Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Online No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em online cash games of all stakes, including pot-limit and cap games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-28-2009, 02:50 AM   #26
Troy Gamble
banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,391
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

wahh wahh whine to 2p2 who cares seriously about any of this.... shows the immaturity of someone to start a thread about something like this. how can't u guys settle this without starting a thread?
Troy Gamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 02:58 AM   #27
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zugwat View Post
i was never considering doing anything cheating related, i just wanted to pause and get sleep before playing a 15k

either way, i beat him, and i hope he gets run over by a lawn mower, / if anybody talks to him please tell him how unresonable, unfair, and rediculous he was being. how uncharacteristic to 2+2, unnatured to the msnl hu oturney firendlyness community, and overall scum he is
Zugwat, remember that you called me scum for when I confront you about it in person, and you cower like a little girl, ok?

Oh, and I challenge you to find two people on 2p2 that know me and agree with you in even the slightest bit (about me being scum).

I am all about good sportmanship and comraderie but when you **** on someone you deserve no favors from that person.

-Stan
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 02:59 AM   #28
ddubois
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ddubois's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coconut Creek, FL
Posts: 7,695
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Even before ImNotSoGood's post I was thinking OP was being a dick for dragging out the HU tournament this long. The post just confirmed it. If it was up to me, you'd be forfeit.
ddubois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:04 AM   #29
easycall
veteran
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: pm to set up grudge match ldo
Posts: 2,907
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

hu4rollz gogogo



illj ust revert back to lol donkaments
easycall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:05 AM   #30
KingDan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: @DanSmithHolla
Posts: 7,567
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

only being willing to 1 table is pretty weak, and the fact you think it significantly decreases your ev is kinda funny
KingDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:05 AM   #31
AJFenix
Pooh-Bah
 
AJFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: twitch.tv/adrianfenixx
Posts: 4,869
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

ImNotSoGood, I'm surprised you were as patient as you were. Guess its over now either way -_-
AJFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:10 AM   #32
MatthijsH
old hand
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Grindin' life
Posts: 1,398
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddubois View Post
Even before ImNotSoGood's post I was thinking OP was being a dick for dragging out the HU tournament this long. The post just confirmed it. If it was up to me, you'd be forfeit.
This.
MatthijsH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:11 AM   #33
billybeartku
Pooh-Bah
 
billybeartku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Taipei, Taiwan. it ain't China yo!
Posts: 5,830
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

i see this a 5 star thread potential
billybeartku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:12 AM   #34
Ansky
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Ansky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: .
Posts: 17,523
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

ImNotSoGood(8:23:31 PM): 3 at once from start is fine
ImNotSoGood(8:23:44 PM): but now
ImNotSoGood(8:23:47 PM): when im up
ImNotSoGood(8:23:52 PM): 3200 800,
ImNotSoGood(8:23:55 PM): a 2nd table
ImNotSoGood(8:24:04 PM): will decrease my avg stack

I don't get it.
Ansky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:24 AM   #35
NHFunkii
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
NHFunkii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: is this real life?
Posts: 14,646
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

yeah that makes no sense
lame on both parts imo, if imnotsogood would have 2-tabled it'd be fine to make him play then I think
NHFunkii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:28 AM   #36
NOSUP4U
banned
 
NOSUP4U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,694
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Threads like these are so hilarious. First its 20 people all up in arms about ImNotSoGood being a donk. Now 20 posts the other way

Also, I don't see why OP's post things like these when they should be smart enough to figure out the villain is going to come and make them look like an idiot...

Mark
NOSUP4U is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:50 AM   #37
Big_Jim
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Big_Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BEHIND YOU
Posts: 13,592
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

I thought this was a fairly tough situation to arbitrate.

I am generally happy to grant people extensions, and allow people to do whatever compromises, for the sake of keeping the tournament fun. However, I felt that ImNotSoGood was entirely within the rules, and I had a hard time giving him a reason why he should allow an extension, aside from out of the goodness of his heart.

From our IM convo, it was obvious that he felt that he had been slighted numerous times by Zug, and as he has said in this thread, didn't feel like he owed him any favors.

There is a lot of money on the line here, and I didn't feel like I could simply impose a rule change at the last second without approval of both parties, so I didn't.

That said, congrats to Zug for sticking it out, and for the win. I wish you the best of luck at Monte Carlo.

As for the 2 tabling, I don't follow INSG's line of reasoning for it being -EV either. You have to win both matches, so I don't see how your average stack size is relevant.

Last edited by Big_Jim; 04-28-2009 at 03:57 AM.
Big_Jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:53 AM   #38
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansky View Post
ImNotSoGood(8:23:31 PM): 3 at once from start is fine
ImNotSoGood(8:23:44 PM): but now
ImNotSoGood(8:23:47 PM): when im up
ImNotSoGood(8:23:52 PM): 3200 800,
ImNotSoGood(8:23:55 PM): a 2nd table
ImNotSoGood(8:24:04 PM): will decrease my avg stack

I don't get it.
Say I'm 0-1, where 2 matches=win

I'm playing my 2nd table now ( Lost the first table, and am currently playing 1 table)

...and I'm leading 3000-1000.

If I add another table, on avg the match should end twice as fast in a vacuum, but whats happenning in this case where in my current state I either lose a game and lose the match, or win a game and go to the tiebreaker.

Until a game is lost/won the two tables basically act as one table where the respective stacks are switched every hand.

So if I play 1 table where i have a 3000-1000 lead, playing a 2nd table w/ 2000-2000 stacks will put me @ 2500 chips, and the villain at 1500 chips.
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:55 AM   #39
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Jim View Post
I thought this was a fairly tough situation to arbitrate.

