Texas Hold 'Em - Any Two Cards Can Win.

[cardcounter0]

Just one more time for laughs and giggles:

"weak-tight" - if "loose" and "tight" are meaningless, why are you calling the games "weak-tight"?

Can anyone see the difference? TIGHT WEAK-TIGHT

Hmmm... upon close inspection it appears one consists of 5 letters, the other has 9 letters and a hyphen in it. Can these be the same? Is there any difference that you can spot?

If I wanted to make sure my jar of pickles didn't go bad, would I say "Screw the lid on tight" or would I say "Screw the lid on weak-tight"? How about when parking my car, "Boy I think my car can fit but it is going to be a tight squeeze" or "Boy, I think my car is going to fit but it is going to be a weak-tight squeeze".

See any differences in those phrases? Since you are cognitively unable to make that distinction then this one is never going to happen:

who counterclaimed the players are "loose passive" with "I agree"?

I was more in agreement with your use of the word "passive".

maybe some repetition will help:

I was more in agreement with your use of the word "passive".

I was more in agreement with your use of the word "passive".

I was more in agreement with your use of the word "passive".

See the part of that sentance that is in quotation marks?

I was more in agreement with your use of the word "passive".

That word that is quoted ("passive") is that the word "loose"?

Let's review:
You think the words TIGHT and WEAK-TIGHT are the same thing. Also the word LOOSE is PASSIVE.

So if a lugnut on your car tire becomes passive the entire wheel could fall off. You better make sure your lugnuts are on weak-tight, you wouldn't want to have an accident from a passive lugnut.

 

[callipygian]

Can anyone see the difference? TIGHT WEAK-TIGHT

So, what you're saying is that "weak-tight" means "weakly tight".

But you also claim that the whole distinction between tight and loose is meaningless! So, if "weak-tight" means "weakly tight", then it stands to reason you used a descriptor you think is useless to describe the game (the loose-tight axis), and omitted the descriptor you insist is most important (the passive-aggressive axis)!

I actually gave you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting "weak-tight" mean "tight passive" - in which case you got at least one of the two descriptors correct.

Remember, your original claim was ...

After you get 10 years under your belt, and you get in a typical weak-tight, calling station, no-fold 'em $4/$8 hold 'em game, let me know what your win rate is.

:laugh:

Here's some poker education, free of charge, from a n00b. Maybe armed with this bit of basic information you will make up smarter lies when you post next.

 

[cardcounter0]

That is it???

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

The problem is that this doesn't cover the whole picture. As one example, a player can be tight and aggressive, playing few hands but playing those strong, but if these hands are garbage, they won't go very far.

There's at least a third axis (and probably several more) that includes good and bad decision making. Counting the number of hands and the proportion of raises to calls can be useful, but it still gives an incomplete picture, and this may lead to an improper strategy.

There is also the possibility that a player may be of a mixed type, for example, tight and aggressive before the flop, but a calling station from then on. Tight = "Plays few"? Plays few badly? Plays few well? Loose = "plays many"? Plays many badly, Plays many very well?

Passive = Check/Call? Against agressive players this would be the best thing to do, yet on your simplistic chart it is not labeled GOOD, that is only reserved for one box.

I don't see any insight about why these people might play the way they do (I have given some examples of player motivation -- can you find them?) nor do you suggest any strategies to exploit these players.

Congrats.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Of course if you play like that box labeled "GOOD LLHE PLAYERS" GUESS WHAT? I ALREADY TOLD YOU:

If you insist on playing 15% of your hands at a calling station passive low limit table, the blinds and rake are going to eat you up, your premium hands are going to get cracked by donkeys playing garbage at such a rate, that the number of times your premium hands hold up, you are going to wind up winning 1 BB/hr and are better off spending your time looking for change on the casino floor.

 

[callipygian]

I ALREADY TOLD YOU

You already told me many things.

You already told me:

sorry, but if you don't realize that a BB refers to "Big Bet" and not "Big Blind", then I think YOU need to step back and get a grip. In a $4/$8 game, 1 BB = $16.

You also told me:

Will they call a turn check/raise? will they come back and 3-bet a flop with bottom pair? A tight player will not, a loose player will -- regardless of their preflop hand selection.

In fact, IT IS CORRECT TO PLAY LOOSE, in a low limit limp fest game.

Before telling me:

Loose, tight? As I said -- who cares? It does not matter. Those are meaningless terms.

