Poker Forum > General Discussion

Was this bad play?

<< < (6/8) > >>

AMRN:
...but if the side pot was bigger than the main pot, surely you have to agree it was worth going for.

kinboshi:

--- Quote from: ThePiranha on December 30, 2007, 16:38:52 PM ---
ok, find me 1 example, be it a video or anything where you have ever seen a succesful pro bet into a side pot with nothing and i will silence myself on this issue.

Fair enough??

Oh and this comp had 1600 runners in, so for it to be down to the last 100, id definately say that you were deep enough to be checking the pot down and trying to knock somebody out.

--- End quote ---


Ignore the side pot - you"re looking at all the chips that are in the middle and trying to make them yours.  You know the short-stack is on a huge range, and the other player in the hand knows that too.  Get him out of the hand, increase your chip stack.

I"d never, ever, ever check down a pot just to increase the chance of short-stack being knocked out when there are a 100+ players left.  I might check it down if I think I"ve got no chance shifting another player off the hand, but I"m not checking it down to ladder.

Looks like we"ll have to agree to disagree here.  You play it your way, and I"ll play it mine.  One thing I"d have to say though is that you"re wrong to abuse anyone here who bets.  I don"t think that"s a matter of opinion, it"s just not right.

Jon MW:

--- Quote from: ThePiranha on December 30, 2007, 16:38:52 PM ---
ok, find me 1 example, be it a video or anything where you have ever seen a succesful pro bet into a side pot with nothing and i will silence myself on this issue.
...

--- End quote ---


You"re not likely to see this on TV.

(i) Virtually all the televised stages of tournaments are the latter stages and final tables of tournaments where the implicit collusion in question is the best choice of action.

(ii) On a similar note, a lot of televised tournaments (specifically those that are made for television, as opposed to just having cameras at an existing tournament), become very crapshooty. This means that the other player in the pot wouldn"t be able to fold because they wouldn"t have enough chips left to be able to do so.

(iii) Once you"ve eliminated the 99.9% (and this may be an understatement) of televised tournament poker the above 2 points cover, you would then have to happen to have a  hand, not only with a substantial side pot but also being played by an established pro and at the feature televised table.

The situation itself will occur on a fairly regular basis around the world - but because of these reasons (especially (i) and (ii)) you would be very lucky to catch it on TV.


And that...

is why you shouldn"t learn poker from watching it on the telly.

ThePiranha:
apologies, the lol at the end of my sentence saying i was going to abuse him to was implying that i was joking.

And that...

is why you shouldn"t learn poker from watching it on the telly.

Ok, i agree here, but still, can you tell me if you have ever seen any seasoned pro bluff into a relatively small side pot?

That was the point i made

kinboshi:

--- Quote from: ThePiranha on December 31, 2007, 14:04:59 PM ---
apologies, the lol at the end of my sentence saying i was going to abuse him to was implying that i was joking.

--- End quote ---


OK - my bad.  Misinterpreted what you were saying - easy to do on a fourm. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page