| |
Main
Date: 27 Nov 2006 13:26:39
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Betting "GCA"
|
If the bet seems wrong it most likely is. As I have said before,
there's no such thing as over betting a pot. You either want a call or
you don't, so you make your wager larger. Does this seem simple enough?
You hear people saying the person bet too much into that pot. If he has
it and you call, he may have been able to bet more. The idea of the
game is to have the opposition fold when you want and call when you
want. Easier said than done.
The main criteria for determining the amount of a bet is the flops.
Spaced out rainbow flops, such as 2-8-K give bettors an advantage as
they can always make a bigger bet on the turn to make up for a smaller
bet on the flop. But, realize, betting T200 into a pot of T800 with
many possibilities riding on the next card isn't exactly a mark of
confidence. If this is a trap, is the person perhaps trapping himself?
The best players in the game are aggressive and bet the pots for
themselves. If you need to rely on someone doing your work, you're not
the player you think you are.
The best way to summarize this is by looking into the situations put
before you. Multiway limp pots allow for many possibilities. This is
why I'm totally against limping in tournaments. Many like taking small
pairs, hitting the flop and perhaps getting great action. Flip side,
blinds and such get the same and unless you get locks in some of these
spots, you can fall victim to these situations. Raising accomplishes
something right from the start, it eliminates many hand possibilities.
If it doesn't, the players are weak and you'll remember this next time.
Cash players don't pay these penalties of going out because they were
drawn out on, they just buy more chips and attack again, a privilege
you don't receive in tournaments.
Always look at the total of chips in the pot and think what you'd do to
protect this if you had a hand. This is something you must advance on
quickly, if you're going to be a player.
Say player A just raised under the gun for T200 with 25-50 blinds, only
to get called by three players. Flop comes 456 and out comes player A
with T200. What can you put this person on? 78? Small pair to make a
set? In this spot, you must learn to deal with these situations and let
your gut play. You can assume the best this player has is an over pair
and thus you can attack him in numerous ways, raising him on the flop a
generous amount, even if you hand contains KJo. Poker is playing people
and stealing.
When players tell you their holding, you own them provided you have the
nerve and savvy to attack in the proper manner. You're all
'brainwashed' into the semi bluff. What about the 'out and out bluff'?
This is what poker is built on, not a bluff where you have a chance to
win if you bet and get called. The game is setting the person up for
the finale, the river bet when there's no drawing out and a decision
must be made. here, you win or lose by calling, nothing else. But, to
get to a position to be able to do this, your betting skills must be
honed and you must know how to control the betting.
The main thing most don't realize is there's two ways of playing NL,
cash game and Tournament style. Cash game style is far more intricate
and good cash players will annihilate 'great tourney' players, if
anything comes close to even.
The reason, as mentioned before is in cash games the blinds stay the
same and you're forced to get out the way you get in. In cash games,
players amass monster stacks, far more than anyone could in a tourney
in comparison to blinds. This allows these players to 'play,' making
moves to confuse opponents as well as trap them while risking small
amounts.
Tourneys don't give you this privilege. Do you ever think you'll see
this type of imaginary money calling all-in with the hands you watch on
TV? In cash games, any style goes as long as the player is good. In
tourneys, this is not the case. In tourneys, you must play many times
tighter than in cash games, since you get only one chance in each
tourney. If you make a few moves on a person to set him up later when
you buy more chips in a game, you can. In tourneys, you'll be out of
chips.
Another thing happening is the MAX BUY-IN in many of these new NL
games. This is for the protection of the weak players, nothing else.
Protection of the weak players is something the house needs, for the
strong would decimate the weak quickly if these buy-ins weren't
limited. I played all my life and never heard of this until recently.
It's being done so the casinos and sites can extract as much money as
possible.
But back to tells on betting. Again, I keep telling you, unless pots
are basically cinch pots, such as AAQ, three suited and their ilk,
small bets are ridiculous. Take a pot with 25-50 blind and 4 players
entering for 200 each. T800 in the pot now and it comes 984 with two of
a suit. Check, check, check and the last person bets T50 or so. What
kind of bet is this?
