For what it's worth which is not much if anything , i was always told to be aggressive when it comes to close or on the bubble in sats , i'da shoved qq and aa regardless of stacks May be that is why i have never won anything of note
For what it's worth which is not much if anything , i was always told to be aggressive when it comes to close or on the bubble in sats , i'da shoved qq and aa regardless of stacks May be that is why i have never won anything of note
I cant fold them either. Although if you won with the queens, there would a bigger case for folding the aces.
I also think that taken as a snap shot you can make a logical case for folding the queens, but when you consider what comes next, it becomes more difficult. Are you folding everything? Or are you nicking blinds, in position? If so, what is your range?
For what it's worth which is not much if anything , i was always told to be aggressive when it comes to close or on the bubble in sats , i'da shoved qq and aa regardless of stacks May be that is why i have never won anything of note
There is a difference between being first in the pot and second in these circumstances. Shoving is fine-it is calling where you have to play far tighter.
For what it's worth which is not much if anything , i was always told to be aggressive when it comes to close or on the bubble in sats , i'da shoved qq and aa regardless of stacks May be that is why i have never won anything of note
There is a difference between being first in the pot and second in these circumstances. Shoving is fine-it is calling where you have to play far tighter.
yeah i should have said if i was 1st to act especially the queens , if limped i would shove Edit: Looking at the hand again i'da shoved qq and closed my eyes
The two scenarios are entirely different, such is the fluidity and nuances of Satellites, which is why we love playing the Game ........ MOST of the time
GOOD LUCK for the rest of UKOPS evry1
If you could turn the clock back, would you play the queens?
NOPE .......
and before you ask .....
I would play the A-Aces again too. The situation had changed .....and it was my BB and I already had 1200chips invested.
So just to clarify. You played and lost.
If you were given another opportunity, you would play to lose all over again.
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
What I'm saying is.......if in the following hand to the Q-Q's I would have been dealt Q-Q again, I would have FOLDED again if someone SHOVED before it was my turn to act.
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
I think you think about Satellite Poker as more of a Tournament (Bounty Hunter mainly) Player where you'd probably CALL any SHOVE with even less than Q-Q's and obviously if it was a Bounty Hunter, I'm calling the SHOVES all day long
...... but it was a satellite, and there are different thoughts and tactics you have to use...... as per Dara O'Kearney's book (which I believe is very good)
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not. I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens? I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs. As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens. Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so. How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose. It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
What I'm saying is.......if in the following hand to the Q-Q's I would have been dealt Q-Q again, I would have FOLDED again if someone SHOVED before it was my turn to act.
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
The "target" being 10K if it is a 1 in 5 sat with no overlay and a 2K starting stack,
I think you think about Satellite Poker as more of a Tournament (Bounty Hunter mainly) Player where you'd probably CALL any SHOVE with even less than Q-Q's and obviously if it was a Bounty Hunter, I'm calling the SHOVES all day long
I dont, and you apparently dont play BHs.
...... but it was a satellite, and there are different thoughts and tactics you have to use...... as per Dara O'Kearney's book (which I believe is very good)
One aspect that MTTs, and sats probably share, is play around the bubble.
The two scenarios are entirely different, such is the fluidity and nuances of Satellites, which is why we love playing the Game ........ MOST of the time
GOOD LUCK for the rest of UKOPS evry1
If you could turn the clock back, would you play the queens?
NOPE .......
and before you ask .....
I would play the A-Aces again too. The situation had changed .....and it was my BB and I already had 1200chips invested.
So just to clarify. You played and lost.
If you were given another opportunity, you would play to lose all over again.
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
What I'm saying is.......if in the following hand to the Q-Q's I would have been dealt Q-Q again, I would have FOLDED again if someone SHOVED before it was my turn to act.
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
I think you think about Satellite Poker as more of a Tournament (Bounty Hunter mainly) Player where you'd probably CALL any SHOVE with even less than Q-Q's and obviously if it was a Bounty Hunter, I'm calling the SHOVES all day long
...... but it was a satellite, and there are different thoughts and tactics you have to use...... as per Dara O'Kearney's book (which I believe is very good)
A couple of other things that affect any decision making. What is the probable range of the shover. As I said earlier this is likely to be very wide, as evidenced by the A6. And secondly, what was your plan after folding the queens. Was your plan to fold everything? If not, what?
This is a hand ah played in the £15,000 turbo b/h , ah freerolled into it. There were 21 players left, ah was sitting 19th, it paid up to 18 which was £130.00. The player on the button had went all-in previously on the button with 10/J off suit and the one before that A/6 off suit. Should ah have tried to dour it oot or was all-in the right play.
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not. I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens? I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs. As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens. Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so.
NO it doesn't ......it's exactly the same scenario with Q-Q's because in that situation I had 10 players below me and 4 above.....so according to Graham and the Poker Satellite Stategy book being in 5th with over 10K chips it's a FOLD......and most people agree with that.
How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose. It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
It's not mad at all.....it's the correct play in that situation
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
I know exactly what turning the clock back means ........ and we actually did it last Sunday morning
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
When I called with the A-Aces, the positions had changed ....... I was lower down the leaderboard (around 7th) and had less than 10K chips. Maybe you're confusing the situations
Is anyone else intrigued about the use of the term 'A-Aces'....
I’m entirely familiar with it. There’s a big number of people who formed a group. We all know each other well and the group was formed with the sole intention of upsetting you. Misty is part of that group, some may call it a clique, and we all use that term
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not. I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens? I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs. As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens. Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so.
