Quote:
Originally Posted by Foldemlow
Really? Man, I was just saying that, but...that's pretty sick, actually. Jesus...
Also, next time you go for outlevelling, please try something a little less cliche than a third degree or first degree at the second level. Clever at best, but mostly mediocre.
Anyway, let me make my position clearer.
First of all, you talk about "bad players" as one single entity of people who all play exactly the same way in the same spots.
I should know about bad players because I play mostly NLHU 50 and I run into them pretty much 99% of the time I'm sitting at the tables.
I can tell you for a fact that they're all very different in their awfulness. I see the tightest nits you can imagine, who never ever bluff and never pay you off in any spots. I see the most aggressive players you don't even see at the nosebleeds etc...
Usually extreme versions of a single archetype (kind of like your analyses).
When I read your extremely vague and non-specific post, I can only assume that you have little to no idea of what you're talking about, hence my assumption that you're probably not the guy who's busting the toughest players around.
Reading your ridiculous assumptions about "bad players" makes reading about your perception of "good players" as another single entity all the funnier, obviously.
However, despite your lack of clear and thorough analysis, you post away your drivel with the kind of self-confidence and lack of self-awareness that characterizes people like Matusow. (making a transition back to the thread, did you see that?)
So there you go. Feel free to take this as another victory and don't forget to hang it around your neck next time you're off to your mirror.
|
First: why does everything have to be about stupid "levels" in this forum? God I hate that word. I was just making a joke, settle the hell down.
Second: yes, I put bad and good players in "entities" because I used the word GENERAL. The funny thing is, the stupid concept in that thread is ridiculously general. My comments weren't ridiculous; they were basic as fk. It is a very fair statement that the vast majority of fish (or average players in general, let's say) do NOT like to bluff raise the river. It just happens a relatively small amount. This is from my experience - which is from the lowest to very high stakes - and I presume many many more hands than you. If you say I'm wrong (which you are but you simply just asserted it like a flimsy jackass), then give me something to back it up. Because as it stands, I think my statement warrants you to have the onus of proof on.
As for my other statement about good players. That's also a very fair thing to point out. I merely stated that in general, good players are going to see through that ****ty manoeuvre. Because, well, it's ****ty. And because, well, good players are... good. Res ipsa loquitur. They are obviously good enough to raise the river with even a top pair hand and exploit that absolutely horrible mistake that you seem to adore. A check call is going to be gaining more money from bluffs and losing less from better hands, in general. There: another simple statement. If you really want me to not talk in general statements, you're gonna have to bring more interesting concepts to the table - because that one is just so stupid that it doesn't even deserve more than two lines of discussion.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
