Friday, August 31, 2012

Picking on Mr. Keys

JTKeys made a comment on my last poker analysis post.

""I'm just gonna leave this one thought here. One of you makes their living playing poker. Which one was that again? "

SO JTKeys.. Your rebuttal to the hand is "Oh he makes a living playing poker". Seriously? This this how much thought people put into poker? The best you can come up with is not "Well that was a good move on his part because...".. it's that he makes a shitty living playing 1/2 poker in Vegas?

I would fucking make a living playing poker if there was any fucking money in it. Sure we see the top percent of people making some cash. We see some people online who spew huge amounts of money around.. but are they really making money? If we are talking 1/2 or even 2/5 I doubt most people gross even 100k a year.

The real problem here though is nobody ever wants to discuss shit. I make some points I consider valid. Obviously I use my own style of swearing and name calling to provoke people.. but if you disagree with my analysis then WHY. Not "Oh because he plays for a living he must be a boss". How do you even know he "Plays for a living".. maybe he made a fortune selling his sperm to rich women so they could have super arrogant babies and now he just plays poker for fun and lives off his dirty whore money.

I miss the days when I would call Dr. Pauly or Iggy a fucktard for some stupid play they made and they would come back and explain some new concept or we would get into lively debates about playing counter intuitive hands like 35o (or 24o) and shit like that.

Now nobody thinks about poker at all. It's all just "Hey Howard Lederer in his book poker for dickwads told me that I should always jam AA pre-flop so I do it". Disgusting.

P.S. If you are insulted JT then GOOD! I am Waffles! That is what I do! I do not mean any offense though.. hopefully none is taken.







24 Comments:

Blogger KenP said...

The thing that makes poker an interesting challenge is that nothing is always right.

You cannot ignore math. You cannot be a slave to it. (Unless you are Sklansky)

Newton said it best, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."

7:48 AM

 
Blogger KenP said...

P.S. NLH has a concept that flies in the face of reason: Implied Odds

You need to be a nutcase to succeed with implied odds. Get it right and move to Bobby's room. It is that gamble that the wizards evaluate properly.

It is why crubs never lose.

7:56 AM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

My point is.. how much implied odds do you have when drawing dead? Paired board and you want to go for a flush draw?

You going to tell me people are not playing J5 in 1/2 NLHE? Or have JJ... and the guy with the trip/flush draw played it TOTALLY wrong... he NEEDS to jam in on the flop to force the fold. I do not see Grump calling there with just a flush draw... maybe he would..

8:08 AM

 
Blogger The Poker Meister said...

Didn't read the comments on the prior post, but I'm sure it caused a lively debate. It seems that there is only one comment remaining - who else, but Josie...

Regardless, poker has changed quite a bit over the past few years. The opposing players have certainly gotten better. A paired board, even a double paired board, does not mean boat. In fact, I've seen players FREQUENTLY call of a top pair no kicker on a paired board, which I'm not sure contradicts my earlier statement about players getting better... At any rate, while I'm not going to judge Grump's play - and I did have a similar but lessened reaction when I read it - there simply aren't too many hands that his opponent can have if he's a "solid player." He's not showing up with J5 and rarely has 55 so you can put him on 45, 56, A5, AJ, etc. (JJ is generally raising / 3betting but there is limited information in the hand history.) Grump is dodging quite a bit of outs here; I doubt he's getting it in if the 4s or 6s turns (he has the As), and he's not drawing great, but he is getting odds on the min raise (that's his opponent's mistake). I think it goes without saying that he's folding a double-paired board against a solid player. To sum up: I don't think Grump's play is an auto-fold on the flop due to the paired board min raise.

8:13 AM

 
Blogger JT88Keys said...

I see my comment had the desired effect and got under your skin in much the same way you attempt to do to people through cursing, vulgarity, and bullying. Mission accomplished...

8:15 AM

 
Blogger The Poker Meister said...

