Jump to content


A7s To A Push


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41 WrongWay

WrongWay

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 01:16 PM

View PostActuary, on Tuesday, October 31st, 2006, 4:27 PM, said:

If I were him, I"d change it to "bite mine"But that's because I'm funny and don't take me seriously.
But, "suck" is a poker term and fits this board and post so much better than bite.And, since the A7 was the "very slight" underdog but won, this hand was indeed a suck.Besides, I have no desire to have mine bitten.So I repeat.... suck mine.As for raise with A7 in 5th position but fold in 3rd... this is the same as folding with it UTG at a table of 5 or folding with it when UTG at a table of 7. In poker, you're playing against all the players that have not yet folded. In MP1 you're opening at a table of 7. In MP3 you're opening at a table of 5. HUGE difference between a table of 7 and a table of 5, in my opinion.
No online gambling site will ever get a dime from me.

#42 IQCrash

IQCrash

    Coke & Whores.

  • Members
  • 4,262 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles
  • Interests:Coke & Whores. Strippers & Blow.

Posted 02 November 2006 - 01:19 PM

View PostWrongWay, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 1:16 PM, said:

In MP3 you're opening at a table of 5. HUGE difference between a table of 7 and a table of 5, in my opinion.
:club: :D

#43 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 01:36 PM

View PostIQCrash, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 1:19 PM, said:

:club: :D
you know your clapping and focus on a pf raise with A7s makes you look dumb, right?I'm pretty certain players like Tremomey raise A7s thereRaising is fineLimping is fineFolding is Fineit's quite irrelevant relative to post flop playgiven the stack, pos, and hand.I'm only saying your clear rigged plays and strong reactions are bad.Along with your assertion that you were donk struck in the Strat Tourney #6, lends more support to my suspicion that you've read a couple books and think there is a right way and a wrong way and no way in between. You should open your mind a bit. you should clap for the posts WrongWay stated that a play site was rigged and he won't ever put money on a real site because they could be rigged.

#44 IQCrash

IQCrash

    Coke & Whores.

  • Members
  • 4,262 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles
  • Interests:Coke & Whores. Strippers & Blow.

Posted 02 November 2006 - 01:41 PM

lol It's funny, Actuary - while we disagree, my disagreements with you are always about the hand and specifics of it. Your responses always seem to contain ad hominem arguments - you can't seem to refrain yourself from personal attacks instead of speaking about the issue at hand.You can stop posting here like you said anytime now. :club:

#45 trystero

trystero

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 3,780 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 01:42 PM

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 4:36 PM, said:

I'm only saying your clear rigged plays and strong reactions are bad.
qft

#46 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 02:45 PM

View PostIQCrash, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 1:41 PM, said:

You can stop posting here like you said anytime now. :D
You should read better.I never said I was not posting anymore in threads I"ve already posted in.Please review and apologize.and don't use fancy words like "ad hominem"**************to save you from searching.And this was quoted in the thread as well.My edit was added soon after but is immaterial anyway to your ascertion I wasn't keeping my word

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 9:10 AM, said:

***********one more thing...I won't be commenting in any threads that I have not yet commented in, except for those in the Micro Limit Forum (the LHE hands, only) until at least the new year and I've learned more from playing to really bring value to my comments. I"m afraid a lot of us that win still make a ton of mistakes and are fooled in the short and long term because the really aweful players still let us take part of the prize pool. Furthermore, I need to focus on getting a job and selling a house (hopefully)edit to add: or any thread in which I'm mentioned :club:


#47 WrongWay

WrongWay

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 03:37 PM

View PostIQCrash, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 2:41 PM, said:

Your responses always seem to contain ad hominem arguments - you can't seem to refrain yourself from personal attacks instead of speaking about the issue at hand.

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 2:36 PM, said:

you should clap for the posts WrongWay stated that a play site was rigged and he won't ever put money on a real site because they could be rigged.
IQ.... Actuary has been a complete and total **** to me ever since I said I don't play internet poker for cash. Why not? 1) It could be rigged. I'm not saying it is. I'm simply saying it could be.No amount of being a **** is going to convince me that it is impossible for on-line poker to be rigged. Quite the contrary. Being a **** just shows me you have no logical argument that could be used to convince me. Being a **** is a last resort.2) I pretty much suck at poker. I'm trying to get better, but I still suck. While I'm getting better I have no desire to give money to the players that are much better than me.Okay, I play live games for cash, but I have much more control over who I get into a game with in real life. Online, you join a game, and you're in with whomever else shows up.Being a **** isn't going to make me a better player.So, I see Actuary as being a **** in an attempt to intimidate me into donating my money towards the $1.5 billion a year profits of the on-line gambling companies, which isn't going to happen.Or, possibly he is being a **** trying to get me to shut up and go away, which also isn't going to happen.So, in response to his being a complete and total **** to me ever since I said I don't play on-line poker for money, my response remains the same...SUCK MINE!!!!!!!And, I still throw away A7s from 3rd position of a 9 player table, even if I'm the big stack. Too easy to end up in a coin flip. Too easy to to end up dominated.
No online gambling site will ever get a dime from me.

