Jump to content


Qdjd Flop Straight Fd Against Fish


  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#21 NoBBiR

NoBBiR

    F34l2 Durrrr

  • Members
  • 3,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Binghamton NY
  • Interests:Poker.
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Lemon Tennis Hold Me Tightly.

Posted 07 September 2008 - 06:17 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 6:06 PM, said:

I think you're making sense here. It's just different than what I'm responding to. If you think the villain never folds, you shouldn't bet here. We would, in that case, have no "fold equity" and a shove would be a mistake. It's pure logic.The whole notion of balancing a range assumes that the villain is capable of folding.
That's just it, no one "never folds." We always have fold equity on the turn. Even people who never lay down top pair will fold on this turn because when we shove the turn (even if they're not giving us a range and are just playing their own cards) the only hands they beat are the K, Q and J high flush draws and the ace means they no longer have top pair. So unless they have a set, they literally lose to everything else.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 6:06 PM, said:

I like what you're saying here. We were, however, fortunate to receive an ace on the turn. If the turn bricks something else, he still loves his top pair against our phantom AK.
We we're fortunate to get the ace, but a lot of the time we're improving on the turn (we have a billion outs on the flop). If you combine that with literally every other scare card that can come, we hit a good turn card to shove like 60-70% of the time so that we still have a lot of FE, and when we don't we're still like 3:2 dog only.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 6:06 PM, said:

Shoving the flop is exactly what I'm talking about. Bet the pot and raise twice the pot when he minraises.
Then we have to be shoving our sets as well. Don't get me wrong, I love fast playing sets, but we get more value out of idiots with top pair if we make a smaller flop reraise and then shove the turn. It gets more money out of him on the flop while we basically always have an equity edge.
"How do they put the ****ing queen in the window?"

Darvin Moon, I hope you die in a grease fire.

#22 psujohn

psujohn

    There is no charge for awesomeness

  • Members
  • 3,788 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:MD

Posted 07 September 2008 - 06:22 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 8:09 PM, said:

What do you have against numbers? Did one kick your dog or something? How often do you think he folds the turn? It doesn't have to be a ton to break even, but can I put you down on record as saying more than 25%?
This entire post just reeks of stupidity. Either this is a level or you don't even have the beginnings of a clue here.On the turn villain doesn't need to fold in order for hero to profit. Yes even though we're almost certainly a dog. Hero likely has about 40% equity and is getting better than 2:1 on a shove. You understand this don't you?

Quote

There's no real value betting going on preflop. An unpaired hand isn't enough of a favorite to pay the rake.It's unlikely (but possible) that we're a significant favorite on the flop.
There's no value in unpaired hands pre-flop? What kinds of drugs are you taking? And we're very likely a significant favorite on this flop and never a big dog.

Quote

We're very likely a dog on the turn, so we're only making money on the folds. The whole key to understanding the profit in the hand is how often he folds the turn.
We're going to play a little game you and I. I'll write down four numbers between 1 and 10 in secret. You'll pick a number between 1 and 10. I'm only going to be correct 40% of the time so you'll make a killing. Oh, did I forget to mention that when you win I pay you $10 and when I win you pay me $20? But don't worry about that since you'll win much more often than I do. When can we start?

#23 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 06:56 PM

View Postpsujohn, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:22 PM, said:

This entire post just reeks of stupidity. Either this is a level or you don't even have the beginnings of a clue here.On the turn villain doesn't need to fold in order for hero to profit. Yes even though we're almost certainly a dog. Hero likely has about 40% equity and is getting better than 2:1 on a shove. You understand this don't you?
I understand how odds work. The problem here is that I want to analyze the marginal effects of the turn play and you want to give the hero credit for his equity in the pot, which I think is wrong.

