I was playing the 100NL at Hawaiian Gardens last year and there was a guy that was trying to convince everyone that 89 suited was a favorite against AA. Not that it played better against AA than another big pair like KK or QQ but that it was a favorite !!!! I finally called him out and said I'd bet everything he had in front of him (which was like 800) that 89 suited isn't a favorite against AA and then he kind of shut up about it. When I got up to leave he followed me over to the cage and pulled me aside and said "is AA really favored against 89 suited?" I said "of course it is" and then he goes "yeah I really don't know odds or anything I just saw 89 suited crack AA 3 times last week so I figured it was a favorite." Sheesh !

See, this is the sort of absurd thinking I mean.

DON'T TAP THE FRIGGIN' TANK!

Ahhhh, why did you tell him?

I understand the whole don't tap the tank thing but I don't really think it applies here.

Wait, you're saying that you actually heard somebody say:

"What appears on the flop has absolutely no relation to what your opponent was dealt before the flop, so unless there are four queens on board, your opponent is just as likely to have a queen in his hand as if there were none on the flop"

in response to:

"I thought that since there were two queens on the flop that meant my opponent was less likely to have a queen, so my pocket 10s were good."???

If so, best in thread!!!

I think it does. When you start talking odds and making people feel stupid, the tone of the table changes. Not just for the people involved in the discussion, but for everybody, including those watching and thinking of joining. It's a subtle effect, but it adds up. Poker is a game of small edges.

less talking about odds and making fun of people how it hurts the chances of making money. back to the making fun of people of what they say!

"i wasnt going nowhere"
after the pot is pushed to the other guy with top pair / top kicker. "nowhere" had 6 high and called an overbet shove on the turn for 1.5x the pot with an OESD.

Amazing to me how many of these stories involve the story-teller questioning or arguing with the person whom the story is about...

i raise pre flop in a 1/2 NL game. Guy calls. I bet top pair on the flop.. he calls. I bet the turn (i hit 2 pair ) he calls. River i value bet about 25 into 80 pot and he calls. He shows AQ for A high , i have J10 for 2 pair. I look over and he says " i thought you were bluffing"

This isn't really that absurd thing to hear from someone with AQ. If he turned up like 9/8 or something maybe.

"I guess that is an "ok" way to play if you can HANDLE THE SWINGS."



After I checkraised someone all in who OBVIOUSLY wasnt folding with an OESFD in a pot with a big overlay.

Of course he had ragged two and I said I was happy to the amazement of half the table.


Note: this was one of my first sessions back to live poker and I was playing 1-2 which is always interesting.

Well they're actually right about that. Just take AQ. With 0 Q's on the board there are 16 combos of AQ one could have. With one Q on the board there are 10 combos of AQ one could have. With 2 Q's on the board there are 8 combos of AQ one could have. Etc.

This brings to mind the game show "Lets Make a deal".

At the end of the show the two contestants with the most winnings that show got to trade their winnings to choose Door # 1, Door #2, or Door #3. Behind one of the Doors was a grand prize worth significantly more than anything given away so far. Typically behind one door was absolute junk.

After some haggling (to see if they would give up their Door) Monte Hall would open up one Door. Assume that Monte always opened up a Door that one of them chose, and that it was not the "winning" Door with the giant prize. Did the odds of the other contestant just go up to 50% from 33%?

This is the apparent dilemma here. Devoid of any other info, it looks like it is less likely the guy has a Q. However, the other guy may be the "Monte Hall" of this scenario. He knows whether or not he has it and you don't. So if he bets strongly, he may very well have it. And with Monte Hall, even though he always followed up with a good offer for the unopened door, the quality of the offer for those who watched the show religiously, may very well have been the tell (i.e., better offer for the real grand prize door).

I would also think that there is a non-zero chance I have added absolutely nothing to this thread. However, in that case, this can be considered what I bring to the table.

First time playing 1-2NL in Casino Niagara, couple of years ago. I'm running well and have ~1K in front of me after I bust 2 players with bottom set on a hand. Guy besides me leans over and tells me that I should be playing every hand from now on since I'm the big stack, looking to bust people. I was smart enough not to tell him that we aren't playing a tournament. I just said, "I'm not a good enough player for that". He looked at me like I had 2 heads.

Well, you are right, this problem has nothing to do with the 2 queens - scenario. And no, the the contestant's prob that his 1st choice was right, stayed the same (33%), the prob that the price is behind the other door is 66% which makes changing profitable. And yes, if 2 queens r on the board, it is less likely that villain has one, simply because if villain holds at least 1 queen it is less likely that 2 queens will show up on the board.

Similarly, if there is an 8 on the board, it's unlikely that anyone has a set of 8s because there's already one on the board, and they'd have to have 2 of the remaining three to have a set.

Well, it is even more unlikely that anybody has a set of 8s if there is no 8 on the board.

1/2 game

I'm in BB and pick up J3, checked around. As hand played out, I make J high flush on river with no overcards on board. Button was very TAG and made big overbet. I fold.

But I flashed the J of clubs. Button shows 10 clubs.

Old bahamian guy launches into me about how I should never have folded the J and how he would never make such a fold. Another reg at the table says to him - "that's no good there." Old Bahamian then lectures him.

Two orbits later, reg ends up heads up with old bahamian dude. Reg has nut flush in LP. B dude bets into him. Reg thinks for a while and makes massive overbet - which is of course called by 10 high flush.

In an attempt to bring this back to the original topic,

I guess the most absurd logic I've heard in nearly every game I've played is the constant use of the word "never". Such as "you can never fold A/K," "you should never limp UTG," "you should never min-raise..." etc.

The use of such absolute rules in a game of incomplete information baffles me. And simultaneously amuses me.

So you're saying you should never say never?

head asplodes

Wrong. The queens remaining in the deck after the hole cards have been dealt aren't going to make themselves scarce because they know the other queens have already been dealt out. The order is set. I stand by my statement that the probability of a queen appearing on the flop is unrelated to what was dealt in the hole and therefore shouldn't affect your reasoning. Betting patterns, knowledge of your opponent, that's a different story.

I'm not sure which is funnier...the stories of idiocy at the tables, or the idiots that come in here thinking they know what the **** they're talking about.

demere, you should really stop before you dig a bigger hole.