While we're posting pics, here's a shot from my very first cash game on Party (notice the extreme high limit *rolls eyes*)

http://www.asshoes.com/royal.jpg

Quick silly bit of info - all the Royals I've ever had (all three of them) have been in Clubs.

I disagree with you there.
The old school players are head and shoulders above the noobs in the tournaments. The newbs are mostly online players who don't have experience in picking up tells or being able to accurately put your opponent on a hand. (And those skills are at least HALF of the game)

The difference in the tournament though is when a noob hits his two outer on the river you go to the rail.
Same thing when they go all in on a hand that's a 4 to 1 dog to yours.....you're going to lose that hand 1 time out of 5, and end up on the rail.

In a cash game losing a hand like this would give you the information you need to bust this guy later on.....but in a tournament you have to be lucky AND good to win.

Moneymaker and Raymer would go home broke if they sat in a cash game with the likes of Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Phil Hellmuth etc.

Anybody can win ONE tournament if they get a good rush of cards and win most of their coin flip hands.
VERY FEW people can actually make a living playing in high stakes tournaments.

:2 cents:

Good point Lenny.

I've never seen a person win a large mutli without getting some luck. And those newbs that do get lucky early on and catch a rush usually give it back before the hit the money.

In fact, I'd say it's a lot more than half the game. More like 60%.

I agree on the online point though, and I think I covered this. What I meant is now online is there, plus so much stuff on the Net and TV it's easier to learn and get good info than ever before. Even 10 years ago, the only way to learn was to sit down and lose your money.



Moneymaker is broke now (according to rumors). He played heads up against Sammy F on Stars last year in a rematch of the final table, and didn't stand a chance.


Agreed.

I can beat anyone here at 7 card stud hi/lo

anyone, even Johnny Chan runs when he sees me

True, its much easier to find information on the "math" of the game these days....but like you said above that's 40% of the game.

Yeah the only reason he beat Farha in the WSOP was he had an enormous chip advantage.....mostly from hitting that miracle ace on the river to bust out Phil Ivey (Ivey made the boat on the turn....its like what I said before about them hitting the miracle two outer on the river and sending you to the rail)

Not to mention cracking Humberto Brenes's AA with his 88 and hitting the miracle 8 on the turn......and probably a few other hands like that along the way that ESPN didn't pick up.

Be very careful what you believe from ESPN's coverage. Last year there were a bunch of questionable hands that were covered and didn't make sense. It turned out they edited the footage to what the *losing* player said they held (Howard L said this happened twice on his non-cam table).

They got a very bad name last year because of it.

As for the Phil I thing - that hand still makes me wince.

I'm going to the stud tables. Tha_Golf_Pro is my nick there. If I cuss at you for sucking out sorry :1orglaugh

Don't worry. I don't play online anymore. I save my playing time for Vegas and the very rare trip to a casino here.

Well, that's the hour up :) Thanks for the posts, guys. Time to get to work!

I don't think so. He's a pretty cool guy, though. He's a member of a poker discussion group I belong to that meets on Wednesdays. He doesn't make too many meetings but it's cool when he does. Right after he placed second on this year's PartyPoker cruise he showed up at our Wednesday meeting in sweet new car/toy he picked up with some of the profits.

Anyway, I think he likes women :) He is about 4' tall and 63lbs, though, a real waif.

SpaceAce

50 poker questions...

You too!

Hey man...ICQ me...where does this group meet? I wouldn't mind checking this out.

ok playing limit - of any size...

1. list your starting hands you play from what position please.

2. list some common situations where you would muck before the flop with certain hands.

Speaking of the "math" of poker....maybe someone here knows the answer to these questions, I can't seem to find the info on the web.

Say you're in the big blind with 52s, four limpers and you check.
You flop a flush draw and make the flush on the turn.

What are the odds that someone else in the hand has a higher flush? (Holding TWO cards of the same suit....I'm not talking about 4 flush boards)

I tend to not bet/call with baby flushes, but I've had top two pair or a set get cracked by a baby flush more times than I care to remember.

Also, in stud hi/lo.....what % of the time is there no qualifying low hand and the high hand scoops?

Hi, ICQ sent. Authorize me please.

SpaceAce

the magic 8 ball says

yes.

5/13 (diamonds we'll say) gone. unknown cards 46. The only combination you could beat would be 34 diamonds. Assuming they aren't on the board. So remove one of those as outs. So one player at the table has 7 outs with 46 unknown cards. 7/46 = 15.2% chance one person has a flush that can beat you.

I think I did that right.

1:
In a loose-passive game (not a lot of raising but lots of people seeing every flop), I will play most suited Broadway cards and AX suited from just about anywhere. In middle position I start adding things like 67-89s if there are limpers in front of me and no raise likely behind me. I will also limp with any small pair if the game is loose and passive.

In a more aggressive game I dump hands like KJ, QJs, AXs from early position. In a really bad (tough) game, I throw away AJ in early position, too. I start adding suited connectors and AXs when I am in later position and there are already limpers in front of me. If there is only one limper or it folds to me in late position, I raise hands like KJ instead of mucking them.

AA-99 I play from any position in almost any game. I'll three-bet these hands if there is a raise in front of me and cap with AA-QQ and (often) AKs, sometimes AKo depending on game conditions. Small pairs hit the muck from early position.


2:
AA and KK I never muck pre-flop in a limit game.

AJ/KJ I usually muck to any raise unless I know the raiser has loose raising standards. In that case, I three-bet if I can isolate the raiser. Also, if I have money in and it's raised behind me I will call and see the flop. Since I usually raise hands like this coming in, I usually have two bets in and need to pay one more to see the flop when I am reraised so I am often getting good odds.

A2-AT just get dumped from any position unless it is folded to me in the cutoff or on the button where I might raise A8 on up.

KX/QX/JX get mucked from anywhere unless they are connected in which case I might play from late position with enough people in the pot ahead of me.

AQ I will muck if it comes around to me capped (unless I already have three bets in) or if the action is three-bet before it gets to me.

KQo I usually muck to an early position raise. I always muck KQo if it comes to me raised and reraised unless I am only calling one bet and closing the action.

KQs I muck for two cold unless the raise came from late position or a loose raiser in which case I will often three-bet if I have better position than the raiser.

Any small pair gets mucked for two cold unless I am getting huge pot odds.

SpaceAce

Ok so if your math is right then the baby flush will hold up about 5 times out of 6. (assuming a non paired board)

That's definitely worth playing aggressively and paying off the higher flush 1 time out of 6.

Thanks :thumbsup

Quick post before I head back to work. You've forgotten to add in the possibility of a four-suit board and someone holding the lone high card for the flush.

Also you can't remove two cards simply because they would be the hand that you can beat - it's a possible hand or turn/river card.

That's a good point. But I'm assuming he only wanted to know the odds on the turn card when he hit it.

Wasn't removing the two cards. Only saying that the only possibly flush he could have that would lose would be those two cards. So that means anyone of those cards and 6 others would make a winner. The unknown at the time would be 46 cards and 7 possible outs.