I think I found the hand of the week. - Page 2

Soooo, baal is still talking about RaSZi although it was pointed out that it wasn't RaSZi - it is RaSZi? Because it looks awful lot like PoorUser's account to me.

On May 25 2006 01:53 Baal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 24 2006 23:38 PoorUser wrote:   On May 24 2006 17:03 Baal wrote: great call it was obvious Raszi had air, but he didnt attempt to bluff him that was the great part, definitely the play of the week. yeah your right it was really obvious. will you teach me how to play poker like you? was a nice call by him obv what i meant is that calling with A high and winning when its not that big pot and raszis play kinda looks like a bluff or raising him isnt a play worth of "the play of the week", but calling with T high is now wash the sand of your vagina

pooruser = pooruser
pooruser =/= raszi
you really need to stop saying this is 'obvious' or that is 'obvious' because you always do when you seriously have no idea. hall had to timebank and if it wasnt obvious to him it sure as hell isnt obvious to you

lol baal has gotten quite full of himself lately

pooruser = sandy vagina

he used a lot of his timebank to fucking call with T high i bet he wouldnt use that much of his timebank with A high.

whats with you trying to hump my leg every post, just let it go.

A high makes top boat sir

Uhhh whats so amazing about this hall hand? Halls read was wrong isant that obvious? Hall called because he put pooruser on a busted straight draw which he beats. But instead pooruser had smooth called the flop with a hand that he was going to make a play with later on. If pooruser had k4 he could have made the same play and hall would have called and been completely wrong. Hall was just lucky that pooruser happened to be bluffing with less than 10 high because he could easily make the identical play with k, q or j high.

Hall did not have some amazing read he only made the call because of pot odds. He was getting almost 3-1 so he figured with poorusers range he would be up against a busted straight draw 1/3 times and so he called. And he may be correct but since this hand only happened one time and he was wrong who knows.

Its amazing how you all go apeshit for this hand when its clear that hall had a misread and was just lucky enough to win.

This hand would be about 10x better if hall had called and pooruser and flipped over 78. Because at least then we would know Hall's read on pooruser's range would have been right.

Now if Hall is putting pooruser on a complete bluff this call is better but still not as amazing as everyone makes it out to be. Once again Hall would be calling because of pot odds and he felt against a bluff his 10 high would be good at least 33% of the time. He does not have some unreal read where he knows pooruser had less than 10 high. And if pooruser had bet pot then hall wouldnt be able to call.

The Stu Ungar hand Ungar had to call an overbet of the pot so he had to be right more than 50% of the time. Ungar also had such a good read he put his opponent on the only 2 hands he could beat and he was right. Hall has just put pooruser on a range that he will beat at least 1/3 of the time and if he thought pooruser was running a complete bluff then he was right and made a nice call. However the Ungar hand is about a million times better and not even comparable to this one.

But we dont know if Hall even put pooruser on a complete bluff or if he only put him on a busted straight. So this might be a good call where Hall put his opponent on the correct range or it may just be that Hall's read was wrong and he was fortunate enough to still be ahead and win.

yeah that is what i thought when i saw the hand.. it was a good call but it wasn't like all the money was in the middle or anything.

And honestly I really doubt Hall is making this call because he puts pooruser on a complete bluff instead of a busted straight. Even if hes right 100% of the time and it was a complete bluff the play is only going to be slightly profitable and then if hes wrong even a small % of the time hes going to lose money.

When hall makes this call I think he expects to see pooruser to flip over a busted straight if hes going to win the vast majority of the time. And pooruser didnt have a busted straight and may not even play a straight draw like this.

On May 25 2006 03:21 Baal wrote: pooruser = sandy vagina he used a lot of his timebank to fucking call with T high i bet he wouldnt use that much of his timebank with A high. whats with you trying to hump my leg every post, just let it go.

im not trying to be cocky but i think itd be no stretch to say that 5/10 and 10/20 are played tiers and tiers above 25nl and when you keep saying things are obvious about my play you can understand why i think you are a moron sometimes

an AA55x board dude, and ofcourse most 2k 1k nl players are better than me and Hallinggol is 100 times beter than me and so are you still...

an A555x board.... checked turn behind when an Ace hits, so id probably call with K high, think about Q high and fold anything else, if you had a PP or 6 well the odds werent that bad.

Baal you are getting a little annoying.. It's just very bad manner to say something like that about people playing 10 limits above your own. Let mig do the commenting.

k

ROFL. Nazgul has you on a pretty tight leash there, eh Baal?

Thought it was a sick play untill i read migs great analysis.

should have floted with J high. hand would have been exponentially better

Mig is just a jealous fish.

Hasn't he ever heard of Hallinggol's Soul-Exposing PSYCHIC Powers™?