Jump to content


With The Bankroll On The Line


  • Please log in to reply
223 replies to this topic

#41 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 12:14 PM

for anyone seriously trying to answer this and sticking to the implied parameters, calling here is most assuredly the dumbest play you could make.IF WE LOSE..WE HAVE NO MORE MONEY FOR POKER!!!EVER! that's the implicationnow, you can talk all you want about divorce, and about +EV, and the raises being a bad idea, etc...Why is this so tough for some of you to understand?Quit trying to put your own solutions and alternatives in.thanks!************************************

View Postsemaj550, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:56 AM, said:

That being said, I probably call if I got myself into this mess. The odds are good enough to warrant risking not playing poker again.
wowyou must not expect to make much playing poker over your lifetime of poker playing, if you'd trade like one pot for all other future earnings in a 42% scenario.

#42 semaj550

semaj550

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 October 2006 - 12:24 PM

View PostActuary, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 4:14 PM, said:

wowyou must not expect to make much playing poker over your lifetime of poker playing, if you'd trade like one pot for all other future earnings in a 42% scenario.
Hey, I'm only working within the parameters of the OP. I'm not going to defend that it's a good call but If I had $1,200 left and could risk it with a 42% chance of winning $2,640 I'd probably make the call. It's a gamble, not a smart decision. Then again, sitting 20/40 with my last 2k wasn't a smart decision either.I still maintain that call or fold, the only smart thing to do is walk away after this hand. You have no +EV in this situation, period.

#43 BudBundy

BudBundy

    The Sacred Geometry of Chance

  • Members
  • 3,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Turk
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO

Posted 02 October 2006 - 12:33 PM

Why risk 1200$ to win 2,640$ in one hand for %42 chance while we are guaranteed(sp?) to win that 2640$ and a lot more on the long run if we play in our bankroll.(He is a winning player)

#44 semaj550

semaj550

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 October 2006 - 12:41 PM

View PostBudBundy, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 4:33 PM, said:

Why risk 1200$ to win 2,640$ in one hand for %42 chance while we are guaranteed(sp?) to win that 2640$ and a lot more on the long run if we play in our bankroll.(He is a winning player)
Not in this game he isn't. You have no chance of beating this game. If he folds, stands up and drops down to about $50NL then yes, folding is correct.Is it still inconceivable to take a big risk here for a big reward? If we win this hand we could then drop out of this game and start at $100NL.To answer your question, if I got myself into the exact situation from the OP, I would see that I have over 1k in the pot so I might as well call off another $1.2k with great pot odds to have over $3,600 or go broke. I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.

#45 BudBundy

BudBundy

    The Sacred Geometry of Chance

  • Members
  • 3,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Turk
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO

Posted 02 October 2006 - 12:54 PM

View Postsemaj550, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:41 PM, said:

Not in this game he isn't. You have no chance of beating this game. If he folds, stands up and drops down to about $50NL then yes, folding is correct.Is it still inconceivable to take a big risk here for a big reward? If we win this hand we could then drop out of this game and start at $100NL.To answer your question, if I got myself into the exact situation from the OP, I would see that I have over 1k in the pot so I might as well call off another $1.2k with great pot odds to have over $3,600 or go broke. I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.
I understand.What you are saying is if we decided to play outside of our bankroll and sat down on this game we have to take this chance.What i am saying is if its all about money then folding,standing up and finding a game suitable for our bankroll and winning unlimited money on the long run is more +EV than calling and expecting to double up on a %42 chance.

#46 semaj550

semaj550

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:03 PM

View PostBudBundy, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 4:54 PM, said:

I understand.What you are saying is if we decided to play outside of our bankroll and sat down on this game we have to take this chance.What i am saying is if its all about money then folding,standing up and finding a game suitable for our bankroll and winning unlimited money on the long run is more +EV than calling and expecting to double up on a %42 chance.
I think we are in complete agreement then.

#47 navybuttons

navybuttons

    What?

  • Members
  • 5,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Diamonds

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:10 PM

finally, people start understanding the question.
if you're not playing the notes in front of you it's not mozart.

#48 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:17 PM

View Postsemaj550, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 12:41 PM, said:

I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.
only if you are a losing player who would just as soon never play again.***************8

View Postnavybuttons, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 1:10 PM, said:

finally, people start understanding the question.
you're preaching to the choir :club:

#49 BudBundy

BudBundy

    The Sacred Geometry of Chance

  • Members
  • 3,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Turk
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:18 PM

View Postnavybuttons, on Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006, 12:10 AM, said:

finally, people start understanding the question.
It only took 3 pages!

#50 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:20 PM

View PostBudBundy, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 1:18 PM, said:

It only took 3 pages!
eh-hum

#51 BudBundy

BudBundy

    The Sacred Geometry of Chance

  • Members
  • 3,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Turk
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:21 PM

View PostActuary, on Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006, 12:20 AM, said:

eh-hum
I got it in the first page.Even you repeated my answer in fancier words and pretended you got it too!!!!!!11111oneone

#52 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:30 PM

View PostBudBundy, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 1:21 PM, said:

I got it in the first page.Even you repeated my answer in fancier words and pretended you got it too!!!!!!11111oneone
like I couldn't figure it out w/o you!

#53 No_Neck

No_Neck

    this is how i roll

  • Members
  • 11,522 posts
  • Location:New Jersey OBV

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:54 PM

so you folded?

#54 navybuttons

navybuttons

    What?

  • Members
  • 5,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Diamonds

Posted 02 October 2006 - 01:59 PM

View PostNo_Neck, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 2:54 PM, said:

so you folded?
if that's meant to be a joke it's really funny. come to think of it, it's funny even if you were serious.
if you're not playing the notes in front of you it's not mozart.

#55 No_Neck

No_Neck

    this is how i roll

  • Members
  • 11,522 posts
  • Location:New Jersey OBV

Posted 02 October 2006 - 02:13 PM

View Postnavybuttons, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 5:59 PM, said:

if that's meant to be a joke it's really funny. come to think of it, it's funny even if you were serious.
:club:

#56 semaj550

semaj550

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 October 2006 - 02:44 PM

View PostActuary, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 5:17 PM, said:

only if you are a losing player who would just as soon never play again.
I assume that is implied by the original question. What kind of winning players sits 20/40 with his last 2k?

#57 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 02:53 PM

View Postsemaj550, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 2:44 PM, said:

I assume that is implied by the original question. What kind of winning players sits 20/40 with his last 2k?
actually, the implication was we could win off of most of the players thereI"m not sure what qualitative factors make this a call, besides you don't want to play anymore anyway, or you suck and don't expect long term to be profitable.that's all I was trying to retort to your "qualitative" rationale

#58 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 02 October 2006 - 03:24 PM

Wait,I read in another thread that Navy lost his live bankroll by playing over his head...This is a true story, isn't it...Isn't it...
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#59 navybuttons

navybuttons

    What?

  • Members
  • 5,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Diamonds

Posted 02 October 2006 - 03:38 PM

View PostZach6668, on Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 4:24 PM, said:

Wait,I read in another thread that Navy lost his live bankroll by playing over his head...This is a true story, isn't it...Isn't it...
no this is not a true story. it is a hypothetical question as a response to daniel's current quiz. showing the relationship between gambler's ruin and the +ev decision.my live bankroll was not lost because i was playing over my head, it was lost because i ran bad, had life leaks, and wasn't man enough to drop down. (maybe we're saying the same thing)i've mentioned before that i play O8 and the largest game in socal is 6/12 with a full kill. i make more than enough at my job that if i go broke one week, i can be in the game the next.my girlfriend doesn't even wear make up and pays for all her expenses herself.
if you're not playing the notes in front of you it's not mozart.

#60 iggymcfly

iggymcfly

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,654 posts
  • Location:Missoula, MT
  • Interests:Poker, football, sitting on my ass

Posted 02 October 2006 - 03:47 PM

There's two choices here. 1) If we suddenly had an awakening in the middle of the hand that we should not be in a 20/40 NL game right now, and are planning on cashing out and going to the 3/6 limit tables afterward, than sure this is a fold.2) If however, we're still planning on playing in this game "because of all the donkeys" or had any plan at all, then this is a definite call, because we can't expect to find another edge this big. Honestly, unless the other players literally play with their cards face up, there's no way we can do better than the current situation.
Lady luck's my fuck-buddy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users