have disagreements with Garth from time to time and this gets the juices flowing and grey matter charged.

Anyhow - I better start playing some poker so I can post some hand histories to hear some views that challenge my thinking

[maccatak11]

I have 12 poker books in my library.

[Des]

I've downloaded 15 poker books. I'm Phil Ivey. I've alrso read the entire Encarta Encyclopedia. I'm Einstein! I own an iPod touch, I'm Steve Jobs.

Just because you've read books and don't go on tilt does not make you a good poker player. It might make you better than the average pub player.

It all comes down to how you apply that learning (if you understand it) in different situations.

I've read a lot of books, possibly more than Garth, but I am no where in the same league as him. I'm sure a lot of other people here would agree with me.

[Bacon]

I have 12 poker books in my library.

And you should see my tv programme library..

Lie to Me
Survivor
Rules of Engagement

just to name a few.