|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/2/2008 6:41:59 PM PACIFIC |
 Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Wren, 22. Apr 2003 17:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| So here's a hand I played today in which I got drawn out on most craptastically. stdio and I talked about it afterwards, and he agreed that it was a pretty bad beat, but we had differing opinions on play at the river. Here's the hand: I looked down to 22 in the BB and took a free flop with 4 other players. Flop came 2h 5h Td. I bet out, solid but very aggressive early position player raised, mid pos player folded, bad calling station cold-called two, SB folded, I 3-bet, SVAP capped it, BCS cold-called another two, I called. Turn was the Jd. I had SVAP on either something like AT, or heart flush draw + pair of T's, or perhaps even two overcard hearts. He could also have had a set of 5's, but doubtfully a set of T's as he most likely would have raised TT preflop. I had BCS on God Knows What, as he was routinely calling one bet with **absolutely nothing** on the flop, and would cold-call with something like middle/bottom pair or non-overpair pockets or a gutshut. Needless to say, I wasn't too too worried about him. Anyway, I opted to bet out on the turn, because I didn't want SVAP taking off a free card on the (good) chance he was on a heart draw. I planned to merely call if he raised, because the chance of him holding 55 would be just too strong in that case. However, SVAP just called (good!), as did BCS. River was the 7d giving a board of 2 h 5 h Td Jd 7d. I bet out, SVAP grimaced and folded, and BCS now raised!! I squinted at the board, fearing he must have spiked a higher set, and called. He showed Q9d for the nifty little backdoor flush. I was honestly flabbergasted that even HE would cold-call two bets on the flop having hit so very little of it. There was virtually no way I could put him on diamonds there. As such, and given that I was close to 100% sure that I had SVAP beat on the river, I feel that a river bet was completely warranted there. stdio disagreed with me, arguing that BCS could very well have been fishing around for the backdoor flush. But I maintain that I will bet almost *every time* in this situation, as I will be good at least 80-90% of the time, and will likely earn at least one or two more big bets with a bet here when I am good. I think I am giving up a lot of value by not making a calling station pay as much as possible for fishing around all the time with bad cards. I can't fear backdoor cards that just might possibly have given him a miracle hand, unless of course I have a great read on him (which I, unfortunately, didn't). Thoughts? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, ross, 22. Apr 2003 18:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I totally agree with your bet on the river. You played that hand well and your reads seemed pretty accurate. Is stdioh on crack? How do you not justify betting trips on the river with a backdoor flush. You said you knew he would play hands like middle pair. He could have been calling all the way with 10's and a weak kicker. Players like that are tough to read and sometimes you have to pay them off when they get lucky. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, ice, 22. Apr 2003 18:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| ross says it with the spark note flare ;) thats what i was trying to say. on 22. Apr 2003 18:40 ross wrote: > sometimes you have to pay them off when they get lucky. *********** ¡¢£ßøx | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, ice, 22. Apr 2003 18:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| that is a bit of a bad beat.... i agree on betting you hand on the river. i mean, if the dude is always going to try to catch two of the same suit with a 3flush after the flop....damn. i dont think you should have expected him to have the flush, but i dont think you should have been so suprised by it. You said he might have been in there with anything, probably junk.... and for him, playing suited cards and catching one of the suit on the flop is a play, apparently (i can't see how). whenever i see three of a suit on the board though, no matter how it got there, im not too surpised when somebody made their flush. you can't put some oddball in there not playing his goofy hand. i still think you were justifed to bet, because what, would you fold your set if you checked to him and he bet? *********** ¡¢£ßøx | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Wren, 23. Apr 2003 07:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yeah...I think it's best to just hunker down and play the percentages against a calling station like this. Yes, is it possible for him to have made the backdoor flush, but very unlikely; a MUCH more probable holding (probably >85% chance) is one or two pair. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Andrew Wells, 22. Apr 2003 19:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You played well. There are plenty of hands that BCS should pay off on the river with that your set has beat. I can see that type of player raising on the river with any two pairs, so no way should you fold. As for SVAP playing overcards with a backdoor diamond draw, well that wouldn't be too solid four betting the flop after seeing BCS isn't going anywhere. It would be a whole different story with the 7h on the river, but I don't think you should slow down to a possible backdoor flush. Maybe stdioh knows a great deal about how SVAP plays. For example, would he just call with TT before the flop if the game is loose? Would he not charge what looks like a heart draw by BCS an extra bet on the turn with a bigger set than yours or even JT? I think your read of SVAP is good, probably a nut heart draw with a pair. This isn't a situation to save a bet on the end, it's one to gain that extra bet. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Wren, 23. Apr 2003 07:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "You played well. There are plenty of hands that BCS should pay off on the river with that your set has beat. I can see that type of player raising on the river with any two pairs, so no way should you fold." I definitely can't fold, but it is a crying call I'm making, as BCS is not very aggressive. "As for SVAP playing overcards with a backdoor diamond draw, well that wouldn't be too solid four betting the flop after seeing BCS isn't going anywhere." Right...there's essentially no way I can put SVAP on diamonds. The only hand I can vaguelly see him holding is A5d, but I really can't see him capping the flop with this. "It would be a whole different story with the 7h on the river" Yup...I think this warrants a check/call. "but I don't think you should slow down to a possible backdoor flush. Maybe stdioh knows a great deal about how SVAP plays. For example, would he just call with TT before the flop if the game is loose? Would he not charge what looks like a heart draw by BCS an extra bet on the turn with a bigger set than yours or even JT? I think your read of SVAP is good, probably a nut heart draw with a pair. This isn't a situation to save a bet on the end, it's one to gain that extra bet." I'm not sure whether stdio has played him or not. (I tried to describe the guy to him afterwards, but he claims I'm horrendous at this :D) I think his judgment was based more on the texture of the board at the river and what a calling station will tend to fish around on with a flop like this one. Perhaps stdio will provide some more thoughts on this one today. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, 4 POKER, 22. Apr 2003 20:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Apr 2003 17:33 Wren wrote: > So here's a hand I played today in which I got drawn out on most craptastically. > stdio and I talked about it afterwards, and he agreed that it was a pretty bad > beat, but we had differing opinions on play at the river. Here's the hand: > > I looked down to 22 in the BB and took a free flop with 4 other players. Flop > came 2h 5h Td. I bet out, solid but very aggressive early position player > raised, mid pos player folded, bad calling station cold-called two, SB folded, I > 3-bet, SVAP capped it, BCS cold-called another two, I called. Turn was the Jd. I > had SVAP on either something like AT, or heart flush draw + pair of T's, or > perhaps even two overcard hearts. He could also have had a set of 5's, but > doubtfully a set of T's as he most likely would have raised TT preflop. I had > BCS on God Knows What, as he was routinely calling one bet with **absolutely > nothing** on the flop, and would cold-call with something like middle/bottom > pair or non-overpair pockets or a gutshut. Needless to say, I wasn't too too > worried about him. Anyway, I opted to bet out on the turn, because I didn't want > SVAP taking off a free card on the (good) chance he was on a heart draw. I > planned to merely call if he raised, because the chance of him holding 55 would > be just too strong in that case. However, SVAP just called (good!), as did BCS. > River was the 7d giving a board of 2 h 5 h Td Jd 7d. I bet out, SVAP grimaced > and folded, and BCS now raised!! I squinted at the board, fearing he must have > spiked a higher set, and called. He showed Q9d for the nifty little backdoor > flush. I was honestly flabbergasted that even HE would cold-call two bets on the > flop having hit so very little of it. There was virtually no way I could put him > on diamonds there. As such, and given that I was close to 100% sure that I had > SVAP beat on the river, I feel that a river bet was completely warranted there. > stdio disagreed with me, arguing that BCS could very well have been fishing > around for the backdoor flush. But I maintain that I will bet almost *every > time* in this situation, as I will be good at least 80-90% of the time, and will > likely earn at least one or two more big bets with a bet here when I am good. I > think I am giving up a lot of value by not making a calling station pay as much > as possible for fishing around all the time with bad cards. I can't fear > backdoor cards that just might possibly have given him a miracle hand, unless of > course I have a great read on him (which I, unfortunately, didn't). Thoughts? Wren, You're absolutely correct, 100% (you played your perfectly). 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Nathaniel Brous, 22. Apr 2003 21:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Apr 2003 17:33 Wren wrote: <snip> Thoughts? I had a nice reply ready to go and managed to erase it. My mind is going lately. I am going try and quickly sum up what I had wrote. I am going with the non vocal minority on this one. I don't like the river bet. After the turn I hate the board. I am now rooting for a 2,5,10,J or a nonheart 3,4,or 8 (which turns out to be bad card) to drop on the river. As you can see I worry about straights popping more than the runner runner flush. But here's my main beef with the bet here. I feel that most people are not taking into account what will likely happen if you check. If you do check after showing so much strength, I think it is likely (51%+) your opponent will bet with or without a hand (putting you on hearts or afraid of the board). This of course is counting on your BCS at least occasionally betting. That's a nice situation to be in. Check/calling the river puts you in the position of maximizing your gain, while minimizing your loss. "But I maintain that I will bet almost *every time* in this situation, as I will be good at least 80-90% of the time, and will likely earn at least one or two more big bets with a bet here when I am good." I