Dave Mardell
-
Posts
265 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dave Mardell
-
-
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
Seems you take a similar view to me. Looks like im not completely alone at least :DFor me an STT has a several distinct phases. -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
MTT's are a different kettle of fish as going out on the bubble usually means missing out on a prize barely above your buy in. You absoloutly should be going for the final table, and indeed the win. As you say STT are much flatter with prizes at 50%, 30% and 20% of the pool. Initally you want to be getting 3rd to double your money, and then you should be absoloutle fearless in going out because after youve doubled your money all the +EV is in getting the top spot.Perhaps I'm too entrenched in MTT play - I play to win, not to scrape into the money. Survival is important, but surely a win is worth more than several scrapings? Is it that STT payout structures are much flatter than MTTs, so it doesn't necessarily matter where you cash, as long as you do? -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
Indeed. My logic was that even though there is a good chance I will end up with all the chips going into 3 way, there is still a 20% chance that aces get cracked to an under pair. As it stood it looked like by folded I get heads up with a player even stacked. A player I felt I could beat My own personal experience with STT is that if I play for third, then play to win I do better than if i attempt to go for the top spot everytime. Of course had this mean a ladders/rounders/sattelite the fold becomes even more clear cut as the prizes are equal. When third is as good as first why even risk 4th when your so likely to get it by folding?You see, you forgot situation 5: He calls, shorty wins main pot, and CL wins side pot, leaving you on your ass. -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
More often than not yes - hence my Poker Name of "Muddle"Are you lot mental?
Absoloutly agree if the shorties were in the call becomes more correct. However I should probably clarify the situation a little further. This was a preflop all in by the BigStack and the Shorties were to act after me. Had I called they no doubt would have folded hoping to seem me busted or the chip leader crippled just as badly as them. Its a pretty unique situation to be honest and had the chip stakes been more level I would have called in a heartbeat. Had we been down to 3 already I would have called easily as well.Situation 3: You call, and lose to CL, you're out 2nd (since shorties are shorter than you). -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
Plus' date=' Id wager that the medium stack you were bullying didn't have AA...[/quote'] I folded AA in a tournament. Once Was down to 4 players I had about 4000 chips, the leader 4500, and the other two about 200 and 300. Blinds where at 150. Chip leader moved all in, and I folded aces. Needless to say I was near garaunteed 2nd place by folding as oppose to bubbling. As it turns out he woulda busted my aces as both low stacks called and he made some wierd ass straight. -
Re: Is This A Scam? The first question is did you actually take the test they claimed you took? The second question is how long do you think they will keep reimbursing you if you are not a consistent winner for them. The third question is if you are a consistent winner why would you give up 20% of you winning which if you get a final table could well be worth more than the buy ins they refund. Coupled with the fact they dont pay you up front... Id steer clear.
-
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
Well - me Im a fish. Too long away. Everyone doing so well!See... the PL's ARE the superior opponents... and my point: -
Re: Poker Novice Questions
Just to elaborate (and im not sure if im even right myself here) thatwould be 2% per out with one card come (or each turn of the card) and 4% with two cards to come if you assuming you can somehow get the next two cards free?Best way of doing this is to count your "outs" and then take the percentages from that............ So a flush draw has 9 outs - about 18% with one card to come and 36% with 2 cards to come...... -
Re: Gutshot extended & New Ladbrokes in da smoke I must have missed the buzz about Gutshot. Whats the SP?