Why would the last person open the betting for the rest of the players
to get another shot in case they checked and hoped to raise? If the
last person to bet was trying to induce a bet because he had a big
hand, why not bet the size of the pot or close? It's just as easily
taken he could be stealing doing this as the other. It's also a far
more deceptive play as well as being safer.
Imagine the person betting T50 and getting three calls from players
having gutshots or needing runner-runner flush? The person would be
better off checking and hoping someone bets into him on the turn.
Turn the scenario around and have the lead person do this. Same thing.
All you hear and read about are these tells these people supposedly
give off. Ever notice how many sun glasses you see on TV these days?
The tell in poker is betting, nothing else. Until you learn proper
betting and betting patterns, you could state you have these tells.
They are nothing else but improper amounts of the bets.
Many of you state you have problems playing QQ, JJ and such hands. They
are harder to play since they're not the cinch hand or number two to
start with. With AA or KK, you don't worry about any over cards, except
an A if you have KKK.
The truth is as with the others, there are many ways of playing these
hands, the key element being your position and opponents in the game.
Seeing an Avatar playing online doesn't tell you much, seeing a real
opponent in a B&M does.
If you ever lay KK down online if you have any chips, please don't
subscribe to this site. You're beyond help. If you do this with AA, you
should seek psychiatric help quickly.
The bottom line is, these hands are called 'no brainers', meaning you
get them against people with their counterparts and one wins and the
other loses. The one thing you hope for is they come fairly evenly
distributed. You just can't lay these hands down.
Plus there are pros and cons to about every situation in poker. Player
in front raises 4x the BB and you're holding QQ. Flop comes A93
rainbow. Player A comes out betting. Problem again? This game is always
problems. Say Player A holds JJ and bets out? Say he checks?
There are so many variables to these situations with so many outcomes,
there's no cut and dry formula to tell you what to do, especially
online. One way, the raise with the QQ could double you up, while a
call could lose you the pot?
Trial and error will play a large part in you learning this game, if
you care to learn it right. The absolute BEST INFORMATION I can give
you to start with is a repeat of what I've been telling you from day 1,
play premium hands. As you become successful playing these, they you
can expand. However, until that point, stick to this plan. Stick to the
high end betting. Better this than lower end giving players better
chances to draw out.
Many of you may like to you the ASK RUSS FORUM for questions for this
subject. The games I usually played in contained at least 80%
professionals, so they differ from those your playing in. Things and
circumstances I think may be obvious, won't be that way to you. This is
what I do.
The plan is to go through NL games through December and I will start on
cash game NL soon. Come January, I'll start on alternative games, such
as 'split games'. These are the games Baby Boomers like. They also have
the money.
Russ Georgiev
www.pokermafia.com
|
|
| |
Date: 27 Nov 2006 15:28:46
From:
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
Sound like alot of good sound advice there.
bitbuilder on stars
|
| |
Date: 27 Nov 2006 15:26:50
From:
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
RussGeorgiev@aol.com wrote:
> If the bet seems wrong it most likely is. As I have said before,
> there's no such thing as over betting a pot. You either want a call or
> you don't, so you make your wager larger. Does this seem simple enough?
> You hear people saying the person bet too much into that pot. If he has
> it and you call, he may have been able to bet more. The idea of the
> game is to have the opposition fold when you want and call when you
> want. Easier said than done.
>
> The main criteria for determining the amount of a bet is the flops.
> Spaced out rainbow flops, such as 2-8-K give bettors an advantage as
> they can always make a bigger bet on the turn to make up for a smaller
> bet on the flop. But, realize, betting T200 into a pot of T800 with
> many possibilities riding on the next card isn't exactly a mark of
> confidence. If this is a trap, is the person perhaps trapping himself?
> The best players in the game are aggressive and bet the pots for
> themselves. If you need to rely on someone doing your work, you're not
> the player you think you are.
>
> The best way to summarize this is by looking into the situations put
> before you. Multiway limp pots allow for many possibilities. This is
> why I'm totally against limping in tournaments. Many like taking small
> pairs, hitting the flop and perhaps getting great action. Flip side,
> blinds and such get the same and unless you get locks in some of these
> spots, you can fall victim to these situations. Raising accomplishes
> something right from the start, it eliminates many hand possibilities.