Quote

We're going to play a little game you and I. I'll write down four numbers between 1 and 10 in secret. You'll pick a number between 1 and 10. I'm only going to be correct 40% of the time so you'll make a killing. Oh, did I forget to mention that when you win I pay you $10 and when I win you pay me $20? But don't worry about that since you'll win much more often than I do. When can we start?
Ahh, but this isn't what happens in this hand.Say we both put in $10 for a $20 total ante. You write down 4 numbers in secret. I pick a number in secret.You can bet up to $10 more. How much do you wish to wager that you have correctly guessed the number? 0, right? It's only the existence of the option to fold that can make a turn shove profitable.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#24 psujohn

psujohn

    There is no charge for awesomeness

  • Members
  • 3,788 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:MD

Posted 07 September 2008 - 07:27 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:56 PM, said:

Ahh, but this isn't what happens in this hand.Say we both put in $10 for a $20 total ante. You write down 4 numbers in secret. I pick a number in secret.You can bet up to $10 more. How much do you wish to wager that you have correctly guessed the number? 0, right? It's only the existence of the option to fold that can make a turn shove profitable.
But that's not equivalent to our situation. If you setup those rules at the beginning of the hand it'd take a fool to agree. When we put in the money on the flop we're a favorite. On the turn we have zero chance to win by folding and 40% chance to win > 2x our bet by betting.Once we get to the turn the only smart move is to shove. (Ok, I'll grant that if you have a sworn affidavit from villain that he'll check behind if you check and call 100% of the time if you bet AND he'll payoff any river bet you chose to make then you can check but in reality you never have that).Now you can argue that the flop 3-bet which puts us in the position is not good. If villain folds almost never on the the flop AND will stack off if we hit our draw then it makes sense to not 3-bet. In reality even the worst villain can fold to a shove when a flush draw (the most obvious of all draws) comes in at least some of the time. Interestingly enough if villain promises that he'll never under any circumstances fold on the flop but he will fold if a 3rd diamond comes up then our best play is to shove the flop.

#25 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 08:02 PM

View Postpsujohn, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 11:27 PM, said:

But that's not equivalent to our situation. If you setup those rules at the beginning of the hand it'd take a fool to agree.
It doesn't matter how we got there. When we analyze the turn play, we analyze the turn play.

Quote

When we put in the money on the flop we're a favorite. On the turn we have zero chance to win by folding and 40% chance to win > 2x our bet by betting.
Folding=bad. Yep.

Quote

Once we get to the turn the only smart move is to shove. (Ok, I'll grant that if you have a sworn affidavit from villain that he'll check behind if you check and call 100% of the time if you bet AND he'll payoff any river bet you chose to make then you can check but in reality you never have that).
It doesn't take all that. If he folds about 15% of the time and never pays off, pushing is the same EV as checking through.

Quote

Now you can argue that the flop 3-bet which puts us in the position is not good. If villain folds almost never on the the flop AND will stack off if we hit our draw then it makes sense to not 3-bet. In reality even the worst villain can fold to a shove when a flush draw (the most obvious of all draws) comes in at least some of the time. Interestingly enough if villain promises that he'll never under any circumstances fold on the flop but he will fold if a 3rd diamond comes up then our best play is to shove the flop.
We'd prefer to hit the straight, I suspect.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#26 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 08:17 PM

View PostSnamuh, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 7:41 PM, said:

Because a huge donk is going to have a one pair here a LOT, and a ton of them are going to fold the turn . . .
What percent is a ton? I'm OK with your theory of him folding a lot on the turn, but I think you can see why it's not automatic.We know:
  • He almost never folds preflop.
  • He calls a lot on the flop.
And then you conclude (based on the range he must have), he'll fold a lot on the turn. OK, that's valid. But couldn't we also see a simpler trend of just calling a lot and infer that he'll call a lot on the turn?

Quote

It's a pretty simple concept. We currently have Q hi. We would prefer to win by making them fold. We're obviously not folding if we check and he shoves. Aggression is good. Passive is meh (usually you prefer being aggressive to being passive).
I have no argument with the concept, but it's not a first principle.

