Man you always fly off the handle. I don’t say that, at all.
No I think you do
If I misinterpreted your post my apologies but I don’t understand the comment about players with big wins being not profitable if you didn’t intend to suggest that of him. Seems like the only reason to post that is to suggest it about v2.
This is another weird thing about hh discussions is people rightfully default to the most likely play. I get that.
I only raise 62hh there maybe 1/10 times and I am guessing v2 limps 85 there something like 1/20 times. He is generally a raise or fold guy. Of course both are folds the majority of the time. That’s what makes it interesting.
Lol donkaments
4 Likes
Truth!
Phil Hellmuth has even bigger wins. I guess you must admit he’s even more profitable.
4 Likes
lol that is pretty funny that you use lifetime donkament earnings to justify an objectively terrible limp.
1 Like
Are you sure you’re not trolling by trying to parody me?
1 Like
You’re far too weak passive to make that play pre or on the turn.
1 Like
I’m genuinely curious as I respect your comments. Is your limping frequency literally 0% in this situation?
Also, I would never use donkament winnings in a vacuum as evidence of a great player. Jamie Gold say hi! I was using it as supplement to my claim he is the best player in the field. If you polled our local player pool I would put the line at top 3 is where his name ends up in a poll of best players.
I don’t really play tournaments, but yea, 0% in NLHE that shallow. I don’t try to wizard it up the few times that I play HE. You can just print playing boring ABC at stakes up to 2/5 nearly everywhere.
But maybe the stakes don’t matter to the guy and he’s just trying to have fun? Last time I played 1/2 with a friend I had a 100% PFR / 100% VPIP.
I don’t try to understand the no limit wizards. I mainly just laugh.
1 Like
Fair points.
I think he would say that as a bit of wild loose aggressive player he mixes in limps with 85 and AA to balance. I wish I’d asked him. Maybe he does say it was just a mistake. When we chatted about the hand we only talked about the turn.
Funny thing is my bluff worked even though I had completely misread the situation. As you said, lol donkamemts.
If I’m going to have a 10% raise frequency with a very shitty hand like 62s, that 10% is definitely not going to include “after the best player in the field limps and there is a megadonk in the SB.”
3 Likes
Interesting. Can you say why? That dynamic is exactly why I did it. As v2 limp was so unusual I guessed it was due to v1 being in the blind so I raised not with the intention of hitting my hand (although that would have been nice) but with the intention of double stealing from v2 when he made a move on v1. Probably fancy play syndrome but the fact v2 can fold made me do it! 
I would guess of my 10% preflop raises with 62hh, 9.9% are when there are two Bruce’s in the blinds I can just win from preflop. I am guessing that is your thinking too?
Whats wrong with having 0% raise frequency with 62s?
That specific hand, nothing. 0% raise frequency with trash in late position to a limper seems weak no?
No. I think you overestimate your ability to make chips with extremely wide range.
Very likely as being too loose is for sure my main leak. I over justify it sometimes for sure but for me as a rec player who likes to be in the mix it’s less fun playing tight.
Yeah, that seems like super FPS. You are bluffing and your results will be heavily impacted by the odds of taking it down pre, which is very rarely happening in this scenario. You also have the equity of setting up a bluff later, but having very little immediate equity and low showdown equity makes it tough to be +EV overall.
1 Like