FWIW, though, I agree with your comments about a "pro player." It is not feasible for me to be a pro; I, like you, have a family to feed and housing to provide. Grinding 1/2 10 hours a day for [the assumed] $20 / hr won't cut it for our lifestyles. As a single guy, I'd bet you can do it. You're doing what you love and have complete control over your overhead. $40-60k a year is nothing to sneeze at, and you control your own destiny; work when you want, etc. That's why it's a "hard way to make an easy living" or something like that. I still don't understand how people like Grump deal with inflation; he's been presumably making the same $/hr rate for the last XX years. How can he not have moved up to 2/5 for a pay increase? And, FWIW, 2/5 rates should be around $45 / hr, much closer to your assumed salary (probably less, but still enough to put food on the table).

8:19 AM

 
Blogger The Poker Meister said...

FWIW, though, I agree with your comments about a "pro player." It is not feasible for me to be a pro; I, like you, have a family to feed and housing to provide. Grinding 1/2 10 hours a day for [the assumed] $20 / hr won't cut it for our lifestyles. As a single guy, I'd bet you can do it. You're doing what you love and have complete control over your overhead. $40-60k a year is nothing to sneeze at, and you control your own destiny; work when you want, etc. That's why it's a "hard way to make an easy living" or something like that. I still don't understand how people like Grump deal with inflation; he's been presumably making the same $/hr rate for the last XX years. How can he not have moved up to 2/5 for a pay increase? And, FWIW, 2/5 rates should be around $45 / hr, much closer to your assumed salary (probably less, but still enough to put food on the table).

8:20 AM

 
Blogger The Poker Meister said...

Don't know why blogger deleted this post but:

Didn't read the comments on the prior post, but I'm sure it caused a lively debate. It seems that there is only one comment remaining - who else, but Josie...

Regardless, poker has changed quite a bit over the past few years. The opposing players have certainly gotten better. A paired board, even a double paired board, does not mean boat. In fact, I've seen players FREQUENTLY call of a top pair no kicker on a paired board, which I'm not sure contradicts my earlier statement about players getting better... At any rate, while I'm not going to judge Grump's play - and I did have a similar but lessened reaction when I read it - there simply aren't too many hands that his opponent can have if he's a "solid player." He's not showing up with J5 and rarely has 55 so you can put him on 45, 56, A5, AJ, etc. (JJ is generally raising / 3betting but there is limited information in the hand history.) Grump is dodging quite a bit of outs here; I doubt he's getting it in if the 4s or 6s turns (he has the As), and he's not drawing great, but he is getting odds on the min raise (that's his opponent's mistake). I think it goes without saying that he's folding a double-paired board against a solid player. To sum up: I don't think Grump's play is an auto-fold on the flop due to the paired board min raise.

8:20 AM

 
Blogger JT88Keys said...

Awww, c'mon, Waffles. I thought you had thicker skin than that. I can't mess with you a little? I'd be happy to discuss actual reasons why I think Grump's move there was perfectly acceptable given the right circumstances. It's just that you declared it the absolute wrong move and I didn't expect you to change your opinion so I didn't bother.

8:30 AM

 
Blogger MorningThunder said...

Maybe grump was playing the player He said he read him for trips. We all trust our reads and play on Grump said he was a generally solid player. Perhaps this narrowed , in Grumps mind, the other players pre flop calling range to say A5 45 65 55 maybe 53 and 57.possibly JJ. Ignore the quads possibility and the only real threat is JJ. I like the play for the $10 more on the flop in this situation. Against the drunks at the table I would have bailed on the flop.

8:47 AM

 
Blogger MorningThunder said...

And I agree with you on the dude with trips. Min raise on a two flush board is begging to be run down.

8:49 AM

 
Blogger Josie said...

In your way you did make valid points. Grump puts him on trips...does he really want to invest a lot in a nut flush draw when the boat that kills him looms, assuming his read is right.

You made a very good thought provoking point - just like all of Grump's posts.