Quote

I don't know how you don't understand this. You made a lot of retarded posts in the other threads, and you continue to fill this thread with your stupidity.
Thanks.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#27 SCS

SCS

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,771 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom, CA

Posted 07 September 2008 - 08:22 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:06 PM, said:

I think you're making sense here. It's just different than what I'm responding to. If you think the villain never folds, you shouldn't bet here. We would, in that case, have no "fold equity" and a shove would be a mistake. It's pure logic.The whole notion of balancing a range assumes that the villain is capable of folding. I like what you're saying here. We were, however, fortunate to receive an ace on the turn. If the turn bricks something else, he still loves his top pair against our phantom AK.Shoving the flop is exactly what I'm talking about. Bet the pot and raise twice the pot when he minraises.
If villain is never folding, which is false even for the fishiest of players, wouldn't this make shoving the turn even more correct against this particular opponent?

#28 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 08:39 PM

View PostSCS, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 12:22 AM, said:

If villain is never folding, which is false even for the fishiest of players, wouldn't this make shoving the turn even more correct against this particular opponent?
Well, no. Are you thinking he'll call without a pair? We could be betting for value against a worse draw occasionally, but for the vast majority of his range we're making a semi-bluff by betting a brick turn.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#29 SCS

SCS

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,771 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom, CA

Posted 07 September 2008 - 08:54 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 12:39 AM, said:

Well, no. Are you thinking he'll call without a pair? We could be betting for value against a worse draw occasionally, but for the vast majority of his range we're making a semi-bluff by betting a brick turn.
No, I don't. What do you think is villain's range here? How much of that range is villain folding to a turn shove? Is our equity against villain's calling range for a turn shove better than 31.5%?

#30 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 09:05 PM

View PostSCS, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 12:54 AM, said:

No, I don't. What do you think is villain's range here?
Before the turn action? He has something. Mostly a pair, but two pair, a set, or a draw sometimes.

Quote

How much of that range is villain folding to a turn shove? Is our equity against villain's calling range for a turn shove better than 31.5%?
Well, yes, I think quite clearly. I think you're falling into a logical trap I shall call the Panda fallacy.We can't bet for value in a heads-up pot when we're the dog. Right? No argument on this?We want him to fold the turn if we're behind. And we're almost always behind. So we want him to fold.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#31 SCS

SCS

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,771 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom, CA

Posted 07 September 2008 - 09:29 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 1:05 AM, said:

Before the turn action? He has something. Mostly a pair, but two pair, a set, or a draw sometimes.Well, yes, I think quite clearly. I think you're falling into a logical trap I shall call the Panda fallacy.We can't bet for value in a heads-up pot when we're the dog. Right? No argument on this?We want him to fold the turn if we're behind. And we're almost always behind. So we want him to fold.
:club: Are you serious? You do realize we show a profit against villain's calling range, right? We bet, villain calls, we show a profit. There is value. Whether villain folds or calls the turn shove, we profit.

#32 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 09:56 PM

View PostSCS, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 1:29 AM, said:

:club: Are you serious? You do realize we show a profit against villain's calling range, right? We bet, villain calls, we show a profit. There is value. Whether villain folds or calls the turn shove, we profit.
Yeah, I'm serious and you're missing something.The hero has equity in the pot. That's great. Yea! Equity in the pot.Now we're playing the turn. We want to also make more money playing the turn, not just say, "Yea! We have equity in the pot."It makes perfect sense to semi-bluff (with a lot of equity) because we expect him to fold sometimes.After the flop action, the hero has 40% equity in a $45.75 pot. That is worth $18.30.If the hero shoves the turn, he has 40% equity in a $123.55 pot. That is worth $49.42. The hero paid $38.90 for this equity. If we just look at the turn action, the hero paid $38.90 and got $49.42. That's a net of $10.52. He lost money ($18.30 - $10.52) by betting the turn.That's probably not clearer than just saying betting and getting called as a dog is bad. I don't know what else to do, though.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#33 NoBBiR

NoBBiR

    F34l2 Durrrr

  • Members
  • 3,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Binghamton NY
  • Interests:Poker.
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Lemon Tennis Hold Me Tightly.

