what pre-flop situations should you call/fold ???

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

Gotta weigh in a little. Get off Aok's back. This is the beginner forum. He helps beginners. Jack, lamb and anyone else who disagrees should maybe move to the high stakes or another forum. It was a pretty basic question and if you idiots would go back to the beginning you would see that Aok was right. FUCK!! Jack, who are you to talk. You got what, 3 weeks in poker....

Aok knows what he's talking about in the "BEGINNER FORUM" where all beginners come to not lose their money when they start, except Jack, he's got it all figured out, you can tell by the $200 he's won. Of course every story he tells after going over his chess mastery, Mathematics, womanizer credentials ends in the same thing "but then variance got me and I lost it, but now I know". And WTF is NLP. Seriously guys "HELP, OR GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE BEGINNER FORUM." FUCK!!!

As a beginner ... I could NOT agree more ... Jack ... move to the 100NL or 200NL tables and help those people. You obviously have "outgrown" the beginner forum so I don't know why you're here blasting someone who has helped a few of us. When you're killing the higher stakes, I'll seek out your advice in the appropriate forum.

Originally Posted by lambchopdc

As usual, the point I was trying to get across was completely missed and tainted by a bunch of BS so i'll post to clarify then i'll drop it.

Short Summary:

A. I have ZERO personal issues with AOK. My problem with him is that I believe the method in which he instructs beginners is irresponsible and and unwarranted. The reason I snapped at this post is because I thought the advice AOK gave in this post (and some other posts) was horrible and that some (NOT ALL) of the readers would actually follow it because they buy into the Godly image AOK has created for himself.

Hmm. That may well be a personal issue there... definition of "personal issue" I suppose.

To be fair I believe the advice in this post was good; it was just obviously unclear because so many people seem to have got the wrong end of the stick (i.e. that AOK is advocating huge raises with crap hands).

B. My attacking of AOK's creditibility IS NOT AN INSULT to his "students." And yes, Jack was right when he said AOK spun that one well.

Again, definitions. You may not have set out to insult his "students", but some are clearly insulted. It's good that you have taken to indicating that you don't consider everyone who follows his advice to be brainwashed morons!

D. Please do not disregard the good points that have been made in this thread because of the flaming attached. The one that I hope will come across is that there is not any one system for poker. No advice is the 100% best advice. Just because someone is "respected" does not mean they are right. If you fall into believing otherwise you are headed down the wrong road in this game.

This point is fine. I think everyone would accept it. The problem is you seem to be going from "no system is perfect" to "don't use systems" (again, you probably don't mean that, but it's come across that way).

No disrespect to AOK, but his system hasn't turned poker theory on it's head. It's a subtle flavour, as I see it, of existing advice for beginners. It's perhaps more developed and also, in some respects, simplified. But it's not exactly off the wall.

I've not played AOK's 19 hands, my ego probably doesn't allow me to allow someone else to have the responsibility for my success or failure. However I've certainly borrowed elements of it.

I learnt a lot off Lederer's chart from "Secrets of No Limit Hold 'Em". This sort of opening hands guide seem to help a lot of people; more so than just looking at Skansky's hand groupings.

Now AOK has played down suitedness and, to some degree, position, with his guide. That perhaps weakens the system but it makes it more accessible to beginners (with Lederer's I was often "okay, that's 22, raised pot, and I'm what, middle position here? Erm, okay, that's a group E hand so I... damn time's up".)

If the advice is reasonable, and I think at least in respect to 19h then it is, then the question really only is: has AOK made it seem like the be-all and end-all of poker or has it made it clear that it's a beginner's method for you when you're getting started.

It was clear watching Lederer's video that this was the case; (especially since he's selling another DVD with an expanded chart). I think AOK has been equally clear. I mean he said that it was a question of experience: don't play marginal hands until you know what you're doing.

Now AOK comes on strong. He writes forcefully and convincingly. But that's not unusual, it's good teaching style. People mentioned chess. In that game we coach in very dogmatic ways: "A knight on the rim is grim".
Sure, there are occasions when you do it. There are occasions when you advance the rook's pawn to develop a rook. But you still tell every newbie never to do it.