I am generally happy to grant people extensions, and allow people to do whatever compromises, for the sake of keeping the tournament fun. However, I felt that ImNotSoGood was entirely within the rules, and I had a hard time giving him a reason why he should allow an extension, aside from out of the goodness of his heart.

From our IM convo, it was obvious that he felt that he had been slighted numerous times by Zug, and as he has said in this thread, didn't feel like he owed him any favors.

There is a lot of money on the line here, and I didn't feel like I could simply impose rule change at the last second without approval of both parties, so I didn't.

That said, I don't follow your line of reasoning for 2 tabling being -EV either. You have to win both matches, so I don't see how your average stack size is relevant.
I obv did 2 table from the get go, im talking about 2 tabling once you're down a match, or up a match, i just made a post on this.
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:57 AM   #40
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingDan View Post
only being willing to 1 table is pretty weak, and the fact you think it significantly decreases your ev is kinda funny
Disprove me...
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 03:57 AM   #41
KingDan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: @DanSmithHolla
Posts: 7,567
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

lol u have to win both matches clown
KingDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:24 AM   #42
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingDan View Post
lol u have to win both matches clown

Do some math and then you can call me clown. You're lowering your equity w/ the 2k stack when you're leading 3k-1k, and say you win one table, its way more likely to be the 3k-1k table, and you'll end up playing the 2k-2k table as your tiebreaker anyway
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:29 AM   #43
(>^_^)>
banned
 
(>^_^)>'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: this is OUTRAGEOUS
Posts: 306
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
Say I'm 0-1, where 2 matches=win

I'm playing my 2nd table now ( Lost the first table, and am currently playing 1 table)

...and I'm leading 3000-1000.

If I add another table, on avg the match should end twice as fast in a vacuum, but whats happenning in this case where in my current state I either lose a game and lose the match, or win a game and go to the tiebreaker.

Until a game is lost/won the two tables basically act as one table where the respective stacks are switched every hand.

So if I play 1 table where i have a 3000-1000 lead, playing a 2nd table w/ 2000-2000 stacks will put me @ 2500 chips, and the villain at 1500 chips.
(>^_^)> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:31 AM   #44
Big_Jim
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Big_Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BEHIND YOU
Posts: 13,592
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
Do some math
Some math:

Assumptions
Ignoring the buy in for the game ($5 or wtv)
Stacks represent % chance of winning.
You start down 0-1 with a 3:1 chip lead

Your chances for a victory are
75% * 50% = 37.5%

Just for the heck of it, let's assume that you play the game where you have even chips first, before you resume the match with a 3:1 lead.

50% * 75% = 37.5%

Please explain to me what I'm missing here, or how the math changes when the matches are being played simultaneously.

Quote:
Until a game is lost/won the two tables basically act as one table where the respective stacks are switched every hand.
I guess this is what I don't see.

Last edited by Big_Jim; 04-28-2009 at 04:36 AM.
Big_Jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:31 AM   #45
d2themfi
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,263
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

basically what yves said
d2themfi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:37 AM   #46
Get_better_Baris
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 3 BaRReLing yOUr MoMmA FoO
Posts: 829
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

(awaiting HU4Rollz) I got the popcorn ready
Get_better_Baris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:41 AM   #47
DrGiggy
grinder
 
DrGiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 658
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
Say I'm 0-1, where 2 matches=win

I'm playing my 2nd table now ( Lost the first table, and am currently playing 1 table)

...and I'm leading 3000-1000.

If I add another table, on avg the match should end twice as fast in a vacuum, but whats happenning in this case where in my current state I either lose a game and lose the match, or win a game and go to the tiebreaker.

Until a game is lost/won the two tables basically act as one table where the respective stacks are switched every hand.

So if I play 1 table where i have a 3000-1000 lead, playing a 2nd table w/ 2000-2000 stacks will put me @ 2500 chips, and the villain at 1500 chips.
WTF is that ?

you either have to win both matches if you're losing 0-1 or he has to if you're leading 1-0. wtf with the tiebreaker, I mean if the guy trailing wins one then the last table left is the tiebreaker, no matter what are the stacks.

My eyes buuuurrrrnnn from reading that... pain, so deep, can't. go. to. sleep.
DrGiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:44 AM   #48
Zugwat
journeyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: maryland
Posts: 375
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

i just wanna say that making the thread wasnt about complaining about this dumb petty situation

i was just getting desperate as I legeitatly could of ended up staying the entire night playing the damn match and i was getting desperate and all i wantedd to do was get some sleep, was doing anything i could that might convince imnotsogood to let it pause

either way theres not much sense in even arguing this anymore
Zugwat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 04:48 AM   #49
TronSpecial
veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,176
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

well i was gonna take imnotsogoods side on this. now i am left wondering how he got this far in the tournament in the first place.
TronSpecial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:01 AM   #50
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Jim View Post
Some math:

Assumptions
Ignoring the buy in for the game ($5 or wtv)
Stacks represent % chance of winning.
You start down 0-1 with a 3:1 chip lead

Your chances for a victory are
75% * 50% = 37.5%

Just for the heck of it, let's assume that you play the game where you have even chips first, before you resume the match with a 3:1 lead.

50% * 75% = 37.5%

Please explain to me what I'm missing here, or how the math changes when the matches are being played simultaneously.
Sure,

When you play 2 matches at the same time in hopes of one win you combine the tables(in theory) as if they were one, since only one win/loss is of concern @ this point.

.625 x {(.75).50+(.25).75} = .3516

.75= CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 2K-2K STACK AS TIEBREAKER(CHANCE I OF 3K-1K STACK WINNING)

.25 = CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 3K-1K STACK AS TIEBREAKER


not sure if I calculated speed of win properly in order to predict which stack is used in tiebreaker, but it seems relatively close to what it should be.
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive