Saying you're "done with this thread" suggests you don't agree with what I said above? Would like to hear your opinions on what part you think instinct plays in poker, especially when faced with maths to the contrary.

Ron, a question. Kind of asked it before but he didn't want to answer me I guess.

Instinct, or a ''gut feeling'', isn't that something that arrises during the hand? So for example if OP would've said, I folded the flop because of a gut feeling it would've made sense? but saying I would fold because of my instinct AFTER seeing the results wouldn't?

IMO in poker instinct and gut feelings or "emotions" are bad and hand-reading/logic/evaluation i.e. "thinking" is good.

Folding here is really bad, yes the fish is saying "LOL I has teh best hand!" but in a fish's head this at least includes every set.

I understand that, but the whole idea behind instinct and gut feeling is based on the moment. ''I had a gut feeling he was slowplaying a set, so I folded his turn bet''.

I can't sit here reading a thread and reading the result and THEN say, my instinct says we should fold to his 4b, it makes literally zero sense.

There are two kinds of instinct.

The first is when you're making decisions on auto-pilot, based on experience and the fact that you've analysed many similar situations before. When you make the decision you just kinda use instinct but if pressed you could explain all the logic and maths behind the decision.

The second is a pure gut feeling. This is the kind of instinct that bad players use to justify their actions when they have no idea how to actually use logic, reason or maths.

The first is fine, and isn't really instinct, it's more of an innate understanding. The second type of instinct is useless and harmful to your game.

+1000000...so true

Yes, so reading the results of a hand and after that saying what you would've done in hero's spot because of instinct is a big joke. Thanks.

You do realize that this makes no sense at all right? I mean...Ron said that he would not fold if I read that correct..so knowing that Hero ran his 2nd nuts into the pure nuts I dont see how Ron knowing the results and still thinking that folding is a mistake is a joke. Or do I miss something here?

No no wasn't talking about Ron's comment, in fact been agreeing with him since his first comment in this thread. Was talking about this one:

He says he'd base his fold on instinct, but that can't ever make any sense AFTER seeing the results, if he was in the hand and said I'd fold because of instinct, well okay.

sorry, i just couldnt verbalise anything that contributed. it wasnt meant in any sense derogatory.

im a bit drunk now, so ill try and work what i meant in the morning

i will say this though. if math alone could beat the game the game would be dead. on some level the ability to make a decison that goes against the math has to be considered.

and to the guy who said sets have to be in his range i agree, but that doesnt change the equity to a point of favouring the call by more than a few %.

Scientist 1: Why do bees dance to tell other bees where pollen is?
Scientist 2: And how do the other bees know that the dancing bee is trying to tell them something?
Scientist 1: Once told, how do they understand what it means with such tiny, tiny nervous systems?
Scientist 2: I don't know.
Scientist 1: Me neither.
Scientist 2: We've wasted our time and all the grant monies.
Scientist 1: If we say that, the public will know that we're just guessing and are no smarter than them. We'll never get any more grant monies.
Scientist 2: Yeah, lets make up a word that means "I don't know", but we'll tell the public it means something deep and insightful that they don't understand.
Scientist 1: Fer Sher, Bro! How about "instinct".
Scientist 2: What's it mean?
Scientist 1: It means something just happens that way.
Scientist 2: We can do better than that, eh?
Scientist 1: OK. It means: the inherent inclination of a living organism toward a particular behavior.
Scientist 2: We'll have grant monies for ever!!

Instinct is behavior that is NOT based on prior experiences. I think we're talking about intuition, here.

Semantic debate on!!!

EDIT: I'm hopped up on cold meds right now.

Math alone can beat blackjack, and that game is going strong. Even in vegas where most of your advantage is taken away by the fact they don't pay 1.5:1 anymore on a blackjack, the tables are still going.

I would say that math alone can beat poker at the micro stakes. But don't tell the fishies. As long as there are people out there with less skill and less want to learn that don't know that this game isn't about some instinctual manly large weinered ability (that they, of course, have) then we'll be in profit for a while longer.

Folding a flopped straight is for sure -EV, even if it's the bottom end of a straight, say if you hold 65s on a 987 board, then you still beat all combos of sets and 2 pair, plus random overpairs and draws if the opponent is fishy, so it's just an auto-stack-off situation I'm afraid.