By the time they realise there are exceptions, they are (hopefully) strong enough to know that they're very rare.

There, thats my clarification, if anyone spins anything else out of my words I will hunt you down with a deck of cards and stick the Ace of Clubs into your forehead the same way Chris Ferguson does to a carrot :P

That's my contribution. I've tried to stick clear of the flames and address the issue. Hope I've done that.
Hopefully my forehead will remain club-free.

By the way, I saw someone ask "who will buy your book?"

I will! The snippets posted online were excellent. Possibly the best writings I've seen on poker -- especially the portions relating to the philosophy of "performance poker."

I've only got about 5-10k hands under my belt, but so far, I understand the game much better -- and have won -- primarily because of Aok's posts. Obviously, there's millions of other ways to look at the game, but his writings allow you to build a framework from which to understand the game. Many poker systems/books/etc really lack this fact.

Just my opinion.

Best,
EW

I don't give half a shit how new I am to poker, but it's wrong to accuse a man of all these things because of his ability to write well. Regardless of how he comes off to readers, AOK established a solid straightforward foundation for new players. I think that any individual with the least bit of intelligence is capable of seeing through bullshit - in this case the supposed "eloquence" in AOK's writing. If you can't, then I don't think you're responsible enough to be gambling. We should all act like adults here (judging by the minimum legal age required to gamble), and not waste time tossing around gaudy accusations, which are clearly fueled by jealously. AOK has great communication skills; however, he is obviously not taking advantage of anyone - give me a break.

Yikes, all this hate for my persona all of a sudden. Bottled up anger venting finally? I suppose.

As a beginner ... I could NOT agree more ... Jack ... move to the 100NL or 200NL tables and help those people.

You gotta give me a month or two for that.

You obviously have "outgrown" the beginner forum so I don't know why you're here blasting someone who has helped a few of us.

Perceptive differences I guess. His advice looked so trivial I wondered basically from the start what was up with that.

wow this thread went to the second page

I think what is being said Jack, is that if the teachings in the beginner forum are to basic for you then move on. If your beyond the "19 hands" then there are better forums for that stupid avatar of yours. You talk about AOK trying to sound like some sort of GOD. Shit who the hell has been spouting off complicated mathematical formulas in this, THE BEGINNER FORUM, that have no relevence at all to what we are trying to accomplish here. I've been to the holdem strategies and high stakes holdem forums as much as here but your posting seem to be a little short, if not, non existant in those. I got news for some of you guys, the beginner forum is for the beginnings of a poker game, style, thoughts. Go back and read the question, the fuckin' guy posts his first and it turns into a fuckin' war on what to do. The guy had no clue. He was talking about offsuited rags. And you guys are arguing about it. IT'S A SIMPLE ANSWER, 19 HANDS, LEARN THE GAME, BR MANAGEMENT, DON'T LOSE YOUR DEPOSIT!! Not your fucking mathematil theories, not suited connectors, not pot odds and implied odds!!! Look at the fucking OP again, then answer this post and tell me what your basic answer is without saying "it depends" which is driving me fucking NUTS. If the guy ever comes back it'll be a surprise. I'LL STATE IT AGAIN IN CAPS FOR EMPHASIS (like AOK likes to use) THIS IS THE BEGINNER FORUM, IF YOUR GAME, MIND OR MATHEMATICS IS BEYOND THIS FORUM, "MOVE ON".

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

I think what is being said Jack, is that if the teachings in the beginner forum are to basic for you then move on. If your beyond the "19 hands" then there are better forums for that stupid avatar of yours. You talk about AOK trying to sound like some sort of GOD. Shit who the hell has been spouting off complicated mathematical formulas in this, THE BEGINNER FORUM, that have no relevence at all to what we are trying to accomplish here. I've been to the holdem strategies and high stakes holdem forums as much as here but your posting seem to be a little short, if not, non existant in those. I got news for some of you guys, the beginner forum is for the beginnings of a poker game, style, thoughts. Go back and read the question, the fuckin' guy posts his first and it turns into a fuckin' war on what to do. The guy had no clue. He was talking about offsuited rags. And you guys are arguing about it. IT'S A SIMPLE ANSWER, 19 HANDS, LEARN THE GAME, BR MANAGEMENT, DON'T LOSE YOUR DEPOSIT!! Not your fucking mathematil theories, not suited connectors, not pot odds and implied odds!!! Look at the fucking OP again, then answer this post and tell me what your basic answer is without saying "it depends" which is driving me fucking NUTS. If the guy ever comes back it'll be a surprise. I'LL STATE IT AGAIN IN CAPS FOR EMPHASIS (like AOK likes to use) THIS IS THE BEGINNER FORUM, IF YOUR GAME, MIND OR MATHEMATICS IS BEYOND THIS FORUM, "MOVE ON".

I think your posts in this thread have been the most inappropriate. Stop flaming.

Jack, he does have a point. You are far, far too green to make the observations you are making. You shouldn't refute any self-
proclaimed poker expert's ideas for the same reason I shouldn't. Because we aren't poker experts. I think its very naive and unrealistic to believe that we are.

However, whether you are an expert or not, you are able to CHALLENGE other peoples ideas. Frankly, I believe the style of play aokrongly recommends is rather weak-tight. It doesn't seem to use position to gain a very large edge on opponents, and it doesn't really work against tight or aggressive players.

Conversely, I think aokrongly's system, as he teaches it to beginners, works wonders against low stakes loose-passive players (which make up the majority). It is a low-variance system that only pushes big edges. Usually when you go all in you are at least an 80/20 favorite. These are all great for novices to the game.

Notice I am CHALLENGING aokrongly's ideas. I am not REFUTING them. I don't believe I am nearly good enough to refute ANYONE'S ideas on poker, because I have only been playing for like 8 months. I am an intermediate at best. I am sure aokrongly could stomp my ass in a heads-up match.

PS: I didn't use the word fuck, or make any disparaging comments about any FTR member in the preceding text. I also chose not to use flowery marketing dialog.

This thread needs to RIP now.

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

I think what is being said Jack, is that if the teachings in the beginner forum are to basic for you then move on. If your beyond the "19 hands" then there are better forums for that stupid avatar of yours.

What the hell got your panties in a twist trainer?

You talk about AOK trying to sound like some sort of GOD. Shit who the hell has been spouting off complicated mathematical formulas in this, THE BEGINNER FORUM, that have no relevence at all to what we are trying to accomplish here.

No relevance? I did those as I was learning the friggin game. This is the beginner's forum, no? For when you're learning the game? And if you don't see the relevance in those pretty basic odds calculations, man then you have some work to do.

I've been to the holdem strategies and high stakes holdem forums as much as here but your posting seem to be a little short, if not, non existant in those.

I've been consciously not going there much as I am only about a month into poker, playing at 20NL now. (BR is at $231, still a little underrolled but it's all good) I can't go talk about what the play is like on 100NL, no clue since I'm not playing there (yet). But where *should* I go then? If the beginners forum means you'll need a month to learn that you shouldn't put your stack on TP, well, I dunno then.

Not your fucking mathematil theories, not suited connectors, not pot odds and implied odds!!!

And here I was thinking THAT WAS the beginner's stuff. Seriously. If that is considered "advanced" then I'm really confused. I don't want to be condescending, although it's no doubt gonna come off that way but whatever, too late to sugarcoat it now anyway, but eh.. if I learn something within 2 weeks of being introduced to the game - yes, those "fucking mathematical theories, suited connectors, pot odds and implied odds" - then TO ME it seems beginner's stuff.

Originally Posted by jackvance

But where *should* I go then?

You should stay in the beginner forum. I would also recommend reading the high stakes forum as long as you understand that alot of it wont be relevent to your game yet.

This thread is not going to bring up anymore useful content. Just let it die.

Originally Posted by diowk

Hey people, brand new to this forum. Looks great! Here is my question:

If the pot is at 100,i have a 3d/6h, and i have to call a raise of 25 to see the flop. should I call so i can see the flop or should i just fold? what if the pot is at 1000 and i have to call a bet of 100 to see the flop? is there ever a time where you should call with cards like that or should you always fold? I have read that you should only call with "premium starting hands" (AA,AK,AJ, KK,QQ, JJ etc....) no matter what the size of the bet/pot is. Is this true? thanks alot everyone. all your answers are greatly appreciated.

Lets get real here for one second, instead of this continuing flaming and crap. The original post is just a theoritical question about what to do with a certain hand or hands of similar value. The very first answer should have been "You shouldnt even be playing this hand to start with, its an auto fold" (this is the beginners forum right? Not the high stakes advanced). Answer to the second question in this paragraph should have been exactly the same answer to the first (this is the beginners forum right). Now I can see where some would say you should fold the first hand and play the second since its a 100 bet to win 1000. But realistically in either situation 3h 6h should be folded pre-flop unless you are very experienced and understand how to read tables, opponents, and understand betting and how to use it. But this is the beginners forum and I feel this is an auto fold hand pre flop.

Ok, that being said. This is a theoritical question on what to do with a hand like this in these situations. All aok did was give the OP some advice on how to play the hand if he was dead set on playing it. And he did mention when giving this advice that "If it's an unraised pot and you are holding less than premium cards and want to play (in late position) then raise it 10xBB and then bet 10XBB on the flop regardless of what it is. If you're willing to do that then at least you have a chance. SOME people know how to play any 2 cards (or sub-premium cards) for geniune profits. But they have alot more experience that you. So You shouldn't. But if you feel froggy one day and want to play them in late position then do what I say. " Maybe he should have left off the "do what I say" part. I think that may have been taken to litterally, but thats just his writing style and I would hope any adult with any level of comprehention ability could have figured that out. I read this whole thread and to be honest, it looked like a couple of members were just intent on turning this into another rippy episode. The advice aok gives in this beginners forum is solid advice, its your choice to use it to better your game or adjust it to better fit your game, or not use it at all. At least he's willing to give advice and try to help folks in the beginners forum. When you move on to the intermediate level and then on to the advanced level then most likely you will have parted from this advice (or at the very least have it tweeked to your advantage against higher level competition).

Originally Posted by Renton

Jack, he does have a point. You are far, far too green to make the observations you are making. You shouldn't refute any self-
proclaimed poker expert's ideas for the same reason I shouldn't. Because we aren't poker experts. I think its very naive and unrealistic to believe that we are.

I'm gonna be completely honest here. Open cards play. Reading what Aok had to say has from the very first time I gotten here given me the impression of being so basic that it was trivial. I'm not trying to blow my own horn here or anything, it's just how I perceived it. If this IS IN FACT NOT the general consensus, then I guess I'm the odd one out. Didn't know that.

Originally Posted by Pelion

You should stay in the beginner forum. I would also recommend reading the high stakes forum as long as you understand that alot of it wont be relevent to your game yet.

.. but my "mathematical theories" are apparently too advanced for this forum?

Let me tell you where my poker game is at. My "A Game" is already beyond the 10NL and 20NL level. I could play around, but I feel this is simply true. When I play there I shake my head once every minute because of the rampant stupid things I see the other players do. 20NL is a bit better than 10NL, a bit more daring people and more aggression, but once you get accustomed to that, it's not too much harder than 10NL. (as a first impression over the last couple of days)

The problem for me is twofold. First, I'm not rolled for anything above 20NL. And I need to be rolled to move up, because the style of play at higher levels is different so I need time to adjust, even if my game is up to par.
The second problem is the mentality one. Maybe I've gotten the hang of the game rather quickly, but I'm still suffering from all the psychological setbacks that I think everyone has to cope with. A bit earlier I played 2-table 10NL for an hour. (10NL to start off the day, 20NL if I feel I'm in my A game) I won $40. This is HORRIBLE for me. Because every time that happens, I get into this mindset as if winning is "standard".. while most of the time poker simply means waiting for good cards and folding folding folding even you get something nice but you sense you are beat anyway. So I've had some agony to keep myself level-headed here. NOTHING wrecks my A game more than winning. Learning to cope with that is my biggest challenge now. This might sound strange, but this is how it is for me. When I lose money, my mind sharpens because I hate to lose. This is good - A game comes around. When I win however I dull out and become very impatient and play like total crap. I really really hope I can find a way to cope with this because it's annoying as hell.

Originally Posted by jackvance

A few years back on another forum (about NLP) there actually was something like what I described going on, and me pointing out the inconsistencies and such caused some uproar and the guys that were selling their air (in this case genuine air) actually paid me off to leave! I was gonna leave anyway so I took their "bribe" as I went, but it always left quite a sour aftertaste.

Seems this is quite a different situation though. I'm pretty much satisfied with having seen this discussed and, well, ready to move on.

Jack, this is not ment to disrespect you or anything. But in this quote you say a few years back on another forum (NLP, which I assume means No limit Poker). But most all of the other threads you participate in you mention only having a month or so experience. To me it sounds more like you have a few years experience and should have moved past the 10NL or even the 20NL stages. Im not saying this is true, Im sure there are folks who have played a number of years that just cant break out of the micro limits for one reason or another. Your math seems very solid, even though I fail to understand that level math anymore. It may even be basic, but my comprehesi0n on math now days is just lost (even though I went through some high level math in college many years ago, if you dont use it you loose it. And thats especially true in math).

I guess the only thing I'm trying to figure out here is do you have a few years experience, or just a month or so. I'm a little confused here. Not wanting to start a war with you, just clarify which is correct. A few years or a month.

That's wht I was trying to figure out. I asked that question and it got skipped over. and what "has my panties in a knot" Is the way you jumped on the aok bash. The guy isn't selling snake oil, he's trying to help. Everyone here is trying to better themselves and he's never ripped anyone's theories. Listen, were here in this forum to talk poker, there's another forum, i'm sure, for general discussions about people and opinions.

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

NLP, which I assume means No limit Poker

NLP = Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Nothing to do with poker

Originally Posted by jackvance

The problem for me is twofold. First, I'm not rolled for anything above 20NL. And I need to be rolled to move up, because the style of play at higher levels is different so I need time to adjust, even if my game is up to par.

The second problem is the mentality one. Maybe I've gotten the hang of the game rather quickly, but I'm still suffering from all the psychological setbacks that I think everyone has to cope with. A bit earlier I played 2-table 10NL for an hour. (10NL to start off the day, 20NL if I feel I'm in my A game) I won $40. This is HORRIBLE for me. Because every time that happens, I get into this mindset as if winning is "standard".. while most of the time poker simply means waiting for good cards and folding folding folding even you get something nice but you sense you are beat anyway. So I've had some agony to keep myself level-headed here. NOTHING wrecks my A game more than winning. Learning to cope with that is my biggest challenge now. This might sound strange, but this is how it is for me. When I lose money, my mind sharpens because I hate to lose. This is good - A game comes around. When I win however I dull out and become very impatient and play like total crap. I really really hope I can find a way to cope with this because it's annoying as hell.

Multi-table.

Originally Posted by Pelion

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

NLP, which I assume means No limit Poker

NLP = Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Nothing to do with poker

My mistake, sorry. Thank you for clarifying that.

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by Renton

Jack, he does have a point. You are far, far too green to make the observations you are making. You shouldn't refute any self-
proclaimed poker expert's ideas for the same reason I shouldn't. Because we aren't poker experts. I think its very naive and unrealistic to believe that we are.

I'm gonna be completely honest here. Open cards play. Reading what Aok had to say has from the very first time I gotten here given me the impression of being so basic that it was trivial. I'm not trying to blow my own horn here or anything, it's just how I perceived it. If this IS IN FACT NOT the general consensus, then I guess I'm the odd one out. Didn't know that.

Originally Posted by Pelion

You should stay in the beginner forum. I would also recommend reading the high stakes forum as long as you understand that alot of it wont be relevent to your game yet.

.. but my "mathematical theories" are apparently too advanced for this forum?

Let me tell you where my poker game is at. My "A Game" is already beyond the 10NL and 20NL level. When I play there I shake my head once every minute because of the rampant stupid things I see the other players do.

