JJ OOP, 4 Way

[pokeraussie]

Thanks bro. I have a saying...

"Poker players like to think their great at playing the game, but most suck". - PokerAussie

Btw I don't think I've ever been so pissed that I wanted to fight the bartender/bouncer.

Furthermore, the article that you seem to have quickly dismissed in my last post was written by Andrew 'Foucault' Brokos, who was a member of Poker Stars Team Online. Are you telling me you know more about poker then he does?

[321]

Two things. First, for this and future threads... I will never play a hand of 2/5 in Philadelphi as long as I live. And I hate no limit holdem because it bores me to death. If any posts a hand on a forum to be "right", they ought to just talk to themselves. The reason to post something is to get other perspectives and then think whether they are interesting or not.

I find it interesting to see how other people think, and better, why they think like they think. I don't particularly care what anyone thinks, but it will always help me in my own thinking to see good and bad ideas posted.

Talking about specific hands, if taken too literally, is completely silly. No one but the storyteller can know if the opponent just lost a big pot, or whether they stood up to take a leak but then stopped when they saw the two cards they had, or if it is jackpot night, or if it is Friday night at 9m or Monday noon, or if the opponent stacks his chips in designs, or etc etc etc.

Also, in this hand, I think a bet of 120 at a 175 pot on this flop is a mistake. The bet should be pot size or more. Given that I think that, basically there isn't anything to talk about the rest of the hand. However, I can say that after a 120 bet is made and we are called on the button, what further action makes sense to follow that.

In this case, while jd is sure of the opposite, I believe it is a 100% certain that betting JJ into 9862 has a higher EV than betting JJ into Q9862. And, betting JJ into Q9862 has a higher EV if you have _also_ already bet into 9862 (since as I mentioned above the turn bet eliminates some of the hands that would improve with a queen). The EV of bet-bet > bet-check > check-bet. I'd say the Ev of check-check is the best choice generally, but certainly against some players (calling stations who won't likely bluff) bet-bet is better.

Last point, checking the turn and betting the river is a poor choice because the turn card hits almost no hands... 66 may call that flop so that is one... but would T7 have called the preflop raise? On rare occasion, but then what about 96, not as often. 86, yes. Would 75 have called the flop bet? No. So there are only a couple of hands to fear.

It's not a total brick (4, 3), but it is FAR more likely to have either done nothing or only improved the draw of our opponents hand (97, 76, 87, 77). Checking is good for them, not us. We need to charge them to draw, not have it for free.

Perhaps the best proof that betting the turn and river is superior to check bet is... if you held ANY hand on the turn that could not beat JJ, what would you want an opponent to do? If I'm on the button with 97 or QJ or JT or 77 or T9... I sure as hell would want my opponent to check, NOT bet!

[jdwanchalk]

Now you're just adding to the list of bad plays. It's like you are now trying to just find anything I did and give any sort of rambling reason as to why it was wrong.

Like you said, you don't play NLHE or these games, and as much is very apparent.

[pokeraussie]

funny how you conveniently ignore the article i linked to which discusses a hand example that is very similar to this situation.

[jdwanchalk]

funny how you conveniently ignore the article i linked to which discusses a hand example that is very similar to this situation.

Nothing you post is ever relevant or logical. I do my best to ignore everything you post. Even when I don't reply to you, you still come back and try to instigate/troll anyway.

You suck at poker. Please stop talking to me and posting in my threads. Nothing productive ever comes of it and I value your opinion less than that of anyone else on this forum, in poker or otherwise.

Why you always have to inject your insight into other people's discussion or threads where you are clearly unwanted is beyond me. If there was ever an applicable time for the phrase "STFU," it's now.

[pokeraussie]

Nothing you post is ever relevant or logical.

Is this a level? The article I linked to could not be any more relevant to this thread. In fact, I recall you replying to the post when I showed you the article, and you insta replied without even reading the article.

Your intellect goes as far as "you suck at poker" you keep on repeating yourself like a broken record.

I'm thinking you are always playing in different casinos because you're a bum hunter always looking for soft games. That would explain your win rate, because you are terrible at poker and clearly never improve your game because you can't identify when you make mistakes.

Keep on fighting bartenders when your drunk you lightweight thats the only time you would have the balls.

[jdwanchalk]

Is this a level? The article I linked to could not be any more relevant to this thread. In fact, I recall you replying to the post when I showed you the article, and you insta replied without even reading the article.

Your intellect goes as far as "you suck at poker" you keep on repeating yourself like a broken record.

I'm thinking you are always playing in different casinos because you're a bum hunter always looking for soft games. That would explain your win rate, because you are terrible at poker and clearly never improve your game because you can't identify when you make mistakes.

Keep on fighting bartenders when your drunk you lightweight thats the only time you would have the balls.

Your insults are so incredibly weak. I like how when I tell you that you suck at poker based on all of your strategy posts and the fact that you play 25NL and 1/2, you retort with "no u" despite a ton of proof that shows otherwise. I have the highest win rate that is realistically possible, yet I suck because you are brain dead. Another logic fail, add it to the long list.

Oh, and what a zinger, like a 16 year old telling someone they are a "lightweight" without any basis, disregarding the fact that I wouldn't care either way. You are just such a loser it's incredible.

You are too dumb to ever realize just how dumb you are. Dunning


You are like 28 and play 25NL and run POS websites, sick life. You bum.

[pokeraussie]

If I cracked your aces playing live I'd laugh at your face you mug. I can see why America is so fucked up, its full of know it alls like you. But hey bro, if bum hunting gives you an edge, more power to you.

[jdwanchalk]

If I cracked your aces playing live I'd laugh at your face you mug. I can see why America is so fucked up, its full of know it alls like you. But hey bro, if bum hunting gives you an edge, more power to you.

Another witty, well-founded reply from pokeraussie. Now he is hung up on this "bum hunting" thing despite there being no reason to believe it to be true, while also disregarding the fact that game selection is something any thinking player would do. You insult your own intelligence while trying to make fun of others, well done.

[pokeraussie]

Another witty, well-founded reply from pokeraussie.

Plenty more where that come from. And unlike you, I don't have to think about being witty.

Did I tell you the story about how I am crushing 2/5 because I play the dumbest players in the world? It's a cool story.

Anyway, I will let you get back to misinterpreting/misapplying basic poker concepts.