> If it doesn't, the players are weak and you'll remember this next time.
> Cash players don't pay these penalties of going out because they were
> drawn out on, they just buy more chips and attack again, a privilege
> you don't receive in tournaments.
>
> Always look at the total of chips in the pot and think what you'd do to
> protect this if you had a hand. This is something you must advance on
> quickly, if you're going to be a player.
>
> Say player A just raised under the gun for T200 with 25-50 blinds, only
> to get called by three players. Flop comes 456 and out comes player A
> with T200. What can you put this person on? 78? Small pair to make a
> set? In this spot, you must learn to deal with these situations and let
> your gut play. You can assume the best this player has is an over pair
> and thus you can attack him in numerous ways, raising him on the flop a
> generous amount, even if you hand contains KJo. Poker is playing people
> and stealing.
>
> When players tell you their holding, you own them provided you have the
> nerve and savvy to attack in the proper manner. You're all
> 'brainwashed' into the semi bluff. What about the 'out and out bluff'?
> This is what poker is built on, not a bluff where you have a chance to
> win if you bet and get called. The game is setting the person up for
> the finale, the river bet when there's no drawing out and a decision
> must be made. here, you win or lose by calling, nothing else. But, to
> get to a position to be able to do this, your betting skills must be
> honed and you must know how to control the betting.
>
>
> The main thing most don't realize is there's two ways of playing NL,
> cash game and Tournament style. Cash game style is far more intricate
> and good cash players will annihilate 'great tourney' players, if
> anything comes close to even.
>
> The reason, as mentioned before is in cash games the blinds stay the
> same and you're forced to get out the way you get in. In cash games,
> players amass monster stacks, far more than anyone could in a tourney
> in comparison to blinds. This allows these players to 'play,' making
> moves to confuse opponents as well as trap them while risking small
> amounts.
>
> Tourneys don't give you this privilege. Do you ever think you'll see
> this type of imaginary money calling all-in with the hands you watch on
> TV? In cash games, any style goes as long as the player is good. In
> tourneys, this is not the case. In tourneys, you must play many times
> tighter than in cash games, since you get only one chance in each
> tourney. If you make a few moves on a person to set him up later when
> you buy more chips in a game, you can. In tourneys, you'll be out of
> chips.
>
> Another thing happening is the MAX BUY-IN in many of these new NL
> games. This is for the protection of the weak players, nothing else.
> Protection of the weak players is something the house needs, for the
> strong would decimate the weak quickly if these buy-ins weren't
> limited. I played all my life and never heard of this until recently.
> It's being done so the casinos and sites can extract as much money as
> possible.
>
> But back to tells on betting. Again, I keep telling you, unless pots
> are basically cinch pots, such as AAQ, three suited and their ilk,
> small bets are ridiculous. Take a pot with 25-50 blind and 4 players
> entering for 200 each. T800 in the pot now and it comes 984 with two of
> a suit. Check, check, check and the last person bets T50 or so. What
> kind of bet is this?
>
> Why would the last person open the betting for the rest of the players
> to get another shot in case they checked and hoped to raise? If the
> last person to bet was trying to induce a bet because he had a big
> hand, why not bet the size of the pot or close? It's just as easily
> taken he could be stealing doing this as the other. It's also a far
> more deceptive play as well as being safer.
>
> Imagine the person betting T50 and getting three calls from players
> having gutshots or needing runner-runner flush? The person would be
> better off checking and hoping someone bets into him on the turn.
>
> Turn the scenario around and have the lead person do this. Same thing.
> All you hear and read about are these tells these people supposedly
> give off. Ever notice how many sun glasses you see on TV these days?
> The tell in poker is betting, nothing else. Until you learn proper
> betting and betting patterns, you could state you have these tells.
> They are nothing else but improper amounts of the bets.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Many of you state you have problems playing QQ, JJ and such hands. They
> are harder to play since they're not the cinch hand or number two to
> start with. With AA or KK, you don't worry about any over cards, except
> an A if you have KKK.
