Continuing from WT: A question about online poker

[Abagadro]

I suppose you could push a real dope off of a 3 and catch another dope overplaying a hand you beat, but that circumstance is so rare at that level I can't see a river check-raise being worthwhile.

[WayAbvPar]

If this hand had happened 30 minutes later, I call in an instant due to reads (SB was a calling station...god love him). I thought and thought about it, and I just couldn't conceive of a way I could have both players beat, so I folded my straight face up. MP showed 98s for a busted flush, and SB showed 76 for top pair. I then threw up in my lap.

I think I overestimated the quality of my opponents since it was not the lowest limit available (there were a bunch of 3/6 tables too). I re-learned the old lesson- if calling 1 bet on the river in a big pot is a mistake, it is a small one, while folding for 1 bet in a big pot is usually a big mistake, ESPECIALLY when your call closes the action!!

I still ended up winning 20 big bets for the session, but this hand bugged me. I am out of practice and timid.

[Abagadro]

I re-learned the old lesson- if calling 1 bet on the river in a big pot is a mistake, it is a small one, while folding for 1 bet in a big pot is usually a big mistake, ESPECIALLY when your call closes the action!!

Yup. This is the single best thing I got out of Ed Miller's book. In low limit games I basically have a rule now that I will call 1 river bet to get to showdown unless I have missed a draw or I have a real good read that someone behind me has hit theirs. (The other key is not to go to the river very much in these games unless you have a strong hand or monster draw).  The combination of clueless players who will bet/call down anything and idiots who think they are tricky and will bluff the river makes this strategy +EV in my opinion.  The pot has to be at least over 5-6 BB though.

[Margalis]

Yeah, pretty much...you folded?

In that case I'm calling and expecting to lose. But I'm calling.

Low limit games are crazy. One thing to remember is that most low-limit players don't pay any attention to the board and what other people might have. By that I mean, people consider mid-set on a totally broken board the same strength as mid-set on 9TJQK with 3 hearts. They have a basic understanding of what hands are good, but not in context of the situation. There are some people who will bet a straight or 3 of a kind or whatever no matter what, no matter what the board reads.

Checking and folding to a single river bet? In 10/20 I might consider doing it based on pot odds. Anything below that no way.

[WayAbvPar]

If SB hadn't called (or if I knew he was a retard before the hand), I would have called. I just couldn't see how I could beat 2 opponents on a double paiired board, but I didn't think about the odds I was getting before the fold, which was a rookie mistake.

[Abagadro]

I hate that feeling when you know you made a mistake that cost you a big pot. Focus on the bright side that you were able to recover and have a good session with is far more important than any given hand as no one plays perfect poker.

[WayAbvPar]

Very true. It was just so hard to not give those guys credit with no reads, and I should have just gone with the math and called.

I plan on playing a lot more often if I can...daddy has a new mortgage payment to make :-D

Maybe the new majority will unfuck Internet gambling and get it regulated and legalized so I can go back to the money train.

[Sky]

I'd like to ask a favor from the card sharks, especially the legal sharks in the crowd: Can I get a quick summary of the legality of US online gambling, especially in NY?

The librarians are having a meeting tomorrow and on the agenda is "Internet Gamling - Illegal - How do we enforce?" Iirc, certain money transactions are illegal, but gambling itself isn't. Not to mention enforcement is ludicrous, because you can have non-RMT card/casino games...just need some more meat to knock it off the agenda before they meet :)

[WayAbvPar]

It varies from state to state. The Wire Act is a federal law, but that was aimed more at bookies (sports betting). Its relationship to online casinos is in a legal gray area, or so I have been told. Only one guy has been prosecuted in relation to online gambling, and he was running a sports betting site.

It sure would be nice if the 110th Congress pulled their heads out of their asses and legalized online gambling with some regulation and oversight (AND TAXES). There is SO much money to be made for both companies and the government. Not allowing it is nanny state bullshit.

[Abagadro]

Interesting article on the ramifications of Frist's baby:

http://www.slate.com/id/2153352/

[bhodi]

Nothing gives me a shit-eating grin like my government shooting themselves in the foot after trying to prevent the populace from doing something that they want to do. Hell yeah. Go Antigua, fuck prohibition.

[WayAbvPar]

Interesting article on the ramifications of Frist's baby:

http://www.slate.com/id/2153352/

Wow, that is interesting. I knew about the WTO situation, but I hadn't heard about what punishment could be meted out. If this whole thing ends up with legalized online gambling, how would the Washington state law prohibiting same stand? Does the WTO ruling affect states as well, or is it just worried about federal prohibitions?

I can't explain how happy I would be to be able to play poker online again with a clear conscience and no threat of jail time (Class C felony...10 years in jail!!! Overreact much?).

[tazelbain]

When has the WTO ever helped us?  It seems like a mainly tool to use against us. China continues to do what ever the fuck it wants.  But we get hit on all sides by everyone else.