NO it doesn't ......it's exactly the same scenario with Q-Q's because in that situation I had 10 players below me and 4 above.....so according to Graham and the Poker Satellite Stategy book being in 5th with over 10K chips it's a FOLD......and most people agree with that.
How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose. It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
It's not mad at all.....it's the correct play in that situation
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
I know exactly what turning the clock back means ........ and we actually did it last Sunday morning
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
When I called with the A-Aces, the positions had changed ....... I was lower down the leaderboard (around 7th) and had less than 10K chips. Maybe you're confusing the situations
You had 8,000 behind. So how much do you think 70% of 10k is?
There seems to be some agreement on that. I was trying to get to the strategy after you have folded the queens. And also whether any rules should be strictly applied. If you were strictly applying the 70% rule, the aces are a fold.
We dont know what would have happened to the queens, because they were folded. We do know what happened to the aces. So were the aces a fold? What is the strategy after folding them?
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not. I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens? I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs. As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens. Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so.
NO it doesn't ......it's exactly the same scenario with Q-Q's because in that situation I had 10 players below me and 4 above.....so according to Graham and the Poker Satellite Stategy book being in 5th with over 10K chips it's a FOLD......and most people agree with that.
How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose. It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
It's not mad at all.....it's the correct play in that situation
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
I know exactly what turning the clock back means ........ and we actually did it last Sunday morning
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
When I called with the A-Aces, the positions had changed ....... I was lower down the leaderboard (around 7th) and had less than 10K chips. Maybe you're confusing the situations
When you called with the aces you still had more players below than above, and were over 70% of your target?
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not. I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens? I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs. As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens. Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so.
NO it doesn't ......it's exactly the same scenario with Q-Q's because in that situation I had 10 players below me and 4 above.....so according to Graham and the Poker Satellite Stategy book being in 5th with over 10K chips it's a FOLD......and most people agree with that.
How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose. It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
It's not mad at all.....it's the correct play in that situation
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
I know exactly what turning the clock back means ........ and we actually did it last Sunday morning
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
When I called with the A-Aces, the positions had changed ....... I was lower down the leaderboard (around 7th) and had less than 10K chips. Maybe you're confusing the situations
When you called with the aces you still had more players below than above, and were over 70% of your target?
.....but I would have very soon been in the bottom four..... AND I'm never going to get a better hand than A-Aces, as well as still having some chips left. It would have been more of a FOLD if one of the Bigger Stacks than me would have SHOVED
..... but even then I would probably still have called
Comments
May be that is why i have never won anything of note
Although if you won with the queens, there would a bigger case for folding the aces.
I also think that taken as a snap shot you can make a logical case for folding the queens, but when you consider what comes next, it becomes more difficult.
Are you folding everything?
Or are you nicking blinds, in position?
If so, what is your range?
Edit: Looking at the hand again i'da shoved qq and closed my eyes
I think you're trying to twist the situation ........ obviously if I knew what cards were going to come out in A-A v A-6 hand, I would have FOLDED ......but no one knows what cards are going to be dealt, except @TheWaddy
I am not.
I just merely asked, if you could turn the clock back, would you call with the queens?
I think that is a no brainer, as the question has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs.
As we all know the outcome, it makes logical sense to call with the queens.
Its just that you cant bring yourself to say so.
How mad do you have to be to say, oh no, I would still play in exactly the same way, and still lose.
It can only be hypothetical, as we all also know that you cant turn the clock back.
What I'm saying is.......if in the following hand to the Q-Q's I would have been dealt Q-Q again, I would have FOLDED again if someone SHOVED before it was my turn to act.
Do you know what turning the clock back means?
.....and likewise with the A-Aces if I'd been dealt A-Aces again in the following hand, I would have CALLED a SHOVE..... which I think has pretty much been backed-up by Graham @StayOrGo and Phil @Essexphil with the stack sizes of the bottom 4 players.
Dara says "in general" if you have more people below you that would get a seat, than those above, you want to start to seriously slow down. So you have 4 above and 10 below. Also he uses a 70% rule, which is, have you got to 70% of the "target."
The "target" being 10K if it is a 1 in 5 sat with no overlay and a 2K starting stack,
Cheers Graham @StayOrGo
Really good insight into Satellite play.
I think you think about Satellite Poker as more of a Tournament (Bounty Hunter mainly) Player where you'd probably CALL any SHOVE with even less than Q-Q's and obviously if it was a Bounty Hunter, I'm calling the SHOVES all day long
I dont, and you apparently dont play BHs.
...... but it was a satellite, and there are different thoughts and tactics you have to use...... as per Dara O'Kearney's book (which I believe is very good)
One aspect that MTTs, and sats probably share, is play around the bubble.
There were 21 players left, ah was sitting 19th, it paid up to 18 which was £130.00.
The player on the button had went all-in previously on the button with 10/J off suit and the one before that A/6 off suit.
Should ah have tried to dour it oot or was all-in the right play.
There’s a big number of people who formed a group. We all know each other well and the group was formed with the sole intention of upsetting you. Misty is part of that group, some may call it a clique, and we all use that term
I was trying to get to the strategy after you have folded the queens.
And also whether any rules should be strictly applied.
If you were strictly applying the 70% rule, the aces are a fold.
We dont know what would have happened to the queens, because they were folded.
We do know what happened to the aces.
So were the aces a fold?
What is the strategy after folding them?