sholden
Monday, July 24th, 2006, 8:33 AM
QUOTE (pokerbully @ Monday, July 24th, 2006, 6:23 AM)

A smart pokerplayer checks the table break list before he emarks on this strategy.
A gambler just assumes he'll have a chance to get his chips back.
A smart player checks his cards before moving all in.
A gambler will flip coins for $1,000, somehow believing he has an edge.
It sounds like Daniel has been frustrated by the WSOP and he was just blowing off some steam. I'm sure he can afford it. He probably made some no name internet poker player very happy when he left the initial table with 10 of Daniel's buy ins.
It's not flipping coins, it's trying to buy more chips because you have a bigger budget than your opponents and hence can afford to.
If you are always getting all the money as a 3:2 dog, then if you do that 5 times you have about a 50% chance of winning two of them in a row. So it 8 times and you have about a 70% chance of winnign two in a row. So you have a good change of getting 4x (or 8x if you can rebuy straight away). If you are a better player than the rest of the table then you should be able to win those chips back too - though yes checking the break list would be wise

There's no point playing a rebuy if you are going to let some other table have 10x as many chips on it as your table.
You don't want to check your cards, because you want people to know you are moving in with random cards, so they will call with those hands that you are only a 3:2 dog to. And of course occassionaly you are in a coin flip, or even a favourite...
This is a reasonable strategy for a normal player - assuming you are bankrolled sufficiently for the buyins. DN got unlucky in that he lost more pots than probability says you should, but that happens - heck I've heard rumours that sometimes AA loses in hold'em...