BBC Z's Contest Thread #6 - Find the fundamental poker errors.
I've done well in a few ten cent turbo MTT's on stars and wanna throw some cash around.
A recent post in the http://pokerforum.ca/forum/index.php?topic=8643 'How Long do you bet it' thread consisted of:
I count about somewhere between 5 and 300 fundamental errors in this post.
$1 for every problem you find the quote. Spelling and grammar don't count. If you get really good and find ones I missed I'll double it.
Edit: I realised that I could get sunk for a few grand on this post, so I'm limiting it to $20 of payout.
A recent post in the http://pokerforum.ca/forum/index.php?topic=8643 'How Long do you bet it' thread consisted of:
Raising isn't always done to get players out. That's one reason. Another is that you believe you have the best hand and will charge others to draw -- this is very true in a LL game where others are limping in with all sorts of trash. You punish them because they have the worst starting hand. However, with KQo, you are likely not holding the best starting hand in the SB AND you don't have position. I can almost guarantee there is at least one weak ace out there. I wouldn't raise here.
That being said, yet another reason for raising is that you give yourself odds later in the hand. This is especially true if there are many limpers. I had a hand yesterday at BCC where I raised preflop when there were six players in the hand, and I was in the cutoff. I gave myself position as I bought the button and I also built a nice pot for the hand I had. As it turned out, I knew my opponent had made a flush on the turn and I had two-pair. Good thing I had all those other callers in the hand pre-flop, as it gave me 12 to 1 to call the turn bet. And bam, on the the river I made my full house and got paid for the pleasure. If I don't raise pre-flop, I can't make that call. Thank you limpers.
I would NEVER rule out ANY hand my opponent has, especially in LL. Bets later in the hand, are more telling than bets earlier in the hand. So, when there's conflicting information I usually listen to the information I'm getting later in the hand.
I like betting out on the flop. I would bet the turn as well, as I want to get three bets in on the turn. By check-raising you're limiting yourself, as most players will stop the betting there as they will be suspicous you have the big hand. When you go three bets it just looks like you're an overaggressive whipper snapper who's tyring to bluff his way into winning the pot.
He wouldn't raise KK on you on the flop as he has the nuts and is just as worried as you are about scaring you away. Once he goes four bets, you really need to assess his aggression factor. Given most low limit players will not go this far with a straight you can rule that out. So, he's got a boat. Is he smart enough to figure out there's a bigger boat out there? At four bets, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and start going into check/call mode to get to the showdown.
Here's my thinking. If he's that dumb to keep pounding with a smaller boat, he'll give you more chips later -- maybe not directly, but he'll put them in play. If the odds are stacked against you and you got out-tricked, well it's better not lose the meta-game. You'll beat yourself up more by losing a few extra bets to the bozo, than you will gain when you are ahead.
I count about somewhere between 5 and 300 fundamental errors in this post.
$1 for every problem you find the quote. Spelling and grammar don't count. If you get really good and find ones I missed I'll double it.
Edit: I realised that I could get sunk for a few grand on this post, so I'm limiting it to $20 of payout.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
A few things I didn't 100% agree with, in the post mentioned.
This sort of confused me since the example given was that hero had made 2 pair and knew he was up against a flush and yet still had 12:1 to draw to his 4 outer (which is fine). Maybe it's just me, but that sort of sounds like justifying raising any 2 to give yourself better odds later in the hand in case you make 2 pair and someone else has a nut flush (although I'm pretty sure Magi isn't advocating this). This example was just oddly illustrated IMO.
Check-call? With the 2nd nuts with only one hand combination that beats you, that seems HIGHLY unlikely given the action at ANY point in the hand (besides the river), and vs. a LL probable monkey, on a board that could potentially fit a TON of hands a LL player might overplay? No way. Raise, reraise, etc.
Personally, I'd rather have those chips in my stack than him "maybe" giving me a few more in the future (or losing it all to some other sensible player).
Maybe this is a personal preference, but I'm pretty sure I'd beat myself up for NOT going to the felt with that. More often than not you WILL be the one ahead in these spots.
I don't disagree with the entire post though...
I agree 100% with leading the turn and hoping to 3 bet. But given the checkraise wasn't 3 bet by the other guy, isn't it all but assured the guy doesn't have KK here?
That's all I've got (and some of that was nitpicking). So do I get any moolah or what?
Im just curious what you have accomplished in your fabulous poker career? If you would be so kind to post some of your wins or even final tables. You are the poker authority,right? By the way, when is your book coming out?
Wader
That's results oriented thinking...
Hahahhahah, 5 points for Hork.
I'd be curious to know to what your poker successes are as well. I'll start by posting mine.
1 MTT win. $5 Freezeout on Prima
8 Final Tables ( 3 on Party the rest on Prima)
No final tables on Stars yet.