>
> The truth is as with the others, there are many ways of playing these
> hands, the key element being your position and opponents in the game.
> Seeing an Avatar playing online doesn't tell you much, seeing a real
> opponent in a B&M does.
>
> If you ever lay KK down online if you have any chips, please don't
> subscribe to this site. You're beyond help. If you do this with AA, you
> should seek psychiatric help quickly.
>
> The bottom line is, these hands are called 'no brainers', meaning you
> get them against people with their counterparts and one wins and the
> other loses. The one thing you hope for is they come fairly evenly
> distributed. You just can't lay these hands down.
>
> Plus there are pros and cons to about every situation in poker. Player
> in front raises 4x the BB and you're holding QQ. Flop comes A93
> rainbow. Player A comes out betting. Problem again? This game is always
> problems. Say Player A holds JJ and bets out? Say he checks?
>
> There are so many variables to these situations with so many outcomes,
> there's no cut and dry formula to tell you what to do, especially
> online. One way, the raise with the QQ could double you up, while a
> call could lose you the pot?
>
> Trial and error will play a large part in you learning this game, if
> you care to learn it right. The absolute BEST INFORMATION I can give
> you to start with is a repeat of what I've been telling you from day 1,
> play premium hands. As you become successful playing these, they you
> can expand. However, until that point, stick to this plan. Stick to the
> high end betting. Better this than lower end giving players better
> chances to draw out.
>
> Many of you may like to you the ASK RUSS FORUM for questions for this
> subject. The games I usually played in contained at least 80%
> professionals, so they differ from those your playing in. Things and
> circumstances I think may be obvious, won't be that way to you. This is
> what I do.
>
> The plan is to go through NL games through December and I will start on
> cash game NL soon. Come January, I'll start on alternative games, such
> as 'split games'. These are the games Baby Boomers like. They also have
> the money.
>
> Russ Georgiev
>
> www.pokermafia.com
|
| |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 09:00:08
From: Dr Zen
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
On 27 Nov 2006 13:26:39 -0800, "RussGeorgiev@aol.com"
<RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote:
We've had this one.
--
Dr Zen
King of the wild pixels.
http://gollyg.blogspot.com
|
| | |
Date: 27 Nov 23:29:45
From: Porsche_Dan
Subject: Re: Betting
|
Are you speaking for the entire RGP community or just your multiple
personalities?
On Nov 27 2006 5:00 PM, Dr Zen wrote:
> On 27 Nov 2006 13:26:39 -0800, "RussGeorgiev@aol.com"
> wrote:
>
> We've had this one.
>
> --
>
> Dr Zen
> King of the wild pixels.
> http://gollyg.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 10:31:15
From: Dr Zen
Subject: Re: Betting
|
On Mon, 27 Nov 06 23:29:45 GMT, Porsche_Dan <43080932@recpoker.com >
wrote:
> Are you speaking for the entire RGP community or just your multiple
>personalities?
I'm speaking for everyone except for boring, topposting cuntfaces.
They have you.
--
Dr Zen
King of the wild pixels.
http://gollyg.blogspot.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Nov
From: Porsche_Dan
Subject: Re: Betting
|
On Nov 27 2006 4:31 PM, Dr Zen wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 06 23:29:45 GMT, Porsche_Dan <43080932@recpoker.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Are you speaking for the entire RGP community or just your multiple
> >personalities?
>
> I'm speaking for everyone except for boring, topposting cuntfaces.
> They have you.
>
> --
>
> Dr Zen
> King of the wild pixels.
> http://gollyg.blogspot.com
You seem to use the word cunt quite a bit. Mommy complex? I read your blog
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, starvedforattentionsaywhat?
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 13:47:16
From: Dr Zen
Subject: Re: Betting
|
On Tue, 28 Nov 06 3:14:47 GMT, Porsche_Dan <43080932@recpoker.com >
wrote:
>
>
>On Nov 27 2006 4:31 PM, Dr Zen wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 06 23:29:45 GMT, Porsche_Dan <43080932@recpoker.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Are you speaking for the entire RGP community or just your multiple
>> >personalities?
>>
>> I'm speaking for everyone except for boring, topposting cuntfaces.
