Well, in defense of wahbs, although the QJo hand turned into a great discussion with constructive criticism, it didn't started out that way. The two initial responses to his posting of the video were 1) Boski telling him he doesn't belong here; and then 2) DreamCrusher posting a sarcastic "welcome to the thread" and then telling him that his QJo play was absolutely atrocious with no other comment or constructive criticism.




No wonder wahbs felt he was being trolled and then reacted defensively to the rest of the discussion. Hopefully, he now realizes that subsequent to those two comments, he was given some pretty good advice that he should take to heart.

The thread got so caught up in the QJ hand not because of how bad the actual play was, but because of how defensive wahbs got in his replies, and how terrible his justifications for the play were (showing such a fundamental misunderstanding of how pot odds and implied odd work).

im in the PLO once a week these days, feel free to introduce yourself! but yes im past my study days; i'm a washed funplayer. doubt im beating NL any more cuz i like to straddle too much =(

i cant wait til all the vegas vloggers are playing PLO, its gonna be great to see the debate and good natured hostility

I agree completely.

+1

I don't mean to be defensive. I don't care what people say about my play and I am happy to discuss and try to learn, however, here is the response my friend got in this thread when he explained what he would do:

I'm sorry, but this is just being an ass! This is not constructive at all!

I did not start with jabs, but certainly did respond as mentioned above. Anyone who watches my vlog knows that I actively seek comments and debate on hands. I have certainly learned from my watchers, as I hope they have learned from me. I will take into consideration what people have said that is CONSTRUCTIVE, although many of those people will not do the same in turn, it seems.

You may say that my justifications are terrible, you may say that the play was horrible, but I certainly understand pot odds and implied odds. In fact, they are not really that difficult in this hand.
I will change the distribution of another poster slightly...

Hold'em Simulation ?
600,000 trials (Randomized)
Hand Equity Wins Ties
TT+, AQ+, AK 35.35% 208,194 9,338
10%-25% 16.55% 92,647 14,771
10%-35% 15.96% 89,698 13,652
10%-40% 15.77% 88,773 13,101
QcJh 16.36% 92,222 13,049
Edit · Link · 2+2 · Deuces Cracked · LeggoPoker
(Sorry, I do not know how to add a picture properly)

Given this distribution I do NOT quite have the pot odds to call, however, I know the implied odds are going to give AT LEAST 9.15:1 with possibly much more. I was willing to gamble $130 to win the $1200 or more. Again, you can agree or disagree with my logic/justification, and i will try to learn, but saying I don't understand the math is just plain wrong.

I certainly did not mean for this topic to take so much time/space in this thread, so i am sorry that it has probably become monotonous. No disrespect or being defensive was meant, even though it obviously has come out that way.

On one hand, you are not getting the immediate pot odds to justify calling. So you justify it with "implied odds".

But by this standard, you could justify almost any non-all-in call with "implied odds".

But only certain types of preflop hands, in certain situations, really call for factoring in implied odds when making this sort of decision.

QJo in a five-way 3-bet pot is definitely not that sort of hand. It is a terrible implied odds hand.

It is the sort of hand where you will flop top pair (or something like middle pair plus a gutshot) a lot and be forced to put the rest of your money as a crying call when you know you are behind. In other situations, the flop will come something like T84 and you will be forced to fold despite knowing you have siginificant equity. The instances where you flop two pair or better and can reasonably expect to get your money in good will happen something like 2% of the time.

In order to play this hand, you need to be getting much better immediate odds than your hot and cold equity, because that equity will often go unrealized, and the rest of your stack is more likely to get in behind than ahead.

wahbs,

We know that you understood the math but you didn’t take it as far as NickMPK’s well played analysis.

What RR said. Understanding the math and understanding how to use it to your advantage are not the same thing and confusing the two can be costly long term.

Don’t pull a Tim, Bill, and declare your understanding the end game of the discussion, there’s always much to learn still!

Yes, I agree.

Of course, there is much to learn and you make a good point of understanding vs applying, which is true of anything learned.

Yikes!!!

Epic OG vlog. I enjoyed the retro music and cinematography. Also..


In fairness the OG did not complain at all at the suck outs and kept "going to the hip"

Yo Mr Bill, I was slumming at the Star yesterday. I looked for you in poker room. I wanted to buy you Jack and Coke in Rio Bar.

I appreciate that! I arrived about 11PM...left about 2AM...short session!

Boski FT in the ACR million today. Don't think he's vlogging it when live on twitch. already won 34K, 205K for 1st place.

GL Mr Sluzinski

I'm pretty sure you are not supposed to spoil like that.

It was a live twitch broadcast from boski himself..... Pretty sure thats ok to spoil.

Different to a live casino 2 day tourney that is not livestreamed and not streamed by him.

Spoilers would've been nice for those of us who don't bother with Twitch and only watch the vlogs.

I doubt this will be on the vlog.

Crazy how he can skip out on his friends wedding but has no problem punting away money.....

i predict it will be in the title of his next vlog, effectively "spoiling" it for the anti-spoiler crowd

Pretty sure everyone of us has made the same play as Bill in the past and tried to justify it with pot odds. I’m sure I have.

I just always think of what Bart Hanson uses as implied odds to play speculative hands and it shows how far off things really can be.

I believe his numbers are 12:1 for pocket pairs and 15:1-20:1 for suited and unsuited connectors.

In this instance we call $130 and win a POT of $1,900....That isn’t our profit for the hand. We have put in about 25-30 percent of the pot so we shall call profit of $1,300. We basically made 10-1 on our call of the $130.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure where he finished, but I guess his 1.20 Hellmuthian markup wasn't a rip-off, after all..

5th or 6th for 45+. good for him


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

He might be up on ACR now.