Cash games I'm a bit better then break even over the last 3 years at .50/1 and 1/2.
Maybe not hall of fame or player of the year worthy but I think I can contribute some knowledge to someone.
BTW: Did you just pee in our pool with that post?
Is it wrong to ask what kind of results BBC has had? I don't think so. There is no doubt in my mind that he knows how to play proper poker, but I am very curious on his results.
As for taking a leak in our pool, well I think BBC unzipped his pants long ago.
As for my tourney wins, I have done well.
BTW: I guess you also could have book "How To Break Even At Low Limit Holdem".
You didn't ask. What you said was not very cool. When I posted my results you then insulted me too. I'm sorry that my poker skills and winnings are not as high as yours. Maybe I'll just stop posting my thoughts about poker and read what you have to say about it so that some day maybe I can be close to being as good as you.
Don't make posts like this if you can't handle my replys.
Also, I never asked about YOUR result, I asked about BBC's and you jumped in. So suck it up and keep posting all you like.
catfight!
i'll get the jello
All they need to do is get one answer right and the jello's on me..
I guess you don't get it. Nobody wants to answer your ignorant post.
too much info
There are different ways to go about showing you disagree with a member other than to highlight a post and attempt to smear it for all to see from another respected member.
Opinions cannot be wrong...otherwise they'd be called facts. In poker, no opinions are wrong...there are only decisions that make or lose money.
I agree with ScoobyD's analysis. The reason I check-raised the turn was I was double checking to see if he slow played KK. Not raising pre-flop and then just calling on the turn after being check-raised I felt very confident that he didn't have me beat.
Edit: Not sure why this was posted in online poker talk and what the intent was but it still seemed like a valid question even if it was posed in BBCZ's attitude.
I don't know either you or Magi but I just don't get it. You disrespect and then hide behind your right to free speech and cry political correctness when people tell you to zip it. The only thing that comes to my mind when you post now is SIGH and YAWN.
Are certain peoples posts on a pedistal such that we can't question the logic they contain? Am I not allowed to make things more interesting by offering a little contest to some of our members in an attempt to get them to think about the words written on the page? Strictly replying to threads gets BORING after a while. I offered an opportunity for the forum to start a discussion based on the content of another members PUBLIC post.
If certain members are off-limits for critiquing, then please add them to the 'rules of the forum' post and I'll be happy to leave your golden childen alone.
I'm not even exactly sure what rule I broke.
Yet again, the feathers get ruffled over nothing. Everyone should pat themselves on the back fo being so uptight.
You have obviously had words with Lou before, and have made it quite clear that you have little to no respect at all for anything he has written. I certainly think there has been advice given on the forum that is equally dubious or incorrect, and you certainly didn't go out of your way to center those posters out.
Your intent to embarass another forum member in this is fairly obvious, no matter how you want to spin it. If you don't respect someone's opinion that's fine, and I'll be the first to defend anyone's right to express themselves, but you've gone too far here in my opinion.
cheers
Dino pretty much summed it up exactly by saying:
"Your intent to embarass another forum member in this is fairly obvious, no matter how you want to spin it. If you don't respect someone's opinion that's fine, and I'll be the first to defend anyone's right to express themselves, but you've gone too far here in my opinion. "
There are other ways of questioning someones logic/advice than how this was handled..starting a "hey everyone, look at how dumb this is" type thread isn't the way to do it.
Such as:
Sloth: I really do support the death penalty in Canada. I wish they'd have it.
now, you could say:
BBC Z: "really, Sloth? Do you not believe that murder doesn't justify murder?" and engage in an open conversation (and by open, I mean statements that encourage discussion rather than closed ended declarations)
or...you could start a thread saying: "Hey everyone, look at what Sloth said, he is a jackass. Everyone point and laugh"
I'm rambling..been awake for a very long time, I tend to over justify things (or try to) but this is where the thought process behind those who reported and ultimately my decision to issue the warning.
BBC Z...you're a very active member here @ CPF and I don't want to discount that. Heck, you're the "shock jock" of the pokerforum world. You just have a tendancy to come off as more abraisive then you really have to be,.
respectfully,
Sloth
How about we get people THINKING about why I think the statements are wrong as opposed to reading my response and saying "Oh yeah, thats right!". Or hell, if they think theres nothing wrong, voice that too, just quit trying to find reasons to burn me at stake.
I never said that. I just said that I found errors in the post and started a contest to see if we could find them all. I never mentioned OP's name and I included the link to the original thread for the required background information you'd need to accurately disassemble the quote.
Did I crack a joke about losing a few grand? Yes, but thats a J-O-K-E.. Remember those things? They're funny so you make a 'Ha Ha Ha' sound from your throats?
I don't know about owls.... But HOOTERS work for me