Posted 07 September 2008 - 09:57 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 9:05 PM, said:

Before the turn action? He has something. Mostly a pair, but two pair, a set, or a draw sometimes.Well, yes, I think quite clearly. I think you're falling into a logical trap I shall call the Panda fallacy.We can't bet for value in a heads-up pot when we're the dog. Right? No argument on this?We want him to fold the turn if we're behind. And we're almost always behind. So we want him to fold.
But you're misunderstanding. Since the money we've put in the pot is no longer technically ours, in order to win that and his half of the pot, we shovel. Since we have less than a pot bet, we'll be risking our 38.9 to win his 38.9 PLUS the 45.75 already in the pot when he calls. That means we're getting better than 2:1 on a shove when we're hardly EVER worse than a 3:2 dog, meaning it's a winning play. Also if he folds, we win 45.75 without risking anything.Given that we A-L-W-A-Y-S have fold equity, we HAVE to shove this turn. He only needs to fold occasionally to make it profitable. Even when we have the worst hand, we can technically value/bluff shove our huge draw since we still have pretty high equity and there is so much money in the pot, and we have fold equity. We cannot fold if we check and he shoves, and since the range you're giving him for advocating a turn check means he's almost never checking back, we have to shoveeeeeeeeel.
"How do they put the ****ing queen in the window?"

Darvin Moon, I hope you die in a grease fire.

#34 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 10:07 PM

View PostNoBBiR, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 1:57 AM, said:

But you're misunderstanding.
No, I'm not. Not even a little bit.

Quote

Since the money we've put in the pot is no longer technically ours, in order to win that and his half of the pot, we shovel.
All we have to do to get our share of the money in the pot is not fold. Nobody wants to even consider folding the turn, because it would be stupid. Shoving the turn does not create the equity we have in the pot. It's already there.

Quote

Since we have less than a pot bet, we'll be risking our 38.9 to win his 38.9 PLUS the 45.75 already in the pot when he calls. That means we're getting better than 2:1 on a shove when we're hardly EVER worse than a 3:2 dog, meaning it's a winning play.
When you compare it to folding, which is a meaningless benchmark, since we're not doing that.

Quote

Also if he folds, we win 45.75 without risking anything.
Which is good.

Quote

Given that we A-L-W-A-Y-S have fold equity, . .
OK.

Quote

we HAVE to shove this turn. He only needs to fold occasionally to make it profitable. Even when we have the worst hand, we can technically value/bluff shove our huge draw since we still have pretty high equity and there is so much money in the pot, and we have fold equity. We cannot fold if we check and he shoves, and since the range you're giving him for advocating a turn check means he's almost never checking back, we have to shoveeeeeeeeel.
The turn shove is fine, but it's not a value bet and the money in the pot doesn't justify it over check/calling.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#35 BaseJester

BaseJester

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Castle
  • Interests:Juggling. Ventriloquism. Story-telling.
  • Favorite Poker Game:The quintain

Posted 07 September 2008 - 10:37 PM

View PostSnamuh, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 7:41 PM, said:

You made a lot of retarded posts in the other threads, and you continue to fill this thread with your stupidity.

View Postpsujohn, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:22 PM, said:

This entire post just reeks of stupidity. Either this is a level or you don't even have the beginnings of a clue here.
Can't we all just live in harmony, come together in a united voice, and tell Keith Crime he's an idiot?No?Worth a try.
If everybody is thinking the same thing, then somebody isn't thinking.
- General George Patton

#36 Snamuh

Snamuh

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 5,094 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 September 2008 - 10:58 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 1:59 PM, said:

If you're going to raise the flop, raise you like you ****ing mean it. What do you want to happen here? I'm pretty sure it's not get to the turn with the stack size you did.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 7:11 PM, said:

On what street do you think the hero made money?It's the same damn hand as the other thread, and it's pretty meaningless to deem a play a correct with no notion of how often he folds. It would stand to reason from the description that it's very seldom, in which case the hero loses money on the turn action. Against a player who can fold, it would be a good line.

View PostBaseJester, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 2:37 AM, said:

Can't we all just live in harmony, come together in a united voice, and tell Keith Crime he's an idiot?No?Worth a try.
Your responses bring the hate onto you.
Snamuh raises to $76.75, and is all in
BigKamp: yyou lose
BigKamp has 15 seconds left to act
BigKamp calls $24.50, and is all in
Seat 1: BigKamp (small blind) mucked [Ad Ac] - a full house, Aces full of Kings
Seat 2: Snamuh (big blind) showed [Kd Kh] and won ($102.50) with four of a kind, Kings
Snamuh: you lose

#37 NoBBiR

NoBBiR

    F34l2 Durrrr

  • Members
  • 3,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Binghamton NY
  • Interests:Poker.
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Lemon Tennis Hold Me Tightly.

