AET Poker Games

81

polaris_x wrote:

rrivers wrote:

I was the one who got pushed out with his raise and I questioned it during the game, but he didn't respond to me. I don't think he's being an ass, I just think he doesn't understand poker. I would have had a full house and won the hand, by the way. But it's not about me not winning the hand, when you have a chance to knock someone out the more the better. Especially with the stack he had, 260 was not going to make a difference. The only way you raise there is if you had the nuts. Any chance to knock a player out you take no matter what.

love this thread ... big fan ... :corn:

i'm not sure why this move is bad tho ... he got you off the pot ... from what i can read 260 was not a huge stack so if he just called ... it opened it up to everyone else just calling ... why wouldn't he want to go heads up with the short stack ... seemed like the short stack was in for 260 regardless - what does she care if he raises ... if anything - it improves her chances because she won't be going up against multiple hands although there is the possibility she could have won more if more people were in but it appears she was all in regardless so not likely to have a strong hand ...

it's not about caring what the short stack is doing...she is all in for cheap...

the key is to knock her out and unless you have a big hand, you just go ahead and check it out to make sure you get the player out.

polaris_x

81 wrote:

it's not about caring what the short stack is doing...she is all in for cheap...

the key is to knock her out and unless you have a big hand, you just go ahead and check it out to make sure you get the player out.

i must be missing something ... when i play with my buddies and the short stack goes all in ... someone usually raises ... the raise is simply to eliminate other players from entering the pot ... not sure why that is bad ...

rrivers

mca47 wrote:

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

Bestdeal basically called 95% of my bets over the weekend....
Baldeagle traditionally calls 95% of my bets...

What's messed up about that...calling that often is usually a one way ticket to the end of a tourney.
They actually HIT the flop or the turn almost every f'n time!!

I'd have top pair on the board, raise it (didn't really matter how much), and they'd hit a flush or a straight on the next two cards...

Who in their right f'n mind is going to hold on to two weak suited cards with the hope that the turn AND the river hit after raises of 300-400 each time?

I don't get it.

I guess when you are hitting EVERYTHING, you can make those plays. :?

You're right.

You should thank me for all those times I raised pre-flop when you were in the big blind to save you from their donkey bullshit!

81

polaris_x wrote:

81 wrote:

it's not about caring what the short stack is doing...she is all in for cheap...

the key is to knock her out and unless you have a big hand, you just go ahead and check it out to make sure you get the player out.

i must be missing something ... when i play with my buddies and the short stack goes all in ... someone usually raises ... the raise is simply to eliminate other players from entering the pot ... not sure why that is bad ...

the goal is to knock out the short stack... if it is one on one, you only have one hand that can knock the shortie out. if you let everyone else call cheap, you have 2,3,4 or more hands that can knock out the short stack. in tourney play, you wanna get rid of players and eliminate any chance of a chip and a chair comeback.

rrivers

DS1119 wrote:

81 wrote:

rrivers wrote:

I was the one who got pushed out with his raise and I questioned it during the game, but he didn't respond to me. I don't think he's being an ass, I just think he doesn't understand poker. I would have had a full house and won the hand, by the way. But it's not about me not winning the hand, when you have a chance to knock someone out the more the better. Especially with the stack he had, 260 was not going to make a difference. The only way you raise there is if you had the nuts. Any chance to knock a player out you take no matter what.

so many people don't understand this concept.....this is poker 101 type stuff.

The play works a lot more than you would imagine. I mean, he did win the hand right and move up a spot right?

He won the hand, but he didn't move up a spot. He had 12,000 chips and had 12,260 after that hand.

rrivers

81 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

81 wrote:

it's not about caring what the short stack is doing...she is all in for cheap...

the key is to knock her out and unless you have a big hand, you just go ahead and check it out to make sure you get the player out.

i must be missing something ... when i play with my buddies and the short stack goes all in ... someone usually raises ... the raise is simply to eliminate other players from entering the pot ... not sure why that is bad ...

the goal is to knock out the short stack... if it is one on one, you only have one hand that can knock the shortie out. if you let everyone else call cheap, you have 2,3,4 or more hands that can knock out the short stack. in tourney play, you wanna get rid of players and eliminate any chance of a chip and a chair comeback.

81 took the words out of my mouth.

polaris_x

81 wrote:

the goal is to knock out the short stack... if it is one on one, you only have one hand that can knock the shortie out. if you let everyone else call cheap, you have 2,3,4 or more hands that can knock out the short stack. in tourney play, you wanna get rid of players and eliminate any chance of a chip and a chair comeback.

so ... basically - he should have let everyone call so that there would be more chances to knock the short stack out? ... all at the risk of losing his hand and having one person get a larger pot?

81

polaris_x wrote:

81 wrote:

the goal is to knock out the short stack... if it is one on one, you only have one hand that can knock the shortie out. if you let everyone else call cheap, you have 2,3,4 or more hands that can knock out the short stack. in tourney play, you wanna get rid of players and eliminate any chance of a chip and a chair comeback.

so ... basically - he should have let everyone call so that there would be more chances to knock the short stack out? ... all at the risk of losing his hand and having one person get a larger pot?

that's a fair question....if it was pre flop...then i can deal with it a little more....if it is post flop, by all means, check it out.

rrivers

so ... basically - he should have let everyone call so that there would be more chances to knock the short stack out? ... all at the risk of losing his hand and having one person get a larger pot?

Yes, definitely in this situation.

Baldeagles stack 12,000
My stack ~4000
Shorty 260

Shorty goes all in, we both call. Obviously Shorty won't be betting anymore. Either one of us winning the hand is not going to affect our stacks, the more important thing is getting Shorty out.

