blankoblanco
plays poker on hard mode
Silver Level
you are just completely pulling stuff out of your ass. all we know is that they're super tight and have already flatcalled a raise with AK multiway. they weren't "slowplaying" because you can't slowplay A-high, that's just the style they play. and there are very very very few players at 100NL who would ever slowplay AA here because you have 3 players already in the pot. i'd like to value your input, but everything you say in every single thread is completely off the mark, and your tone is always nasty. frankly you don't play 100NL FR online or even close, so you don't know what the ranges are like at all. it's not a freeroll or $2 sng. obviously a fold is not mandatory or even close to that, i simply gave my opinion and reasoning. however your guesses blatantly contradict what we already know about the player and make very very little sense
a) switch is not a she
b) there's no "fold and show" option so if switch folded nobody would have any way of knowing if he was right (even if the guy says he had AA, people lie)
c) i'm basically the only person in the thread who has said i would fold, so what the bloody hell are you talking about?
what is it like to be a rambling idiot who is wrong about everything?
blankoblanco
plays poker on hard mode
Silver Level
btw i don't know what i meant to say on b cause in theory they could have showed their hand even though we can't show ours, just very unlikely they would. but that's pretty much the most irrelevant point anyway, and i don't know what you could see in the thread that would make you think it's a "circle-jerk" for folding KK since almost nobody wants to fold and switch hasn't even said if he folded
Last edited:
Dorkus Malorkus
HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
without the knowledge of the AK/JJ hands i'd be saying 136 hands isn't that much and i wouldn't read too much into the 9/0 (obviously you can draw conclusions from it, but i don't think you can necessarily read enough from it to seriosuly think about folding KK pf), but given the specific reads i like folding.
i didn't think it was possible to fit so much fail into 5 short sentences. we have seen villain limp-call with JJ, we have seen him call from the blinds with AK, and he hasn't raised pf in 136 hands, and you really think he's going this crazy with AK? it's also funny that you think he "likely had AA at some point" when (a) in any given 136 hand sample you're more likely to not get dealt AA than you are to get dealt it (seeing as the odds of being dealt AA are ~220-1 iirc), and (b) AK gets dealt like 3 times more often than AA and we've actually SEEN villain 'slowplay' AK before and he's most likely done it on other occasions and not shown down. i like how you throw what hero has actually observed at the table completely out of the window in analysing villain's play and just invent random potential scenarios, it's very amusing.
hay guyz i think based on absolutely nothing that villain is the sort of person who will go allin preflop every 137th hand so you should call because based on my 'read' (which is based on bugger all actual observed evidence) he could have any two cards here.
Last edited:
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
One more for the circle - with that specific read, I'm happy with a fold too.
DM took the words right out of my mouth re: "out of those 136 hands, he likely had AA at some point". I wish I got them that often
DM took the words right out of my mouth re: "out of those 136 hands, he likely had AA at some point". I wish I got them that often
eNTy
Legend
Silver Level
Sounds spot on to me..
About the same chance u get quad 7's runner runner with 72os in a bar imo.
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Lol, this is such self ownage its hilarious.
vanquish
Legend
Silver Level
GDRileyx
Rock Star
Platinum Level
Yep, that's what probability is. A mathematical way to predict what will most likely happen in reality. It's not the mathematics of certainty. 100% probability does not equal certainty.
I'll tell you what, we'll write a program that deals 220 random two card hands. Every time it doesn't deal at least one pair of aces, I'll pay you a dollar. Every time it does have at least one pair of aces, you pay me a dollar. Eventually, I'm going to wind up with all your money. And that would hold true even if we dealt 136 hands per bet, or 111 hands per bet.
When I originally posted, I thought switch was going to tell us what the guy actually had. But in truth, this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot right? We don't know what the guy actually had, and we never will, correct?
GDRileyx
Rock Star
Platinum Level
So he flatted AK previously. That doesn't mean he is going to do it every time, or even again. switch didn't say what position this guy was in previously when he flatted AK. So now he is in a different absolute position, or different relative position, and does something different. You don't have enough information, or a big enough sample size, to conclude that this guy is likely to flat AK.
Dwilius
CardsChat Regular
Silver Level
I will take your wager for the 111 hands not 220. We can sit at a playmoney table HU and checkdown every hand...actually I won't take the bet b/c I could win more $/hr playing 2nl but if we could speed up the results I would.
If Switch folded then no we won't see results. The hand analysis section is for considering what the best decision would be based on the information we have.
If Switch folded then no we won't see results. The hand analysis section is for considering what the best decision would be based on the information we have.
GDRileyx
Rock Star
Platinum Level
So, I'd be spending how much time to have 50.5% chance to make a dollar? I don't think so.
What I'm saying is, we run thousands of computer simulations of 220-hand sets, or 136-hand sets, or 111-hand sets. You wouldn't take that bet for $1 per set, and neither would dorkus.