those who say that this shove demonstrates "fear of flop play" are idiots.

as far as i can tell, djk played the flop beyond perfectly in this hand

if anything, it's "fear of being 3bet shoved in the face by FU_15"

which will happen wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more often if ur open raising here than the # of times ur called & lose if u shove.

ZZZZZZZZ

[QUOTE]=youcanhaveitall;5139633]
"though he may pick up a couple bb's, DJK's skill level is high enough that I think he should be picking better spots instead of throwing up a prayer in a BVB situation, just because he doesnt want to play me OOP and bc i may play back at him. For all of you who say this is an unexploitable shove, it is not because it screams weakness and I exploit him every time I call him in this spot with a better hand and bust him like I should have." [/quote}









yea i find it pretty funny that several of the instructors at http://www.pokerpwnage.com/ can't understand this concept

edit: and are ****ing terrible at poker

I think the fact folding enters your mind is ludacris, the amount of chips you gain by shoving is wayyy to much to pass up

If you wanted to argue there are better options I'd prolly still disagree with you but its close-ish, and I can't imagine you making 800 chips in any of the other lines

You are also prolly underestimating how often you will bust if you open to 3x or limp

I understand what unexploitable means doofus I was just asking if it was infact unexploitable, or if it was just +cEV. Often times you can make +EV plays that are in fact exploitable, I was curious to whether or not this was the case here. As TT said before, w/o antes it would not be unexploitable (lol double negatives).

EDIT: Oh and I hope you weren't calling me terrible at poker in that post

I didn't know what the hell "unexploitable", as least as it used in this thread (a play that is +cEV if our cards are turned faceup), meant prior to seeing a thread here using that term a while back. Nor did I know what the Yeti Theorem or the Zeebo Theorem were. I don't know who came up with the term "unexploitable" to describe this particular phenomenon, I don't think it's a particularly good term to use (since I would think unexploitable meant your opponent can do no better if he knows what you are doing), but whatever. I don't think people's knowledge of poker terminology, especially poker terminology which IMO is a misnomer, is particularly relevant to determining their skill as a poker player.

Edit: I probably should have said you can do no worse rather than your opponent can do no better to be precise, but headsup in poker they are one and the same.

QFEric

Btw, is anybody else getting a ****ing migraine from all these ****ing pokerstove calculations?

here's my thoughts on the hand:

he's prob a 9:1 dog to pick up a hand to call with (like 19:1 to dominate me), and i was only a 2:1 dog to suck out. i'd say he ran much better overall this hand.

Can someone tell me why MTTC'ers are always saying FU_15 is bad at poker tournaments? To me, it seems like he plays well and wins a lot, but I'm not always the most astute observer.

You should observe more astutely.

This isn't a case of jealous internet trolling. He is, quite simply, a ****ing moron who has run incredibly hot and now is scamming people pretending to be a poker coach.

Full Tilt Poker Game #4933370046: $1 Million Guarantee (34088976),Table 151 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 18:09:15 ET - 2008/01/20
Seat 1: smutje67 (4,985), is sitting out
Seat 2: MrDoggy (4,955)
Seat 3: bigredAK (4,865)
Seat 4: FU_15 (4,595)
Seat 5: sindomar (5,090)
Seat 6: Gretz27 (5,375)
Seat 7: FinnishNightmre (5,945)
Seat 8: ochocinco123 (4,910)
Seat 9: ErittS (4,280)
ochocinco123 posts the small blind of 15
ErittS posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #7
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to FU_15 [7s 2s]
smutje67 folds
MrDoggy folds
bigredAK folds
FU_15 raises to 90
sindomar raises to 315
Gretz27 folds
FinnishNightmre folds
ochocinco123 folds
ErittS folds
FU_15 calls 225
*** FLOP *** [2c 7h 5s]
FU_15 checks
sindomar bets 675
FU_15 raises to 1,650
sindomar has 15 seconds left to act
sindomar raises to 4,775, and is all in
FU_15 calls 2,630, and is all in
sindomar shows [Kh Ah]
FU_15 shows [7s 2s]
Uncalled bet of 495 returned to sindomar
*** TURN *** [2c 7h 5s] [4c]
*** RIVER *** [2c 7h 5s 4c] [8s]
sindomar shows Ace King high
FU_15 shows two pair, Sevens and Twos
FU_15 wins the pot (9,235) with two pair, Sevens and Twos

Stealth he didnt come up with the idea of the training site himself................he was just going about his everyday life when the powers at be behind pokerpwnage asked him if he'd like to join the team and make videos. You can't blame a guy for saying yes, good bad or indifferent. If anything blame the guy (not sure who it was actually) who asked him to join in the first place.

You failed to convince me that this isn't a case of jealous internet trolling.

Not true.

I've been asked by multiple different training sites to be paid to do videos for them and I always declined, despite even needing the money a couple times.

I'm a lot better at poker than FU_15. Like......a lot. Like....chase utley vs. a bench player in the special olympics softball team.

Watch one of his videos at the training site or talk to him about poker or read his posts in this thread and you will see he is terrible at poker.

(Or if you don't see that he is, then you really aren't a good judge of poker skill.)

You seem to be saying the sum total of a poker player's skill can be expressed in words and ideas, and I disagree.

I remember Randallin's well where he said FU_15 was bad, but I've never had an easy time playing against him and he seems to put up results.

I don't see how you can say that Chase Utley is better at poker than a bench player in the special olympics softball team.

sheets

Yea but you didn't decline because you felt you weren't good and you would be robbing people of their money, you declined just because you didn't feel like making videos for whatever reason. But had you accepted, no one woulda bashed you. It's not like Nick went around saying he's the best ever let me make a training site and teach the world how to play poker like me because I'm da illest. He simply was presented with an offer to make videos because he was told that he would make a good candidate to teach, and he accepted. Hard to blame a guy for that.

EDIT: Oh and I saw Chase live at the ASG last night (obv brag)

It should be noted that this isn't a tilt episode which happens to even the greatest of players. This is standard.

This isn't true.

1. I declined because I felt I'd be robbing people of their money and felt I wouldn't be able to provide good enough videos for people's money.

2. Nick actually actually treated himself as a respectable commodity, offered himself up to other poker training sites before "settling" with pokerpwnage.

Now, whether or not he is a thief or not due to him being ignorant is up for debate. Whether or not he is qualified to teach people poker isn't up for debate.

who knows I may be wrong, but I think of the largest misconceptions poker players have is that a player's skill correlates with how difficult it is to have that player at your table and vice versa

While it seems a little unpractical, some players who I (and others) consider to be poor players are the most glaring example of players who I hate having at my table. Some players who I (and others) consider to be extremely skilled players are also players who I do not mind having at my table at all.

/tangent

Why wouldnt u be able to provide good vids?

This is absolutely true. Very good/solid TAG players are for the most part not the type you mind having at your table because they won't put you in a ton of annoying/gross/high variance spots. There's a lot of guys who I consider really,really good (Sirwatts/Randallin are two good examples) who aren't necessarily a big pain to have on the table.

Meanwhile a guy who is aggro/spewy/LAG takes you out of your element, forces you into more awkward spots, etc. The thing is, a lot of the LAG/spews have pretty ridic leaks which can be exploited, so they're still 'bad at poker', so to say.

As for the hand, my standard is to limp/shove unless I think the BB is calling that SUPER wide, in which case I guess I just shove cause I like it better than raise/folding, limp calling, limp folding, or folding.