#48 TeeSludge

TeeSludge

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,732 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 03:58 PM

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 2:36 PM, said:

you know your clapping and focus on a pf raise with A7s makes you look dumb, right?I'm pretty certain players like Tremomey raise A7s thereRaising is fineLimping is fineFolding is Fineit's quite irrelevant relative to post flop playgiven the stack, pos, and hand.I'm only saying your clear rigged plays and strong reactions are bad.Along with your assertion that you were donk struck in the Strat Tourney #6, lends more support to my suspicion that you've read a couple books and think there is a right way and a wrong way and no way in between. You should open your mind a bit. you should clap for the posts WrongWay stated that a play site was rigged and he won't ever put money on a real site because they could be rigged.
I would raise A7s with that stack and that point in the tourney unless my raises had been getting no respect and the table was a bit crazy. Much of my preflop decisions are determined by how the table is playing.. I don't sit there and think I'm UTG+1= A7s autofold. All situational.As for his call of the push. He could believe that the Villain would push 22-66 making his hand a flip, KQ-K10.. or a few other random hands. A lot of the super LAG players out there make all kinds of crazy calls like this that are just pure gambling calls maybe based on the fact that they are running ridiculously well.. who knows. I'm probably folding to the shove myself unless I have a really good read at the time that he isn't that strong.

#49 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 02 November 2006 - 07:20 PM

IQ,had a litle time to review...If you call me, saying you were being ridiculous in your assertion of what to do with A7s being so rigid, as being a personal attack.lol.. you gotta grow a little skin. When I called you dumb for clapping and supporting WrongWay and focusing on Preflop with A7s deeeep stacked, ok..that was semi personal attack.. BUT look what you had alread said and your attitude.But here's the key: My attitude towards you changed when you acted like a jerk towards Alex, saying "donk struck" (check time on posts). Above all, I try to learn and help and facilitate both (I stick up for new guys if they are not jerks). Hence my insistence on no results and converting. I have nothing against you. I do get defensive and should work on that.*************************8Wrong Way:saying online poker could/might be rigged insults everyone here who plays it. I may be an *** to you; but everyone else is laughing at the idea that someone thinks it might be rigged. I try to help players who take this game seriously. I have little tolerance/time to help someone who is as irrational as youYou ALREADy SAID NO ONE WILL EVER CONVINCE YOU THAT ONLINE POKER IS NOT RIGGED 100%. So, quit pretending/posting that me being a **** has anything thing to do with you not being convinced. I'd be happy to review your next 100,000 hands for anomalies.**************No one can question my sincere dedication to helping and doing what I can in Strategy, admittingly, inexperinced as I am and learning along with all of you.,

#50 WrongWay

WrongWay

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 08:28 AM

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 8:20 PM, said:

saying online poker could/might be rigged insults everyone here who plays it.
Not my intention, but not my problem.

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 8:20 PM, said:

everyone else is laughing at the idea that someone thinks it might be rigged.
Not my concern. I'm not a "go along to get along" type person. I'm here to learn poker, to improve my game.

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 8:20 PM, said:

I try to help players who take this game seriously. I have little tolerance/time to help someone who is as irrational as you
I do take the game of poker seriously... live games that is.Online poker? That is just to get time in chair for free.As for me being irrational....1) I'm not irrational.2) Suck mine.

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 8:20 PM, said:

You ALREADy SAID NO ONE WILL EVER CONVINCE YOU THAT ONLINE POKER IS NOT RIGGED 100%. So, quit pretending/posting that me being a **** has anything thing to do with you not being convinced.
I think you have a misplaced modifier here. I'm not convinced it is rigged. I'm convinced that it is possible that it could be rigged.No one will ever convince me 100% that online poker could not be rigged. I don't know if it is rigged or not.... I'm open to the possibility that at least some online poker could be rigged.

View PostActuary, on Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 8:20 PM, said:

I'd be happy to review your next 100,000 hands for anomalies.
The info you would need is not available, such as how long each player had been playing free-money without depositing money. How recently they'd deposited real money. Stuff like that.Maybe just for the heck of it, I should go back to that one site where the free money games seemed rigged. Maybe see if I can gain some data..... Just for the heck of it.
No online gambling site will ever get a dime from me.

#51 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 08:38 AM

WrongWay,I'm glad you responded.It validates my points.and, yeah, my sentence structure was a bit off.What you said is what I meant.The point being there is no reason for anyone to try to discuss it with you.So you saying:No amount of being a **** is going to convince me that it is impossible for on-line poker to be rigged. Quite the contrary. Being a **** just shows me you have no logical argument that could be used to convince me. Being a **** is a last resort.and implying you'd listen to a non-**** with logical arguments trying to convince you, is pointless.Rigging Cash sites would KILL business. I could careless what you think of play sites. It's the impication that real sites MIGHT be rigged that is relevant.