You also told me:

using common terminology you are getting 10:1 for your money. 10 for 1 or 9 to 1.

You tell me a lot of things.

:laugh:

 

[cardcounter0]

Will they call a turn check/raise? will they come back and 3-bet a flop with bottom pair? A tight player will not, a loose player will -- regardless of their preflop hand selection.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Do you see how I use the words "loose" and "tight" in this sentence.

Do you see the definitions for these in your simplistic chart?
loose - plays many
tight - plays few

see the part where I use the phrase "-- regardless of their preflop hand selection"

Can you fathom that I am using the words "loose" and "tight" in a manner that means something different than what you are trying to define?

 

[callipygian]

Do you see how I use the words "loose" and "tight" in this sentence.

Yes, I do - I see that you use them, despite later claiming:

Loose, tight? As I said -- who cares? It does not matter. Those are meaningless terms.

If they're meaningless, why do you use them at all? If you use them, how can they be meaningless? Or are you admitting that you do use meaningless terms?

Can you fathom that I am using the words "loose" and "tight" in a manner that means something different than what you are trying to define?

What I can't fathom is how someone who says 10:1 means 10 for 1 has the balls to keep posting on a thread, or how someone who insists $16 is a big bet in $4/$8 limit can keep pretending to be an expert in the subject. (Oh, right, it was a typo ... twice ... :laugh: )

Remind me again how much LLHE you've played in a casino? Come on, at this point, you've really got no incentive not to lie. Why not just make something up, so that at least I won't keep on posting things like:

Attempt #7: How much LLHE have you played? (You may define LLHE as you wish)

P.S. Remember to make it greater than 100 hours! Wouldn't want you to get caught lying that easily, would we?

 

[cardcounter0]

Quote:
Originally Posted by cardcounter0
Do you see how I use the words "loose" and "tight" in this sentence.

Yes, I do - I see that you use them, despite later claiming:

One more time. (I know this is difficult for you, but keep trying, we might be making progress).

ME: Do you see HOW I use the words "loose" and "tight" in this sentence.

YOU: I see that you use them

BUT ....

DO YOU SEE HOW I USE THEM?

I know, it will require effort. Probably to much to ask of someone whose perception is so warped he cannot tell the difference between TIGHT and WEAK-TIGHT.

 

[callipygian]

DO YOU SEE HOW I USE THEM?

It's irrelevant how you use them. Don't you understand? You keep trying to salvage this whole train wreck of a strategy by pretending that you meant $8 when you said $16 and you meant 10 for 1 when you posted 10:1.

IT DOESN'T MATTER.

You have zero credibility - you're like Larry Craig out there claiming he has a wide stance when he takes a dump.

YOU ALREADY LOST!

Let me recap this thread for you.

cardcounter0: Look, you can make this awesome play by playing any two from the big blind if 5 people call an early raiser.
callipygian: That's worth about 0.1 BB/hr.
cardcounter0: True, but if all 10 people call a pre-flop raise then the same principle applies. You're getting 10:1 (10 for 1) for your bet.
:laugh:
callipygian: How often does this happen?
cardcounter0: All 10 people are more likely to call a raise.
:laugh::laugh:
callipygian: Does that mean they're loose or tight?
cardcounter0: That's meaningless.
callipygian: Then why did you use the terms before?
cardcounter0: I have a wide stance.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

If you want this thread to be about what you actually mean, you can start by admitting you make a hell of a lot of ridiculously simple mistakes for someone claiming to have 10+ years of poker expertise.

Then you can proceed by answering some of the questions on this thread which have been posed in very non-ambiguous terms.

Unless you define "very marginal hands", there's no way to tell what you really mean. Are you talking ATo, 98o, or 73o?

How common is it for 10 people to go to a flop, raise or no raise? How much is this play worth in terms of BB/hr?

As of right now, I'm unconvinced that you've played any LLHE at a casino, or that in any way understand the conditions. Your assumptions - 10 to the flop, for instance - are either based on imaginary or extremely non-standard conditions. Your calculations - increasing win rate from 2 BB/hr to 10 BB/hr with aggressive play, for instance - are either based on freak conditions or probably just eyeballed without play. For the record, I do believe you're a good mid- or high- level limit player, just that you have less experience at LLHE than me (which is, of course, why you keep refusing to answer the question of your own experience).