- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:02 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Like trying to explain math to a goldfish.
Thats a nice line
But you still have not explained how you have not made infinite amounts of money with a foolproof plan to bilk morons out of their money playing poker
Its just math
You should never lose
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:04 am to Caraway Rye
Nice little Saturday morning semantics battle. 
Games of chance are inherently games of math. Math is how you calculate chance.
The difference between playing the lottery and playing poker isn't chance vs math. It's control and psychology. The concept of a coin flip makes the chance aspect of poker pretty explicit.
Games of chance are inherently games of math. Math is how you calculate chance.
The difference between playing the lottery and playing poker isn't chance vs math. It's control and psychology. The concept of a coin flip makes the chance aspect of poker pretty explicit.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:05 am to PeteRose
I get that she made what usually would be a dumb and losing play yet luckily got away with it. What I don't get is if they think she cheated, how? Do they think she saw his cards?
It seems to me she just got lucky and if it were me I wouldn't have given him the money back.
It seems to me she just got lucky and if it were me I wouldn't have given him the money back.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:08 am to FredBear
quote:
What I don't get is if they think she cheated, how? Do they think she saw his cards?
Read his notes I posted. The explanation is what made him question it.
My take is there is a chance she just got nervous and wasn't cheating. We will likely never know for sure.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:13 am to EarlyCuyler3
The only thing I can come up with is that she mistakenly thought she only needed one more club for the flush. That’s a baffling hand of poker unless she’s a bad beginner player with really deep pockets.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:15 am to lance814
quote:
Yes, there’s variance involved in the short term, but to deduce poker to a “game of chance” is a bad take. The best poker players in the world (for the most part) practice bankroll management that doesn’t allow them to lose their whole bankroll when they’re on a downswing. There are also thousands of people that make enough money to not have to work outside of poker. Amazing that it’s only a game of chance.
You’re talking about things that occur over multiple hands, not a single hand. Any single hand cn bsoluteky be deduced down to nothing but chance because of situations exactly like this one.
If we play one hand where Im dealt pocket aces and you’re dealt 2 7, there is absolutely a chance you win that hand.
If we play an entire game where we are both dealt those same cards every hand, there is absolutely no chance you win that game.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:16 am to EarlyCuyler3
From what was said, she’s an amateur and had been playing tight. He’d probably been pushing her around and she got locked in that he didn’t have anything. The more he pushed the more she thought he was bluffing.
All of her comments afterward sound like somebody that was embarrassed from making a dumb move on TV.
Any player that complains because the less experienced amateur doesn’t do exactly what they’re supposed to do in a situation and ends up winning sounds like a bitch. All you can do is laugh and be happy that you know you’ll probably be taking her money if she keeps doing stuff like that.
All of her comments afterward sound like somebody that was embarrassed from making a dumb move on TV.
Any player that complains because the less experienced amateur doesn’t do exactly what they’re supposed to do in a situation and ends up winning sounds like a bitch. All you can do is laugh and be happy that you know you’ll probably be taking her money if she keeps doing stuff like that.
This post was edited on 10/1/22 at 9:18 am
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:16 am to EarlyCuyler3
I'm not saying she cheated. I don't know. But if anyone wants to see cheating, take a trip down the Mike Postle rabbit hole. He definitely knew everyone's hole cards
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:18 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Not exactly shocking to see you not getting it.
I get it. I just don’t think it’s that crazy.
In the long run I think it really helps her. How the hell can you get a read on her after that?
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:19 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
Any single hand cn bsoluteky be deduced down to nothing but chance
Wrong. There is still skill and exploitation even in single hands. That's why you continuation bet.
This post was edited on 10/1/22 at 9:21 am
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:23 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
He's given the rationale of why it's a terrible call. I've yet to see anyone explain why it's a good call except that she won the hand.
I’ve yet to see where I said it was a good call.
Or why her call must mean she was cheating except that she didn’t offer an acceptable explanation for her call. As if that’s a requirement or rule of some kind.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:25 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Wrong. There is still skill and exploitation even in single hands. That's why you continuation bet.
I noticed you forgot to reply to the rest of my post that addresses this. I wonder why that is.
I look forward to your next reply explaining how I just don’t understand.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:26 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
I get it. I just don’t think it’s that crazy.
If you don't see how crazy it is, you 100% don't get it. Look at the table reaction and Bart's reaction as proof.
What the recs here aren't getting is that is makes zero sense given his line in the hand. When someone bets, gets raised and then shoved over the top, that is an extremely narrow and strong range. For her to then call off her stack on a pure high card hand is beyond crazy.
The line he took has almost zero bluffs in it. This is probably the only hand he ever does it with. One hand. Out of many combos.
This is not a "she just thought he was bluffing" situation. It's the context that is key.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:28 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
I noticed you forgot to reply to the rest of my post that addresses this. I wonder why that is.
Because it was nonsense just like the first part. I'll often get out in the water in here for fun, but this is one area where I'm pretty confident I know a lot more than most of the OT.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:29 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
When someone bets, gets raised and then shoved over the top, that is an extremely narrow and strong range. For her to then call off her stack on a pure high card hand is beyond crazy.
And yet, she still won with the best hand even after 2 river cards.
quote:
This is not a "she just thought he was bluffing" situation.
Comments like this are why the dungeons and dragons comparison is so perfect.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:31 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Look at the table reaction and Bart's reaction as proof.
People shocked at wild poker hand they didnt partake in
Every table ever at 11 o clock
This post was edited on 10/1/22 at 9:32 am
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:31 am to PeteRose
He was a bitch and I think bullied her into refunding the hand.
At the point she called she wasn’t even favored to win so she would have to know what cards were gonna be dealt. The cheating allegation doesn’t even make sense. If she knew his hole cards she would have folded not called.
I think she either forgot or misread her hole cards - which happens - and then was embarrassed to cop to making a mistake in front of everyone.
At the point she called she wasn’t even favored to win so she would have to know what cards were gonna be dealt. The cheating allegation doesn’t even make sense. If she knew his hole cards she would have folded not called.
I think she either forgot or misread her hole cards - which happens - and then was embarrassed to cop to making a mistake in front of everyone.
This post was edited on 10/1/22 at 9:36 am
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:33 am to Caraway Rye
quote:
People shocked at poker hand they didnt partake in
Every table ever at 11 o clock
Tell me you've never played without telling me. 95% of poker is monotonous and about as exciting as watching paint dry.
Posted on 10/1/22 at 9:33 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
This is not a "she just thought he was bluffing" situation. It's the context that is key.
He could have been bluffing with hundreds of hands that still beat her.
Page 10 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News