The problem for me is twofold. First, I'm not rolled for anything above 20NL. And I need to be rolled to move up, because the style of play at higher levels is different so I need time to adjust, even if my game is up to par.
The second problem is the mentality one. Maybe I've gotten the hang of the game rather quickly, but I'm still suffering from all the psychological setbacks that I think everyone has to cope with. A bit earlier I played 2-table 10NL for an hour. (10NL to start off the day, 20NL if I feel I'm in my A game) I won $40. This is HORRIBLE for me. Because every time that happens, I get into this mindset as if winning is "standard".. while most of the time poker simply means waiting for good cards and folding folding folding even you get something nice but you sense you are beat anyway. So I've had some agony to keep myself level-headed here. NOTHING wrecks my A game more than winning. Learning to cope with that is my biggest challenge now. This might sound strange, but this is how it is for me. When I lose money, my mind sharpens because I hate to lose. This is good - A game comes around. When I win however I dull out and become very impatient and play like total crap. I really really hope I can find a way to cope with this because it's annoying as hell.

You are still in the newbie circle of death. I thought after 8 months, I'd finally escaped but I haven't. I moved up to 100nl, and then suddenly realized that there were gaping holes in my game. I have since been spinning my wheels and getting better, slowly.

Jack, you have gotta realize you aren't that good. Just because you are appalled by the other players dumbass moves doesn't mean your good. At a ten-man poker table there are probably 4-5 of these dumbasses. Then there are 2-3 people like you, and 1-2 people who are sharks. The money flows to them. Even though someone is better than the loose-passives, it still means they may break even to the rake or even lose.

Jack, you are going to move up soon, probably too soon. You are going to realize everything I am saying. I dominated 25nl, and then I dominated 50nl, and then I GOT dominated at 100nl. A lot of it is negative variance, but a lot of it is poor play too. Nothing is more humbling than running 10bb/100 for 25k hands and then moving up to the next level only to run -2.5 bb/100 for 10k hands. Its frustrating too.

Unfortunately for you, you are also going to realize how little math ends up having to do with poker, when its all said and done. In no limit poker, implied odds are so significant that its very often profitable to make calls with bad odds.

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

A few years or a month.

NLP=neuro linguistic programming. Thought it might be something, but pretty quickly found out it was all just hogwash. Basically a whole lot of "make people feel good" talk with zero substance.

As for poker, I was introduced to the (rules of the) game march 8; Played limit on playmoney tables for 2 days because I didn't know there were different variations and I just clicked the first one I found; Then in a live game with friends to my surprise there was something like "no limit" which they advised me to play. Started playing NLHE 10NL online march 15.

Unfortunately for you, you are also going to realize how little math ends up having to do with poker, when its all said and done.

Well, very true, realized this.. that's why I'm now trying to get enough experience under the belt to see how the math applies in practice. Math just gives you a foundation of understanding. Seeing my friends play and talking to them about poker a week back was actually much more helpful than all the math. However, I was able to actually understand what they were doing because I know the math, the odds.

Seriously, without the math all you can really do is observe what others do and take their advice and apply it, not really knowing why or how it actually works.. and basically playing so much (and blowing a lot of money along the way) until you get an intuitive feeling of the odds because you've seen all the variations over and over. This takes heaps of time. If you can get this intuitive understanding from knowing the math, it'll obviously speed things up a bit.

I think maths is very important in this game. The thing is once you start to get the hang of it and it becomes second nature, you dont look at it as "maths" anymore because you just see a loose big stack and think implied odds, but those implied odds are maths.

everytime you make a call based on being ahead of a range of hands, or making a draw, or pushing a draw for that matter, all that stuff is maths.

Thing is, you can't say to the original poster that because NO hand is a 10:1 dog, he should bet 100 into a 1000 pot with 36o. This is where maths is limited because it NEEDS a tactical addendum when applied to inexperienced players.