-
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling One thing that made me smile a lot in this thread (as it reminded me of myself about a year ago) is the notion that your more likely to win by playing against superior oppenents. I wonder how many people would be prepared to play the $20 and $50 games on a weekly basis if those tables were populated by previous WSOP winners. Not many id wager? Ive lost count of the times ive busted out to sheer bewildering calls. I am fully aware that Ive made a hell of a lot more than ive lost over the long haul though. There is nothing quite like moving all in $1500 into a $60 pot on a 3-hearts flop with the AQ hearts only to be called by some guy with the bare king of hearts, now drawing dead for all his money. Plus as well as a giggle, you usually end up being the new chimp leader
-
Re: Jackpot Sit and Go's Surely offers like this are just asking to be hit up by a 6 strong team of colluders? Edit: And by surely I dont me that I ever would btw. Cheating is bad mmkay. And Karma's a biyatch :)
-
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
An interesting analogy. One I shall extend further. There is nothing wrong with seeing Port Vale play, so long as you can get in cheap (Compared to say AArsenal), and you already know a few of your mates are comming in as well. You never know sometimes they win 4-0. Just have the good sense to leave early and beat the traffic if your 2-0 down with ten men. Im sure you can all draw the parallels there :)You like suited connectors? Congratulations. I like Port Vale.......footballs' equivalent. -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling
Mmm I think your logic is on the right track, but slightly flawed. Yes you should absoloutly play the game you can beat, and just because you have $20000 in your acount doesnt mean you should be playing $1000 simply cos you can afford to. You still, as you say, have to be able to beat the game. However if you have $200 in your account, you definatly shouldnt be playing $50. It is entirely possible, and infact quite likely, that you will go 4 games without making it to cash. Now if that happens and you bust out and you are prepared to deposit more funds to continue to play then what happens is your bank account becomes part of your bankroll, on top of what ever happens to be in your account. This being the case you can be properly bankrolled for $50 IF the $200 in your account doesnt represent the sum total of what your prepared to invest. However if busting that $200 means you can never play poker again (or at least for some months / years till you can re-roll yourself then you are taking a substantial risk by playing in tournaments when you cant suffer more than 4-10 beats.Just to second my earlier advise about choosing your game according to Poker game and not Bankroll: ................ My bankroll is never below $ 700 or 800... so... $ 50 buy in is acceptable according to bankroll aswell. -
Struggling
in Poker
Re: Struggling If its any consolation I mamanged to rack up a 17 STT losing run. Most of those I was all in a 2/1 or more favourite, or unlucky enough to walk right into AA anytime I picked up KK. Sometimes the laws of probability just smack you in the face like that. However provided you are playing within your financial means, and most importantly having fun, try not to let yourself be too disheartened by short term blips. And also remember that so called bad beats are a rarity. True bad beats. Like having top pair catch a runner runner full house after you set second set. Getting your money all in a 2/1 favourite is always handy, but your still gonna bust out a third of the time. 33%. This being the case you will likely have quite high varience if you like to get it all in preflop with things like AK or JJ. Nothing wrong with humping it all in, just be mindfull that youll need a bank roll that can withstand about 20 straight losses.
-
Re: STT - All in Strong or Weak ?? Another thing that occurs to me: In poker, as in life, the strong prey on the weak. However good a player you are, there is alway someone better. Now in a cash game if you find that your simply outclassed you can simply get up and find a softer table. However in a tournament if you know you simply cant outplay the people your sat with your pretty much stuck for the duration. When you find yourself in that situation you have almost no chance to win if you "play". You pretty much have to let the cards do the talking. Ive been there myself and by adopting a selective all in strategy for that particular STT Ive managed to scrape 3rd where id given myslef almost no chance to win at the outset.
-
Re: STT - All in Strong or Weak ??
Indeed. Like every pker conundrum the answer is always "it depends". So much relies on the situation. Using STT SNG's and an example. If the blind are curently 200 and you have 1000 then making a 3xBB raise to 600 is going to leave you pot commited anyway. YOu know you have to move the rest in if you miss. Why give yourself a chance to change your mind after a scary flop - get it all in. Like wise in the early stages of a SNG when the blinds are low pretty much any "sensible" raise you make relative to the blinds is still a small ammount relative to the chip stacks and if you've got Aces your going to get called in four places and your going to get outdrawn. Id be inclined to hump it all in and see if anyone is daft enough to call with AK. Youd be supprised how often they do :)So... I don't agree that it's necessarily weak play... -
Re: Am i paranoid?
Interesting theory Mr V. I sometimes find myself doing the opposite' date=' based on the rationale that because there have been numerous flushes recently, the law of averages says it is less likely there will be more in the next few hands.[/quote'] Now Hodgey I KNOW your smarter than that :) Just like the spin of a roulette wheel every poker hand is a unique event. THe chance of a particular hand comming up is the same regardless of what has happened in the hands before... -
Re: Am i paranoid?
