and probably in pots that are fractions of this one

fyp

sex what's the point of posting this hand if you're just going to blatantly ignore all of the advice given?

WTF. I already told you who he was, and you confirmed that you knew who he was. Stop playing games.

I've offered to give you lessons. I can fold for 3 orbits, raise UTG, and get 6 callers behind me.

Sex will not be posting any more in this thread. Sadly, his house burned down this morning and he was trapped inside and died. Fire marshal's say the cause of the blaze was a deck of cards they found placed inside the stove. Close friends were on scene to report that he had done so on the advice of a man named Mitch. Authorities are closing on on the suspect and expect an arrest by midmorning.

While I would never fold AQ on this flop and would never have any nitty tight image, I do think it is a very fair point that the game plays much differently when the kill is on, especially in regards to raising. They need to grab and put out 16 chips to raise!!! That is a lot for people who usually only buy in for 1 rack.

And it is nice to see iLR posting here.

I agree that the kill nits up the game. I also think it slows down the game, which is why I hate kill games.

How can you hate the kill?

People make such horrible adjustments to it, that it really helps a good players winrate. It also forces you to keep a lot of money on the table. I usually top off my stack right as a kill pot is announced if I am approaching only a rack or so of chips on the table. And it was the only reason I had a winning session last session.

I was down well over a rack when this hand came up:

Full Kill Pot:
1 loose passive who loves to cold call (LPWLTCC) limps, killer is inbetween and doesn't get to act. Player who thinks he is good (PWTHIG) raises, folded to me in BB and I 3 bet AA, Killer takes 2 to the face, PWTHIG calls, and now LPWLTCC calls 2 (action goes through blinds, then to killer, then clockwise after that).

Flop (12 BBs)
ATT
I bet, LPWLTCC instantly raises, killer finds the fold button, PWTHIG calls, and I call.

Turn (18 BBs)
ATTx
I check, LPWLTCC bets, PWTHIG calls, I c/r, LPWLTCC calls, PWTHIG can't find fold button w/ his AK.

River (30 BBs)
ATTx9
I bet, both call.
LPWLTCC has JT and PWTHIG bemoans how his AK lost...

36 BB pot, woo woooooooooo

So basically you cold-decked two players in one hand and that is evidence of why I should like a kill game?

No, my two points were not related.

Point 1: People's weaknesses are made greater by the kill pot. If they are tight, they play tighter. If they rarely raise postflop, they raise even less only with strongest values. If they steal, they tend to steal more (me for sure). The one area that people seem to improve on is limping. Someone will limp, learn it is a kill pot, and ask for their chips back and fold, when in reality, they are getting a better price than they normally do to limp.

Point 2: Big pots are fun when you win them.

I am not ignoring it.

Like I said, in the 8/16 structure I would have called. And also giving back all my profit after being down 2 hundred or so for 2-3 hours factored into my decision also.

I guess I was just playing devils advocate and interested in responses. I know mathematically it was the wrong play now, but in that particular hand folding saved me money. That dark cloud came over me after the action on the flop, and that sometimes takes over the math involved for me, thought the hand was interesting.

kill games suck no matter how it's looked at. ppl constantly question/argue if they have to put up the kill, most everybody nits it up in the kill hand blah, blah, blah. having the leg-up is a liability, posting the kill is a liability. why would anybody want that? And Gila River has the absolute worst kill policy of anyone: you get the leg-up anytime you get pushed chips ie, stealing the blinds. steal the blinds and get a liability for it. and they never let the leg-up button go neutral which caz does. i hate kill games, hate, hate, hate.

/rant bec it's no use, the kill is here in az to stay.

Do you seriously not understand why going backwards from the results in poker is pointless?

kill is awesome. having the leg up is awesome. adjust or perish.

Poker is one long session. The results of one session are meaningless. I had a suspicion that when you were describing your opponents' scared money tendencies you were really talking about yourself. This statement pretty much confirms it.

So just play higher. There are plenty of scared money shot takers in the 20 and it doesnt slow down the game.

If I could I would...hopefully by late 2010/early 2011 I'll be back in my home at 20/40.

I might not know stove, but I know poker is one long session.

You are sort of right. I have been reeling lately. I needed a win if even small to boost confidence. But that still didn't change the fact that I was pretty damn sure I was beat after the flop action. So I didn't chase that queen for a couple reasons.

So if you already have a win booked and need it for confidence why stick around in a game and play sub-optimally? If you were "pretty damn sure you were beat," I dont understand the need to post this hand here. Most people in this forum play in games where this is a super-super standard call if not a 3bet, given the flop action. If you are a confident enough hand reader (apparently with no good reads) I dont see why you would need our input. I think you made a mubsy, scared money fold and are now posting here as a thinly veiled brag. Notice how quick you post the results when no one agrees with you. You cant come in here, say you are readless and expect that any poker player in their right mind is going to fold AQ getting 15-1 or whatever closing the action when it went 2bets pf and only 2bets on the flop with a guy about to be all-in. So stop arguing a point that you cant win.

I know it was wrong not to call, and I was very impatient the rest of the hand to see what hands they had. But is it always 100% math to you?

What else could it be? It could be a tell, but you didnt provide us that. You provided us with no info that we could use to advocate folding. I mean we cant soul read people we dont know from our computers. The way your OP was set up and they way you have vehemently defended your action in the hand, despite giving no logical reason for your play and providing a random critique of the player pool in this game after every poster told you were wrong was a little convenient. Its obv you werent looking for constructive criticsm, but instead a pat on the back. Again no one in this thread agrees with you. Almost all of us have a ton more experience at poker than you. Poker is 100% math. Your reads are intuitive math. Even tells. You have to figure out how reliable a tell is. You have to assess hand ranges. You have to count pot odds. You have to figure out implied odds. You did none of these.

DUDE... I am not looking for a pat on the back.

The read I had was that my hand was ****ed... based on the action behind me on the flop. What other descriptions or reads do you want? That one dude might be an asian and laggy? or some old white dude who is probably tight? or some dude is Indian and calls with anything on any street hoping to get lucky?

Yes I should have called the flop raise since I had led out and have top pair second best kicker...

but given that action I would have been very uncomfortable calling down with so many other strong hands involved that all are seemingly going to showdown. And I am wondering given this action, can YOU ever find a fold at least on the turn UI.

I don't need to be belittled into hearing that you all have more poker experience and are better players then me. That is probably the case, but you don't need to be an ass about it. wtf is your problem. go to another thread then

Sigh. I give up. Nh.

The reads give you approximate ranges. The ranges give you the math. The math says to call.

Imo the problem here isn't the reads, or even this particular hand, but more that you seem uncomfortable making a mathematically correct call in a huge pot in LHE because you feel like you're unlikely to win the pot, when the real question should be: do you win the pot more than X times in Y (where X and Y are functions of the pot odds). It's a shrimp cocktail/fur coat problem here.