8:51 AM

 
Blogger MorningThunder said...

For sure Josie. I think $10 was the most I would call here to continue and see. Would be nice to hear from Grump on this. We are missing a lot of info on the player. If he had been playing with him for 6 hours he would presumably have a good idea of how the other player played. If he never got out of line with say J5 or K5 and only played suited connectors or pairs or broadway cards then I love the play. I have read Grump enough to believe this was true. He got his all in as a nearly %80 favorite. Cost him $10 to do it. I would get in all day every day with those odds. I wonder what Grumps play would have been if say the four or six of spades fell on the turn?

9:09 AM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

He did have the same flush draw with his trips. His was however lower. That is why I suggest JAM and knock out Grumps profitability in drawing to only an Ace high flush.

Morning Thunder - Well thought out analysis. I think when we are playing a 1/2 game we are looking at less aggressive people unless they have a monster hand.. in this case the guy did have trips with a baby flush redraw which was a monster... I almost think his min raise looks like he has already made the boat even though he had not.

Obviously everything is dependent on reads.. and I did say the other guy was a moron for min-raising the flop...

10:21 AM

 
Blogger DrPauly said...

I haven't discussed a poker hand since 2005. I miss the good ole days.

10:27 AM

 
Blogger MorningThunder said...

Waffles. When I read Grumps post today I read it as 4 h 5h. Vs AsTs. On a Js5s5d board. I don't know if that changes anything

11:15 AM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

erm, I thought he said the guy had a flush draw too... blah.. man, my reading skills are getting bad as I get older...

I still think the guy with trip 5's can jam there.. the min raise still sucks... makes it even more baffling why the guy did not raise substantially with his trips...

12:10 PM

 
Blogger Rob said...

"The real problem here though is nobody ever wants to discuss shit."

Including you.

Seems like you just wanted to take a cheap shot at JT, like your early post you just wanted to take a cheap shot at Grump, without really justifying it.

Why was Grump's calling on the flop with the nut flush draw so bad? Do you just insta-fold your nut flush draws because the board it paired?

Based on the way hand played out, I think Grump played it right. If he's drawing dead on the flop, the other guy just calls his bet, he doesn't raise.

I realize you take great pride in dumping on Grump because you don't like him (which also explains why you posted your response on your own blog instead of his), and he surely doesn't need me to defend his play. But I think your first post was rather too sketchy if you really wanted to discuss the hand. This post here, along with all the comments, is much better.

4:33 PM

 
Blogger M.Prosk said...

Yeah, your insult of Grump's play was discredited somewhat by your insisting that the guy had trip 5s and a flush draw on the flop. If you paused a moment you would have realized that this is indeed impossible. Anyway, I also have no problem calling this min-raise as he can often have a smaller flush draw, or have the trip 5s and be unable to let go when the flush hits. Have a nice day.

4:58 PM

 
Blogger SoxLover said...

Hey fucktard. I know you like it.

Sox

5:25 PM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

You are so full of shit Rob.. I explained why I thought everything. I said I hated drawing to a flush on a board where you might be drawing dead. It might be ok in limit but in NLHE that is going to cost you money in the long run. SO to answer your question... the majority of the time when I have Ace-high and a draw on a paired board I am folding.

If you think someone is not min-raising the nuts there you have not played enough poker.. at least against good players. I do it for exactly the reason that it is unexpected.

9:11 PM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

I don't understand why half the comments are not showing up...... weird...

9:12 PM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

I don't think it discredits anything Prosk.. the thing I hated about the play stands.. the second guy is a huge moron as I said before... I really hate drawing to dead hands in NLHE.

9:13 PM

 
Blogger SirFWALGMan said...

for some reason my comments thought that JT and Poker Meister were spam... rubbish maybe... but not spam!! ;).

JT thought I had thin skin. LMAO. Go read his post. I have marked everything as not spam... I need to see if I can adjust that filter.. must be something new in blogger?

9:19 PM

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home