#52 WrongWay

WrongWay

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 09:32 AM

View PostActuary, on Friday, November 3rd, 2006, 9:38 AM, said:

I could careless what you think of play sites. It's the impication that real sites MIGHT be rigged that is relevant.
How many poker sites are there? How many different countries do they opeate out of? What type of oversite do some of these countries provide? How easy would it be to put in a slight bias?Which is irrational given insufficient data?1) To believe it impossible that at least one site is at least slightly rigged.2) To believe it possible.And let's say, for the sake of argument, that online poker ia 100% not rigged.Now convince me that I should donate my money to the many, many much better players out there. Live poker, I control who I get into games with and can judge the relative skill of those players. On-line, I join a game with no control over who gets into the game with me.
No online gambling site will ever get a dime from me.

#53 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 09:49 AM

WrongWay,of course, you should not put money in if you feel you have less of an advantage. I'm only talking about the "rigged" theory.There is no motive to rig vs the downsideYou are obviously much younger than I and have little business senseWe'll agree to disagree and that you are crazy.peace.

#54 WrongWay

WrongWay

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:06 AM

View PostActuary, on Friday, November 3rd, 2006, 10:49 AM, said:

There is no motive to rig vs the downsideYou are obviously much younger than I and have little business sense
1) How old are you? I'll be 40 in a couple months.2) The motive is pretty straight forward. a) A newb shows up and gives you some money. Plays like a doof. Looses it quick. Goes away and never gives you more money.b ) A newb shows up and gives you some money. Plays like a doof. There is enough of a rig in the system that allows him to break even, and even make a little short-term... but eventually he loses. Bad run. Gives you more money. Enough rig that he breaks even or even gains short-term... but eventually loses. Gives you more.... repeat.With the huge number of sites, the huge number of countries they operate out of, and the complete lack of oversite in most of those countries, along with the truely obscene profit margins possible.... I find it irrational to not at least suspect that atleast one site has atleast a slight rig in the system.As a computer programmer for the last 18 years, I know it would be quite easy to do.It is possible. To think it impossible is irrational.
No online gambling site will ever get a dime from me.

#55 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:13 AM

it's physically possible to doit's not being done.there's a differnce.given a mix of players at the table, you think someone writes a program to disperse the cards in such a way as to induce the betting and action necessary to end up with the right people making money and the right people losing it? THat would be a lot to track..as players come and go and sit with a mix of other players and play multiple tables. Yeah, that makes sense.man, you're old and crazy.

#56 Briguy

Briguy

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,199 posts
  • Location:Halifax, NS
  • Interests:Poker!

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:15 AM

What possible reason would a site that's making millions per day in rake have to...oh nevermind. Just remember to wear your tinfoil hat while playing, and it all should be fine.Lolz @ logicaments.
I should change this.

#57 shpaget

shpaget

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,603 posts
  • Location:Canada, eh
  • Interests:beer

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:20 AM

Quote

Rigging Cash sites would KILL business. I could careless what you think of play sites. It's the impication that real sites MIGHT be rigged that is relevant.
It depends on your business plan and business model.You would think that poor service and snaky salesmen would kill business too, but you still see very shady used car lots....they want the quick sale for the quick profit...long-term customer relationships are not in their model. They will get a continuous stream of new customers...and when their reputation tanks, they'll open up a new store under a new name.I guarantee you that there are online sites that are rigged to some degree.The most common form would be simply increasing the likelihood of big hands on multiple players...this increases action, which increases the rake.This I have definitely seen. How about personally getting seven full houses in an hour of seven card stud...and having four of them lose....where during that entire session a full house occurred at least every two hands. And then to see it again in two subsequent sessions on two subsequent days. To the point where regulars on this particular poker site (who don't necessarily understand poker) see this as normal activity, to the point where they CALL on 7th street with Aces Full. My issue with online poker is simply collusion. It is incredibly easy. Be it two computers in the same room, or friends on the phone or IM. Less likely in MTT...more common than you want to believe in STT and cash games.Is it all rigged? No. Is it all suspicious? No...online poker offers an illusion of frequency of suckouts simply because you play 3 to 4 times as many hands in an hour.But to categorically deny any possibility of rigging is naive.
"Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand."

#58 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:25 AM

lol.

#59 trystero

trystero

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 3,780 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:27 AM

http://www.playwinningpoker.comsteve badger rulz

#60 shpaget

shpaget

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,603 posts
  • Location:Canada, eh
  • Interests:beer

Posted 03 November 2006 - 10:43 AM

View PostActuary, on Friday, November 3rd, 2006, 11:25 AM, said:

lol.
typical non-response.are you suggesting what I saw was a one-off coincidence? or does it happen where you play too, so it must be normal?
"Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users