I saw my friend get into a funny hand before. She had AJ hearts on a A4569 3 hearts board (with no straight flush possible). She had to check the board on the seventh river bet, got eight bet, checked her cards and then when she 9 bet the guy looked at the board and said, “wow, you must have 78 I guess. Ok, just call,” and shows 23 offsuit (which he had raised preflop). When she showed the flush he thought he won the pot, and leaned over and squinted at the board as the 20+ bet heads up pot was pushed her way.

After the hand he said, “wow AJ of hearts 3bet before the flop? I thought she had pocket aces,” to no one in particular. The 8/16 at commerce has some very special characters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh man, big street multi-bet action with the nut flush. I haven't gotten that in ages. A thin 3-bet with top two pair seems to be the most I can strive for these days. My room is super nitty on big streets or I play the multiway flops I hit so fast that they shutdown by the turn.

I love how the fish was surprised he got three bet by AJs pre when he's raising 32 haha. 2-bets is no big deal but 3-bets are sacred!

Well, so ends the Worst Month Ever. We’ll see what fresh horrors May holds when I next set foot in the cardroom

I'm kind of amazed at how much some players who must be losers or at least breakeven play live. There's a few bad LAGs at my room who play way too many hands and miss value all the time. I only play once a week but I get the impression that they play A LOT of 8/16 and don't go anywhere else.

What are these people's lives like? Are there live pros eeking out $8-$10/hr at 8/16 with variance? Are these people just independently wealthy and have nothing else going on?

Retired or on disability?

With Rob here. Look for an explanation that doesn't equal your opponents playing poker for needed income. 8/16 in an expensive place to live? Even a poker genius is going to have trouble paying bills. Most people in that game lose the rake + a bit more. Is this cheaper than one of the following as a hobby:

• Golf
• Losing gambling at golf
• Horse track
• SCCA cars
• Night clubs
• Day trading - for sake of argument, let's assume at least most day traders are -EV, like most poker players
• Pick another hobby

Don't think that anyone paying their full bills is doing it at a limit lower than 20/40. Maybe a very few 8/16 players are supplementing?

Based on your question I assume you are asking about daytime regs. My read on most of those, regardless of stakes, is that if they are not retired they have passive sources of income or a source of income that requires only minimal involvement, such as owning rental properties.

That makes sense, some sort of financial Independence. That plus it being a hobby is probably reasonable because they are likely not ultra awful, just have some obvious leaks. I've only ever run into one or two other TAGs at 8/16 so the bad LAGs might be supported by the calling stations when someone a bit more skilled is not around (maybe not me, but I hope it is). It may be reasonable to think these people are approximately breakeven when there isn't a good TAG or two around.

To me it's always interesting to think about the poker economy/ecosystem. How and why people play long-term if they are breakeven/losers and what has to be true in other parts of their life to fund the hobby? What does the losing player population need to look like to fund X number of pros making decent money? Economics considers most things to be positive sum (gains from specialization and trade) but poker is negative sum (rake) which can create very different dynamics.

I see a lot of realtors and limo drivers playing poker.

Rental properties or they own a small business (usually a franchise). In the two dozenish daytime regs in the 20 game I can think of three who own fast food franchises, one who owns a retail franchise, three realtors / rental property owners and one guy who has an auto repair place. Plus a few guys who own landscaping / snow removal / trucking / roofing / painting shops.

Throw in your rich housewife and a couple younger folks with inheritances and you got yourself a game!

I guess it only takes a handful of whales.

holmfries nailed it. Owning their own business, especially if it involves cash, is the most common scenario. Or retired if their older.

And what's with all these disparaging remarks (bad LAGs, bad TAGs, etc.) about their playing ability? Compared to GOOD players, we're all pretty bad at poker in some way, so it's pretty silly to call someone else bad at poker.

I feel like when talking about other players it's not uncommon to say they are bad or solid or things much more descriptive.

Idk what a bad lag that misses value is. Lags should never miss value because if anything they over-bluff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pre-flop and flop aggressive then turns to passive on turn and river.

They are a bit odd, but I think the exploit for this is to raise thin on the big streets because they won't play back at me much at that point even when I'm behind. Also I fast play made hands on the flop because they are likely to spew when behind.

Side note: I see these LAG regs check down big streets against each other often. It was egregious between a couple people one night and I mentioned it to a floor and he seemed confused by my comment. "What do you mean by soft play? They're playing soft?" I explained, he looked at me blankly some more and it was late so I just left. Haven't played with those particular regs since.

I have this double-reverse Dunning-Krueger thing going on, where I often think that (1) I really suck at poker, while at the same time (2) I am nevertheless the best player at the table, because these spew-monkeys are terrible!

In my days as a limit pro, I mostly played in a game with a small-ish player pool and we all knew each other and we all knew who were the people who studied the game and who were the people playing for thrills, and mostly we didn't talk about it.

I think there is a lot more focus on performance, on playing the role, in no-limit games. And generally, role-playing is what it is, often not backed up by actual study or skill. When someone sits down wearing a hoodie, ball cap, sunglasses, and headphones, as a general rule they are not good players at all, but are trying to look and act like the pros they see on TV and YouTube and hope that their image wins them some pots, or are trying to use sympathetic magic, or something. It is at least as easy to get these guys to stack off with their bluffs as it is to get the regular whales to stack off with top pair.

When I first started playing poker, it was a new home game at a friend of a friend's house. Host sent out a "this is what beats what" sheet and a list of rules for the games. I read some terrible poker book on beating home games, and did better than breakeven in the game. You say, "right, sure you did." Normally that would be true, but the host kept meticulous records of buyins & payouts and published everyone's yearly results. If you want a truly terrible idea for poker, keep records of the results of all the players. Only way to be worse is to have PokerTableRatings exist.


Jump forward 20 years later. One of the worst players in that game -- his name became a verb for terrible plays -- is still a friend I do lunch with. IRL, he does finance (and owns several businesses). He has read a couple poker books, and plays 1/2 NL for fun. When he describes hands to me, his thought process is amazing. "I made a strong call and then I put in a big bet on the turn." That's x/overcalled the flop and then donked 1/7th pot on the turn on a card that didn't help a caller.
This describes him exactly. He's an expert in his field. I'm sure he uses poker words from browsing his books at the table. He's putting up a facade of being an expert at this and then randomly stacking off. Looking down on a guy like this? Why? He's super nice. One of the smartest people you'll ever meet. He's just not a favorite to beat a small stakes poker game. Let's say he became an expert and won max. He'd literally not notice the difference money.

Then he could move up to where the money matters to him.

To be clear I would never ever comment on someone's play to them and if they make lots of bad plays I don't think that means they aren't good at life. I would let a friend know away from the table if they asked for my thoughts on some hands or if they are likely a losing player. I don't think it's immature or short-sighted to say someone is bad at the game, but I'm not the guy blowing up when his aces get cracked and going "how do you play that garbage?!". I just chuckle and muck because that's poker. It's not like the NFL where only good players are allowed, anyone can play anywhere if they can buy-in.

I would hypothesize that mentally bucketing players as "good" vs. "bad" does more harm than good in all sorts of ways, especially when you take game selection out of the equation.

lol

is that better or worse than self masochism(hey golfers I see you) with a side of idgaf? So it goes when you're on double secret probation.

I'm pretty bad at poker.

Look on the bright side: At least you're in action. I haven't gone this long w/o gambling in 45 years.

Drive to Laughlin.

Or Gila River.

Or Fort McDowell

Or Harrahs Ak Chin

The ban's statewide. And I got a certified letter from Harrah's that I'm now banned from all of their properties. I am literally in poker jail.