can't create a situation where you are going to get two big bets out of someone who does not have you beat (barring a loony making a funky two pair on the river and raising you). Ok...fire away (ducking). - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Tommy waggoner, 23. Apr 2003 04:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I on 22. Apr 2003 21:18 Nathaniel Brous wrote: > on 22. Apr 2003 17:33 Wren wrote: > <snip> Thoughts? > > I had a nice reply ready to go and managed to erase it. My mind is going lately. I > am going try and quickly sum up what I had wrote. > > I am going with the non vocal minority on this one. I don't like the river bet. > After the turn I hate the board. I am now rooting for a 2,5,10,J or a nonheart > 3,4,or 8 (which turns out to be bad card) to drop on the river. As you can see I > worry about straights popping more than the runner runner flush. > > But here's my main beef with the bet here. I feel that most people are not taking > into account what will likely happen if you check. If you do check after showing so > much strength, I think it is likely (51%+) your opponent will bet with or without a > hand (putting you on hearts or afraid of the board). This of course is counting on > your BCS at least occasionally betting. That's a nice situation to be in. > Check/calling the river puts you in the position of maximizing your gain, while > minimizing your loss. > > "But I maintain that I will bet almost *every time* in this situation, as I will be > good at least 80-90% of the time, and will likely earn at least one or two more big > bets with a bet here when I am good." > > I can't create a situation where you are going to get two big bets out of someone > who does not have you beat (barring a loony making a funky two pair on the river and > raising you). Ok...fire away (ducking). - Nathaniel Brous I disagree with check calling the river here, I think the play is clearly to bet. She three bet the flop, then it gets capped, then she bets right back out into him on the turn. I don't think that the calling station would put her on a flush draw or a weak hand, and bet a weaker hand into her on the river. She has to bet her hand for value at the river, even if there is a small chance that she is beat. All you can do is say nice hand and move on, and of course hope that the BCS hangs around for a while. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Wren, 23. Apr 2003 06:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Ok *FIRE*!!! Heheh...some comments embedded within: "I am going with the non vocal minority on this one. I don't like the river bet. After the turn I hate the board. I am now rooting for a 2,5,10,J or a nonheart 3,4,or 8 (which turns out to be bad card) to drop on the river. As you can see I worry about straights popping more than the runner runner flush. " The only straight possible on this river is one using 89. BCS would have had to put 4 bets in on the flop with merely a 3-straight in this case, which is a similarly unlikely scenario as him chasing a backdoor flush. Of course, it is *possible*, since he is such a huge calling station, but definitely not probable. "But here's my main beef with the bet here. I feel that most people are not taking into account what will likely happen if you check. If you do check after showing so much strength, I think it is likely (51%+) your opponent will bet with or without a hand (putting you on hearts or afraid of the board). This of course is counting on your BCS at least occasionally betting. That's a nice situation to be in. Check/calling the river puts you in the position of maximizing your gain, while minimizing your loss." It is true that I save a bet in the event that I am, strangely, beat on the river; however, if I am not beat, I don't believe I'll get a bet from anyone. If I'm correct about SVAP, he's either sitting on a pair of T's or a heart bust. BCS is sitting on anything from a bust (if he's on hearts as well) to a pair to two pair to an unlikely made hand. If I check, I don't see SVAP betting, as he is a solid player and has to know he can't pick up the pot after all my previous strength with a total bust. If he has a T, he checks as well and hopes that his hand has managed to stand up. BCS, meanwhile, is playing like a calling station; he check/calls and doesn't try to pick up pots. If he is on a pair, two pair, etc., he'll most likely check and hope he is good. "I can't create a situation where you are going to get two big bets out of someone who does not have you beat (barring a loony making a funky two pair on the river and raising you). Ok...fire away (ducking)." I didn't mean two bets from the same guy; I meant that I might get calls from both SVAP and BCS if I bet. If SVAP has a T, he'll likely call, as will BCS with some marginal holding. As previously elaborated on, however, I don't think either will bet out with holdings like this. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Nathaniel Brous, 23. Apr 2003 08:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| As far as the straight angle go, I was thinking more of the 89h, KQh, which would certainly explain his calling and a reluctance for me to bet the seven. I really like your response here. It was well reasoned and covered the bases. I think the reason I see so many dangers in the shadows is because I wasted so many sessions trying to be dangerous from them. I am the type of player who kind of expects them. There is some sort of value in being a reformed insane player. This is good for my anti-tilt but bad for the reason you stated. I am leaving bets on the table. Thanks for the eyeopener. - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Wren, 23. Apr 2003 08:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "As far as the straight angle go, I was thinking more of the 89h, KQh, which would