But then how are they making their money? Surely as a business your single goal is to make cash - however much they dont need to?it is a famous brand, which is why they can afford to have no rake on their poker room. -
Re: Am i paranoid?
I was going to say the exact same thing :)That's exactly right. Human beings look for patterns, and often find them when they're not there. -
Re: Had a bad beat ? Come and have a moan here To be fair Heniek you have called of a 6xbb raise a massive dog to kings. You've hit your Jack and are trapped calling off needing one of 5 outs (2 jacks and 3 sevens. Problem now is that even if you hit one of your 5 outs kings still has 8 outs to win it right back. The two remaining kings for a set, the 3 dueces and 3 fours for kings up to beat jacks up. As it happens youve found yourself against a bit of a novice who cant lay down a big hand when its obviously beat and by moving in on the turn and getting a call you make your high risk play correct. Realistically the guy should have been able to fold and punish you for your gamble - youda taken the pot but you never had odds and if you cant get paid when you hit your losing money. With top par pairing the turn and three hearts on board the guy has to figure youve got a jack at least, and quite possibly the slow played flush and hes an idiot to call in my book. 2 outs all in. Shocking :)
-
Re: Am i paranoid? Ive had days like that. Ive also seen long session of boarded "four flushes" and Ive had SNG tournements where practically every pocket pair I was dealt flopped a set inspits of the 7/1-8/1 odds against me per pair. Its like the old addage when playing chance games. Just because the last 20 spins of the roulette wheel have been red, the probability of the next spin being black is still approx 50/50. Whilst it is statistically improbable that you will see more than one or two quads hands dealt in relatively quick succession, it is by no means impossible. Just chalk it up to a statisical anomaly and continue safe in the knowledge that poker rooms make such ridiculous ammounts of money from the rake they have no need to "fix" their games. That said - I saw an advert for a "free" poker room (i.e no rake). How are they making money then? Id stay clear of a place like that and just stick to famous brands. Oh and steer clear of TruePoker.com. As bent as a nine bob note!
-
Re: WSOP main event
Also bear in mind that the field is a record high (again) this year. Ive heard 8000. Consider that players will have to play 14 hours a day for maybe 5 days or more if they want to win it. Thats going to take tremendous physical stamina just to do it. The thinking then is that the eventual winner is either going to be very fit, or very young. Also consider that many of the younger pros are fully aware of the grueling task ahead of them and are actively honing their physical self at the gym. The bet looks like a very strong one to my mind. Edit: Bodog have realised their error and slashed the prices massively.Judging by the amount of younger players coming through and the Online boom of new younger players who will get there from the Online sites, 3 x £20(eg) on 21-25/26-30/31-35 = £60 out with a minimum return of £100 (IF! one of them comes in!!) and a possible £160!! looks Great value :ok Not sure what the average age was last year or will be this but got to be under 35, hasn't it? C.R. -
Re: WSOP main event Trying to pick the winner out of a field estimated to be 8000 is folly. However I did have a crack at the "to make final table" book. Basically picked out 20 players that I had a fancy for, stuck £10 to make the final table on each for an outlay of £200. My reasoning is that all things being equal you have a good shout of one of those guys making it for a return of anywhere between £400 for Ivey and £1000 for somone like Ulliot. If you get lucky you might even get more than one bet come in :) I spread the bets across bet365 and Paddypower depending on who was offering the best price. I also seem to recall one of those sites offering stake back if selection makes the last 60. Cant be bad eh ;) My selections to make final table: Phil Ivey David Chiu Scott Fischman Gus Hansen John Juanda Phil Laak Marcel Luske Daniel Negreanu Chris Ferguson Joe Hachem Greg Raymer Dave Ulliot Doyle Brunson Tod Brunson Antonio Esfandiari Patrick Antonius Noah Boeken Isabelle Mercier Ben Affleck Matt Damon Wish me luck!
-
Re: Remember me?
****in hell Dave' date=' ages since we heard from you mate. [/quote'] Wow has it really be a year? My word :) Thats exactly what I was doing in the Ladborks Ladders only playing level 2, and as GotAFancy has said, you used to be able to fold your way to success.
Struggling
in Poker
Posted
Re: Struggling