Posted 07 September 2008 - 10:58 PM

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

No, I'm not. Not even a little bit.
Yeah, you're still missing it. FE is the key to this hand.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

All we have to do to get our share of the money in the pot is not fold. Nobody wants to even consider folding the turn, because it would be stupid.
Obv.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

Shoving the turn does not create the equity we have in the pot. It's already there.
Obv. Again, it's all about the FE we lose by checking.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

When you compare it to folding, which is a meaningless benchmark, since we're not doing that.
I'm not comparing it to folding, I'm comparing to to checking.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

Which is good.
Obv.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

The turn shove is fine, but it's not a value bet and the money in the pot doesn't justify it over check/calling.
Yes, it absolutely does. Check calling FULLY eliminates the ability to take the pot down uncontested. We cannot force a better hand to fold by checking. Either way, since we're calling if he shoves, we're going to see the river. Since if we check, we lose the ability to push him off a hand, it's silly to check. This means that the ONLY way we'll win the hand is if we river a hand and hope it's good. We also give everyone at the table the ability to ALWAYS fold whenever we do shove turns here because we'll always have the nuts and never have a big draw.

View PostBaseJester, on Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 10:37 PM, said:

Can't we all just live in harmony, come together in a united voice, and tell Keith Crime he's an idiot?No?Worth a try.
I can go for this.
"How do they put the ****ing queen in the window?"

Darvin Moon, I hope you die in a grease fire.

#38 d0c

d0c

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Est
  • Favorite Poker Game:NLHE

Posted 07 September 2008 - 11:15 PM

Without falling into all of the turn discussion (where I agree that shove is only move there) I want to come back to flop.OP: why did you decide to 3 bet 87 vpip guy and not 29 vpip guy (it obv should've been other way around). Adding the fact that Ama theorem applies here I like b/c on flop or 3bet allin.Bet/call will give us chance to draw and get paid because villain doesnt like fold button.3bet shove gets us actually value against his range as he might call you down with bottom pair.

Quote

Against this villain I think c/c the flop is probably better
Why aren't we cbetting this flop? I suppose you meant b/c

#39 Snamuh

Snamuh

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 5,094 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 September 2008 - 11:21 PM

View Postd0c, on Monday, September 8th, 2008, 3:15 AM, said:

Without falling into all of the turn discussion (where I agree that shove is only move there) I want to come back to flop.OP: why did you decide to 3 bet 87 vpip guy and not 29 vpip guy (it obv should've been other way around). Adding the fact that Ama theorem applies here I like b/c on flop or 3bet allin.Bet/call will give us chance to draw and get paid because villain doesnt like fold button.3bet shove gets us actually value against his range as he might call you down with bottom pair.Why aren't we cbetting this flop? I suppose you meant b/c
Or he might call the flop and fold the turn (which a lot of donks like this will do). 3betting the flop with approximately this size is definitely optimal.
Snamuh raises to $76.75, and is all in
BigKamp: yyou lose
BigKamp has 15 seconds left to act
BigKamp calls $24.50, and is all in
Seat 1: BigKamp (small blind) mucked [Ad Ac] - a full house, Aces full of Kings
Seat 2: Snamuh (big blind) showed [Kd Kh] and won ($102.50) with four of a kind, Kings
Snamuh: you lose

#40 d0c

d0c

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Est
  • Favorite Poker Game:NLHE

Posted 07 September 2008 - 11:33 PM

I kind of agree. This size will give us nice PSB on turn, but... On complete blank turn e.g 5 :club: I think this opponent does not find fold button very often. Ace is the best card for us (that doesn't complete our draw).

Quote

and fold the turn
OP read was that villain didn't like folding turns.As default play OP played it perfect. Now I'm not suggesting anymore but asking: can anything be done differently because of OP read, Snamuh?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users