certainly explain his calling and a reluctance for me to bet the seven. " The KQ does not complete a straight on the river; only the 89 does. And, of course a hand like 89h is possible, but again, it is very improbable that one of my opponents holds precisely these two cards. "I really like your response here. It was well reasoned and covered the bases. I think the reason I see so many dangers in the shadows is because I wasted so many sessions trying to be dangerous from them. I am the type of player who kind of expects them. There is some sort of value in being a reformed insane player. This is good for my anti-tilt but bad for the reason you stated. I am leaving bets on the table. Thanks for the eyeopener." No prob. I think gaining a feel for when to bet and when not to bet the river is a matter of experience, and, of course, knowing the players at the table. Sklansky provides some commentary on this in his advanced hold'em book - he states that betting or raising the river is warranted when you feel that you have the best hand >55% of the time you will be CALLED; not just when you think you have the best hand, which is an important distinction that I believe a lot of players don't appreciate. (He quotes 55% instead of 50% to account for the possibility that you will be raised/checkraised) I pretty much applied this here; I bet, believing that I would get one and maybe two callers, AND that my hand was most likely good. All in all, (if you take advanced player reads and psychology out of it), a lot of situations like this can be handled effectively by some objective hand analysis and a feel for probability (which comes with experience). It isn't prudent to irrationally fear the nuts in hold'em; in fact, it isn't good to fear at all, as fear and hope are the two worst emotions at the poker table, but we can leave that to another post :O) - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| My two cents, stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 07:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| ok...here is my take on the whole hand. I think that Wren played superbly throughout until the river, where I would say that I wouldn't bet, but I certainly wouldn't call the bet boneheaded. Here's why I wouldn't bet it. SVAP could have had me beat the whole way or he could have just improved to beat me. If it was heads up I could bet it, but now I have to worry because the fish could be in there with damn near anything and I have been proved wrong many times when overestimating the intelligence of bad bad poker players. That said, there are still a lot of hands that are not unlikely for either player. SVAP could be holding 8h9h and been doing something agressive and advanced preflop. Roy has himself talked about raising preflop in a small field with medium suited connectors as advanced plays. More likely, SVAP could hold AdTd and have flopped top pair, top kicker with a backdoor flush draw, which would explain his continues afression on the turn. The fish could have been holding onto a silly pocket pair and spiked a 2-outer, could have had a backdoor flush and backdoor straight draw(which I've seen countless calling-stationy fish hold onto for dear life) - which in this case he had and either of which could have hit. Now I'm not saying that a river bet for value here would be bad with one opponent, but with the two of them, I'd be happy to check and see what happens. If it is checked around, then fine. If SVAP bets and folds off the fish then I might consider a checkraise, depending on my read, though I'd probably just call. If the fish bets, I would make a crying call because by definition, calling stations don't bet unless they actually have a good hand. I'd be hoping that he had 2 pair. Basically, what I'm getting at here is that you know that you'll be calling a raise so you risk losing 2 bets. You also can be fairly sure that you'll get a maximum of 1 caller to your bet, so you're only standing to gain 1 bet if you have the best hand. The flush and straight possibilities, combined with the fact that you hold the weakest set, would lead me to say that checking the river here is *marginally* better than betting it. Though I would say in terms of EV the desicion to check the river is worth pennies over betting the river. All that said, this is a clear cut matter of style where your bet depends not only on the facts of the hand, but on how the other players at the table perceive you. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: My two cents, Wren, 23. Apr 2003 09:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the thoughts hun :O) One thing though - SVAP couldn't have held ATd as the Td appeared on the flop. And there are really no other double diamond hands that he could have held and 4-bet the flop with. After thinking about this some more, I'm sticking with the conviction that a river bet is called for here (reasoning provided in the above thread with Nathaniel). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: My two cents, stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 09:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Oops...yeah. The Td was gone...and Ad5d isn't something that a good player would be jamming with there. Fair enough. Though that said, I'd still be worried about the fish catching something silly as he did. Like I said, I don't think it is a big change in expectation either way you play it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: My two cents, noiseboy, 23. Apr 2003 09:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hmm, you do make a pretty good case for the check call. Players like that will stick around with pocket pairs even if there are several overcards, hoping to spike a set. They'll never put down a backdoor draw or gutshot, you never know where they are in a hand. I'll have to think about it some more, both options have their merits. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: My two cents, Andrew Wells, 23. Apr 2003 13:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Perhaps you are underestimating the most likely scenario if Wren bets on the river. That is SVAP folds and BCS calls with two pair or less. I suspect this is around 60% likely here. Of course both of them could fold, something I'd rate as about a 20% chance. Then 15% she gets raised by a better hand from either player, and 5% that BCS raises with two pair (Th7h being the most probable). I don't think she can expect either player to bet a busted draw or represent diamonds holding just a pair due to all the action on the flop and her willingness to lead on the turn. Maybe SVAP would bet JT here for her, but I think he might have raised the turn instead with top two. So I'd estimate that if she checks it's about 75% likely it gets checked around. With 15% that someone bets a hand that beats her set, and 10% that it doesn't. If SVAP bets and BCS raises, then given these player characteristics she won't have to call two cold. So it still looks like betting has the most value due to BCS mostly just paying off but not betting if it's checked to him. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: My two cents, stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 13:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 23. Apr 2003 13:08 Andrew Wells wrote: > Perhaps you are underestimating the most likely scenario if Wren bets on the river. That > is SVAP folds and BCS calls with two pair or less. I suspect this is around 60% likely > here. Of course both of them could fold, something I'd rate as about a 20% chance. Then > 15% she gets raised by a better hand from either player, and 5% that BCS raises with two > pair (Th7h being the most probable). I don't think she can expect either player to bet a > busted draw or represent diamonds holding just a pair due to all the action on the flop > and her willingness to lead on the turn. Maybe SVAP would bet JT here for her, but I think > he might have raised the turn instead with top two. So I'd estimate that if she checks > it's about 75% likely it gets checked around. With 15% that someone bets a hand that beats > her set, and 10% that it doesn't. If SVAP bets and BCS raises, then given these player > characteristics she won't have to call two cold. So it still looks like betting has the > most value due to BCS mostly just paying off but not betting if it's checked to him. That's a very good analysis and I'm willing to accept it as it stands. I hereby agree that the bet on the river was good. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, noiseboy, 23. Apr 2003 09:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| No the bet on the river was fine, a clueless player like that could have just as easily caught a second pair on the river and thought he was good. Some people just like to gamble, and sometimes they get lucky and hit a hand, but you have no way of knowing, because you can't put them on anything. My girlfriend played this hand recently where she had pocket AA's and was playing them really aggressive, and this other person kept coming back and reraising her. The flop was K-rag-rag. After he kept coming back at her and capping the betting, she was like "Oh damn, they've got a set of KK'sor at least two pair" but the player was kind've wild so she decided to call them down. Turns out they had QQ's, and kept coming even with the overcard! The point is that some players you simply cannot put on a hand and should just hope that since they are playing worse starting hands, that you will end up with the best hands more often than not. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, JunglingS, 23. Apr 2003 10:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Well, look at this hand from his perspective -- On the flop, his hand basically consists of: Qd9dTd So, his odds of improving to either a flush, straight, or straight flush are about 6.12% or 16.3:1 against. Bad call!! On the turn, however, he is drawing one to an open ended straight flush. Effectively his hand is: 9dTdJdQd Now his odds of improving to either a flush, straight, or straight flush are about 30.6% or 3.26:1 against. A raise is probabally appropriate now. As for your play, given his drawing odds on the flop, I don't think it wrong of you at all to not put him on this hand. I think you played it right. Given just a bit more time, I'll go through the expected values on both sides of the table, but right now my lunch break is about to end, so. . . | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 11:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The one fact that you are overlooking here is that he is a BBPP (bad bad poker player) and as a result, stupidly ridiculous calls are not to be ruled out. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, Nathaniel Brous, 23. Apr 2003 13:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 23. Apr 2003 11:34 stdioh wrote: > The one fact that you are overlooking here is that he is a BBPP (bad bad poker player) and as a result, stupidly ridiculous calls are not to be ruled out. Wait just a minute stdioh...now you're up to six cents. :) - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 13:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Wait just a minute stdioh...now you're up to six cents. :) Heheh...I'm fortunate enough that the lovely Wren allows me to say anything worth less than a dime. I think it's the fact that I am a good cook :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Bad beat....but bad bet too??!, blubster, 24. Apr 2003 04:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| that sounds right how you played it. blubster | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|