You may have a point that sometimes you might want to bet because the person who will be left with you will get a huge pot which could swing the game, but the majority of the time I think you do everything you can to knock a player out and having more people in the hand increases your odds of doing that.

polaris_x

rrivers wrote:

so ... basically - he should have let everyone call so that there would be more chances to knock the short stack out? ... all at the risk of losing his hand and having one person get a larger pot?

Yes, definitely in this situation.

Baldeagles stack 12,000
My stack ~4000
Shorty 260

Shorty goes all in, we both call. Obviously Shorty won't be betting anymore. Either one of us winning the hand is not going to affect our stacks, the more important thing is getting Shorty out.

You may have a point that sometimes you might want to bet because the person who will be left with you will get a huge pot which could swing the game, but the majority of the time I think you do everything you can to knock a player out and having more people in the hand increases your odds of doing that.

when i play with my buddies ... the short stack is almost irrelevant here ... if i don't want you in the hand or if i want to shorten your stack ... i will raise ... maybe you will call or come over the top ... i don't know ... but at this stage of the game - i'd be looking at knocking you out as well ... if you had a good hand - you could have gone over the top and raised all in as well ...

i'm just not sure how this is etiquette ... it's just poker based on what everyone is telling me ...

DS1119

rrivers wrote:

He won the hand, but he didn't move up a spot. He had 12,000 chips and had 12,260 after that hand.

Well then he did move up a spot. :? No spot is guaranteed until the tourney is over.

DS1119

polaris_x wrote:

when i play with my buddies ... the short stack is almost irrelevant here ... if i don't want you in the hand or if i want to shorten your stack ... i will raise ... maybe you will call or come over the top ... i don't know ... but at this stage of the game - i'd be looking at knocking you out as well ... if you had a good hand - you could have gone over the top and raised all in as well ...

i'm just not sure how this is etiquette ... it's just poker based on what everyone is telling me ...

I know exactly what you are saying and this is my style as well. I am not of the philosophy of sitting back and checking it down in the hopes the table knocks a player out. I would rather put my hand, even if its marginal, against that severely short stack. Why do I want four or five players in the pot gambling along with me for a bigger pot?

rrivers

DS1119 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

when i play with my buddies ... the short stack is almost irrelevant here ... if i don't want you in the hand or if i want to shorten your stack ... i will raise ... maybe you will call or come over the top ... i don't know ... but at this stage of the game - i'd be looking at knocking you out as well ... if you had a good hand - you could have gone over the top and raised all in as well ...

i'm just not sure how this is etiquette ... it's just poker based on what everyone is telling me ...

I know exactly what you are saying and this is my style as well. I am not of the philosophy of sitting back and checking it down in the hopes the table knocks a player out. I would rather put my hand, even if its marginal, against that severely short stack. Why do I want four or five players in the pot gambling along with me for a bigger pot?

Why do you want to put a marginal hand against a short stack for next to nothing when you can just check it and double your odds of knocking a player out? The amount bet in the example yesterday was irrelevant it was so small. Why run the risk of Shorty doubling up and then maybe doubling up the next hand all of a sudden you're playing against two people with sizable stacks?

I still stand by any time you can knock someone out, you do it.

polaris_x

but ultimately, this discussion is on etiquette ... a philosophical difference in play is fine ... i'm just not seeing the bad etiquette part of this ... but having said that - if that is part of the etiquette of your playing group - i completely understand ...

rrivers

polaris_x wrote:

but ultimately, this discussion is on etiquette ... a philosophical difference in play is fine ... i'm just not seeing the bad etiquette part of this ... but having said that - if that is part of the etiquette of your playing group - i completely understand ...

A lot of games I've played in (both online and in real life), it's kind of an unwritten rule. Etiquette is a strong word for me, I see it more like you say as a difference in play.

mca47

rrivers wrote:

mca47 wrote:

You're right.

You should thank me for all those times I raised pre-flop when you were in the big blind to save you from their donkey bullshit!

81

polaris_x wrote:

but ultimately, this discussion is on etiquette ... a philosophical difference in play is fine ... i'm just not seeing the bad etiquette part of this ... but having said that - if that is part of the etiquette of your playing group - i completely understand ...

etiquette is folding out of turn...

DS1119

rrivers wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

when i play with my buddies ... the short stack is almost irrelevant here ... if i don't want you in the hand or if i want to shorten your stack ... i will raise ... maybe you will call or come over the top ... i don't know ... but at this stage of the game - i'd be looking at knocking you out as well ... if you had a good hand - you could have gone over the top and raised all in as well ...

i'm just not sure how this is etiquette ... it's just poker based on what everyone is telling me ...

I know exactly what you are saying and this is my style as well. I am not of the philosophy of sitting back and checking it down in the hopes the table knocks a player out. I would rather put my hand, even if its marginal, against that severely short stack. Why do I want four or five players in the pot gambling along with me for a bigger pot?

Why do you want to put a marginal hand against a short stack for next to nothing when you can just check it and double your odds of knocking a player out? The amount bet in the example yesterday was irrelevant it was so small. Why run the risk of Shorty doubling up and then maybe doubling up the next hand all of a sudden you're playing against two people with sizable stacks?

I still stand by any time you can knock someone out, you do it.

I'm glad all of this is coming out. You going to MT? :corn:

polaris_x

81 wrote:

etiquette is folding out of turn...

splashing the pot? ...

81

polaris_x wrote:

81 wrote:

etiquette is folding out of turn...

splashing the pot? ...

that too.