Originally Posted by biondino

Thing is, you can't say to the original poster that because NO hand is a 10:1 dog, he should bet 100 into a 1000 pot with 36o. This is where maths is limited because it NEEDS a tactical addendum when applied to inexperienced players.

sure you can. You can say, if you are getting 10:1 against 1 player and it will put you allin then you gotta call.

Thats a pretty important SnG lesson to learn.

e.g.

you are on BB with crap of spades. The BB is half your stack.

There is a raise and two calls, then the tight big stack pushes in. Its pretty likely all of the other played will fold so you call with any 2 getting 12:1 on a headsup pot.

That sort of situation isnt so uncommon in a SnG and it is a DISASTER to fold here, so you say so. It doesnt have to be one of the first things you say to a beginner but if someone is playing SnGs you should certainly mention it in the first couple of weeks

Chardrian the moderator Speaks - I did not see this post or the controversy it caused until just now. I am going to direct everyone here: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...oker-32835.htm

The reason I love this forum is because of the willingness of most to give honest and straightforward answers to any question. There is also usually a lack of flaming and a lack of schlong sucking, which runs rampant on other sites and provides no value.

I am not going to lock this thread because I believe all of you can go about debating without flaming.

I don't know AOK but I know the man has a way with words. Calling him a cult leader is like calling Maya Angelou a cult leader - people read his stuff, for the most part, because he writes well. If he wants to write a book, who am I, or anyone else to stop him?

I think debate is important - so I am not going to edit or remove any of the threads in this post. No one has gone so far as to publicly degrade another poster - they may have publicly degraded what a poster wrote (and although I am not ok with the degradation I am ok with criticism of the content of a post), but no one has (yet) dropped down to the level of blatant name calling. I understand why AOK feels attacked and hurt but I also think he is a big enough guy that he can deal with it.

There are quite a few people on this site whose words of wisdom I treat as gold. I am not going to tell you who those people are becuase I think everyone should make that decision for yourselves. I am sure there are people who would blindly follow AOK because of his way with words. And I am also sure there are people who would blindly follow lambchop because he just won close to $100k in one day. I choose to blindly follow no one, and I would advise you to do the same.

One request from me though - please, even when criticizing someone's post, do so in a respectful way.

Pelion, that's exactly the kind of tactical addendum I meant

Originally Posted by Pelion

Originally Posted by biondino

Thing is, you can't say to the original poster that because NO hand is a 10:1 dog, he should bet 100 into a 1000 pot with 36o. This is where maths is limited because it NEEDS a tactical addendum when applied to inexperienced players.

sure you can. You can say, if you are getting 10:1 against 1 player and it will put you allin then you gotta call.

Thats a pretty important SnG lesson to learn.

e.g.

you are on BB with crap of spades. The BB is half your stack.

There is a raise and two calls, then the tight big stack pushes in. Its pretty likely all of the other played will fold so you call with any 2 getting 12:1 on a headsup pot.

That sort of situation isnt so uncommon in a SnG and it is a DISASTER to fold here, so you say so. It doesnt have to be one of the first things you say to a beginner but if someone is playing SnGs you should certainly mention it in the first couple of weeks

If this was ment to be a SnG question then I definetly agree with what you say here. But if this is a ring question then it changes, right? Surely ring doesn't play like SnG. Although I have been in some ring games where they play it that way.

Originally Posted by biondino

Pelion, that's exactly the kind of tactical addendum I meant

That is in fact exactly the mathematical approach. If you say "he could have AA, KK, QQ or AK" I could say "1/2 he'll have AA/KK/QQ and 1/2 he'll have AK". Even for bluff there is a mathematical analysis possible. On any given flop you can calculate the odds your opp has "something"; pair, set, overpair, flush draw, straight draw, and the likelyhood a certain raise will cause a fold based on a set of premises, such as what your opp is willing to pay for MP, TP, draws, etc.

Originally Posted by chardrian

I understand why AOK feels attacked and hurt but I also think he is a big enough guy that he can deal with it.

Are you saying aok is fat? kidding of course.

Math is involved in just about every decision to some degree or another. Even if you dont realize your using it, you very well subconsciously probably are using it. Even with the simplist of decisions.

Has no one here watched Nmbers?