>> They have you.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dr Zen
>> King of the wild pixels.
>> http://gollyg.blogspot.com
>
>
>You seem to use the word cunt quite a bit.
I meet a lot of cunts online.
> Mommy complex? I read your blog
>Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, starvedforattentionsaywhat?
>
>
No one's forcing you to read it, cuntface.
--
Dr Zen
King of the wild pixels.
http://gollyg.blogspot.com
|
| |
Date: 27 Nov 21:34:24
From: Stu Ungar Fan
Subject: Re: Betting
|
Wow! You should write a book on nolimit cash games. Preferably shorthanded and
heads up play.
Seriously.
http://stuungar.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 20:47:42
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
Tate and Lyle wrote:
> <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1164773015.357206.41770@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Tate and Lyle wrote:
> >> Just curious to know if the money you raise from the people who
> >> pay to join your site covers you poker loses or not?
> >
> >
> > My site has cost me at least $100,000. First, I don't have 1000
> > members, next, if I did, that would only add up to less than $30,000.
> >
> > I earn my money playing poker, which I have for over 40 years.
>
> You couldn't lend me $400 for a tournemnt could you?
> I will give it you back + 10% more.
I have staked numerous players on this site in many events, including
WSOP events. Some, I've put into multiple tourneys. I even staked
Razzo, just to show I don't play favorites. I have also sent money to
many RGPers who have been down on their luck, to help them out of
positions they have been in. I will not mention them, for it was my
priviledge.
I have spent well over 100K on this site, more than probably all others
combined, just to discredit those who want to discredit me.
I have sent out 1000's of tapes and DVD's, as well as PokerMafia hats
and shirts.
I have stated dozens of players for tourneys and lessons and believe I
have kept my word on this NG everytime.
I have NO JOB, never had one, except playing poker and having a prop
job in a casino for a few years. However, with this job, I had no
schedule, allowing me to come and go as I pleased.
The older posters stopped attacking me long ago, due to the lies that
came from the 'so called' hero's you people worship.
Why am I here? REVENGE
How did I take over this NG?
Logic and answering questions. Answers that had more credibility than
just stating, "it's me, Doyle Brunson, would I lie to you"?
I know Clinton and Nixon both lied to me, so why would Doyle be any
different? When I asked if the Big Game could be cheated, he replied,
"Russ, it the game was being cheated, we'd catch them". I then replied,
what would stop you and your crew? He replied, "MY WORD". Well, if
Presidents of the United States can lie, Doyle certainly could. The
fact he stated the Big Game couldn't be cheated was a lie in itself,
since if he and his crew wanted to cheat it, they could. Not only could
they cheat it, they do cheat it.
Russ Georgiev
www.pokermafia.com
>
>
> >
> > Russ Georgiev
> >
> > www.pokermafia.com
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > www.pokermafia.com
> >> >
> >
|
| |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 20:03:35
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
Tate and Lyle wrote:
> Just curious to know if the money you raise from the people who
> pay to join your site covers you poker loses or not?
My site has cost me at least $100,000. First, I don't have 1000
members, next, if I did, that would only add up to less than $30,000.
I earn my money playing poker, which I have for over 40 years.
Russ Georgiev
www.pokermafia.com
>
>
>
> > www.pokermafia.com
> >
|
| | |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 04:25:41
From: Tate and Lyle
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
<RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1164773015.357206.41770@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Tate and Lyle wrote:
>> Just curious to know if the money you raise from the people who
>> pay to join your site covers you poker loses or not?
>
>
> My site has cost me at least $100,000. First, I don't have 1000
> members, next, if I did, that would only add up to less than $30,000.
>
> I earn my money playing poker, which I have for over 40 years.
You couldn't lend me $400 for a tournemnt could you?
I will give it you back + 10% more.
>
> Russ Georgiev
>
> www.pokermafia.com
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> > www.pokermafia.com
>> >
>
|
| |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 00:15:10
From: Tate and Lyle
Subject: Re: Betting "GCA"
|
Just curious to know if the money you raise from the people who
pay to join your site covers you poker loses or not?
> www.pokermafia.com
>
|
|
