Quote:
Originally Posted by bparis
Tudor is saying that but flush has enough spazz/nonsense in his range to give us odds to call against the bet in question (as in we win more than x% of the time vs his range, too lazy to calculate exact pot odds). He is not saying that he sized his bet incorrectly so as to give us good odds
I disagree, especially given icm implications, but perhaps I underestimate the spew that Mr. Flush is capable of
exactly, but just assuming since "This message is hidden because Scrudge is on your ignore list."