Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Jesus Lederer, post: 367611, member: 3283"] Completely agree with rob. MrSticker, when you analyze a hand you have to analyze every move but without being results-oriented. You have to see if you made the correct betting and you achieved what you wanted. Look at this: Full Tilt Poker Game #332853336: $5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (2161681), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 14:51:42 ET - 2005/12/12 Seat 1: MAD Nice (1,365) Seat 2: Trumpman (1,955) Seat 3: streske18 (1,380) Seat 4: BIMMER99 (1,515) Seat 5: middle57man (1,300) Seat 6: jompa_banan (1,455) Seat 7: Don Mega (1,545) Seat 8: DokerPad (1,515) Seat 9: Jamile100 (1,470) Don Mega posts the small blind of 15 DokerPad posts the big blind of 30 The button is in seat #6 *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to Jamile100 [Ac Ad] Jamile100 raises to 105 MAD Nice folds Trumpman folds streske18 calls 105 BIMMER99 folds middle57man folds jompa_banan folds Don Mega: wins Don Mega folds DokerPad folds *** FLOP *** [Ah 2c Qd] Don Mega: oops Don Mega: wrong window Jamile100 has 15 seconds left to act Jamile100 bets 255 streske18 raises to 1,275, and is all in Jamile100 calls 1,020 If you analyze that, then you can´t say that it wasn´t the perfect play. Jamile, holding the nuts, made the other guy went all in. That´s all. Streske18 could have ANY hand and he still was going to be the underdog. According to you MrSticker, Streske18 made the perfect play because he won? That´s the reason of why i like when Paulsson doesn´t show the results when he post a hand in the hand analysis section, because he prevents us of being results-oriented. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us