EVallone

You made the right call, since you were getting almost 2 to 1 odds, and had pegged yourself as a slight favorite. The call is made easier when you consider that you'll still have chips left over if you lose, and since you could read him so easily, it makes sense to think you could have come back from the early chip deficit.That's assuming you know he does not have top pair.

I think you have to call, given the pot odds. Then, if you make the flush or straight, you can try to get more money out of UTG. If not, you can check it down or fold, depending on your read. I see no reason to go all-in here, as getting the pot heads up will probably not help you win it, especially considering you put UTG on an ace with a better kicker.

I listened, but the arguments are not convincing. Excuse me for refusing to accept bad reasons for things in sports, politics, and life in general. If we all asked the basic questions, this world would be a better place.

You're right, an icing in the 2nd period is the same as a goal that should not have counted. The refs get MOST of the calls right, not 99.9 percent, but MOST. And yes, mistakes happen, but when they are obvious, and important, its not like missing a hooking call in the corner during the 1st period. Imagine if the NBA started counting missed shots. You are missing my point about the officiating. Missing penalties, offsides, etc., are normal human errors. But failing to review a goal where there was a clear issue immediatley after it was scored is not a "human" mistake. It is a glaring er

Mistakes happen, but when they are glaring, and you want people to take you seriously, they have consequences. And the consequence of this mistake is that the NHL looks like a joke. As far as the time period in the rule being reasonable, I think this situation shows that an extension can make the rule better. Allowing a reversal to the end of the current period, or even an additional whistle, will prevent this situation from happening, and the NHL won't have to worry about looking like a joke again.

There is no good reason for the rule. Again, I refer you to my point, that any such rule is a cop out that lessens the integrity of the league.

Nice try, but the league admitted that the goal should not have counted. So, everyone that matters agrees that the goal should not have counted. It makes no difference to the ultimate point; the point being that there was no good reason for the NHL to fail to correct the mistake, and take the goal off the board, while the game was going on.

Unfortunatley, attendance is not an accurate barometer of an NHL (or any other sports league, for that matter) team's financial health. You need a new building, with the luxury suites, personal seat liscenses, and other revenue streams to be competitive. A team also needs a television and radio contract that provides it with a good percentage of its revenues, and a good source of marketing. The problem for Pittsburgh has been the building for as long as I can remember. When every other team has a shiny new playhouse, the Pens are in an outdated building. Unltess that changes, the Pens are

The joke is a goal counting that everyone agrees should not have counted. As far as the playoff scenario goes, all overtime goals should be reveiwed right away, by the league office in Toronto as well as the off-ice officials in the building. Supposedly, the league officials in Toronto knew immediatley that the goal should not have counted, and tried to call Calgary, but could not get through. The NHL is becoming a joke league again, like the NFL with their terrible officiating. It's time we fans stop buying these stupid reasons, think about it rationally, and demand some change.

Well, that's a cop-out. I just want to expose it for what it is. They could have changed the score during the intermission, and neither team would have been worse the wear. And, the game would not have been tainted.

My point is less about the on-ice officials than it is about the "inability" to correct the mistake afterwards. What difference does the puck being dropped make? If they find the mistake while the game is going on, they have time to take the goal off the board. The mistake is correctable, to a certain degree, and the failure to do that is reprehensible.

During Saturday night's Buffalo-Calgary game, Calgary scored a "goal" that was clearly kicked into the net. However, the on-ice officials did not review it, and dropped the puck. Play continued, and the NHL admitted the mistake during the next intermission. However, they claimed they could not do anything about it, because play had continued.Now, the question is obviously, WHY? The game was still in progress, and the illegal goal was still on the board. The problem is fixable, at least somewhat, if they would take the goal off the board, and let the teams finish the game with the "correct

I agree. You have to push. You are not likely to see a better hand before the blinds take your stack.

Pushing all-in here is probably right, as he is unlikely to have a premium pair. Of course, if he calls an all-in, you are probably way behind. However, the SB's raise is very likely to be a steal attempt.

I was just wondering what you guys thought about the issue of whether the Olympics should have professional players. I was having this discussion with some friends last night, and I was of the opinion that the NHL in particular need the marketing boost that the Olympics provide, especially in the United States.Just wondering what everyone else thought!