Fools Wildin Thinking They Doing It Unappreciation Vol Get The @#*+ out

[Master Zik]

Even the play by play announcer suggests the only way this may make sense is if she saw his hand but he backs off that cuz making that accusation cant just be levied without proof and is also frowned upon.

 

[picasso swerve]

A coin flip is 50/50 like you said, all that means is that heads has 50% equity and
tails has 50% equity on each individual flip.

In this hand he has 53% equity and she has 47% equity.

He technically has 3% edge in this spot, but it's close enough to a 50/50 that it's just going to be called a flip.

You'd have to run that spot 10k times in order for that 3% equity to actually matter.

Gotcha gotcha ok that makes sense.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Even the player by play announcer suggests the only way this may make sense is if she saw his hand but he backs off that cuz making that accusation cant just be levied without proof and is also frowned upon.

Isn't that what is happening in here right now?

 

[Master Zik]

But it seems to have gone well beyond that point.

What are you basing this off of?

Cuz with the amount of money on the line and their reputations also the reactions are par for the course.

Given the cerebral element to the game, players reacting like children to ridiculous play is the norm.



The more extreme example




Bruh goes even crazier against inexperienced players in the WSOP tourney.

If a player flips his bat after a homerun, I understand why a pitcher or manager of the opposing team might be upset, but as a normal person/fan is not clutching my pearls over norm-breaking.

Not really the same thing comparison wise.

Flipping your bat would've been if she got him to fold before the river and then showed her cards anyway (which probably would've pissed off every other player at the table too).

If there was cheating, and there is proof, I would understand the outrage. But until then a lot of this just seems like a lot of Chelsea boot creasing

Which is why I said if you play the game or understand it at that level you can get the reactions to how that hand was played and what she tried to say in defending/explaining herself.

 

[Master Zik]

Isn't that what is happening in here right now?

It is what was suggested by the announcer in the video.

The vid was posted in here mainly cuz of how she played the hand and how he reacted to it.

In trying to make reasonable poker sense of how the hand was played it is suggested she may have cheated which is why she called the all in. I don't think anyone has suggested she has cheated in any other type of way.

Regardless none of it has to do with her being a woman. Its literally about how the hand was played and the feeling that she does not know how to play the game.

Putting it simply choosing to gamble your hand (especially when you don't have a huge chip advantage) makes you look like a bum *** player to pros.

 

[RustyShackleford]

What are you basing this off of?

Cuz with the amount of money on the line and their reputations also the reactions are par for the course.

Given the cerebral element to the game, players reacting like children to ridiculous play is the norm.



The more extreme example


Bruh goes even crazier against inexperienced players in the WSOP tourney.

I'm saying that not only professionals are commenting on this

Not really the same thing comparison wise.

Flipping your bat would've been if she got him to fold before the river and then showed her cards anyway (which probably would've pissed off every other player at the table too).

I am making a general comment about norm-breaking in regards to professionals and fans

You saying here is the offense was worse than I implied, ok find, I still don't see it as something a normal person should get mad at without proof of cheating

Which is why I said if you play the game or understand it at that level you can get the reactions to how that hand was played and what she tried to say in defending/explaining herself.

A theory of why she probably cheated, and concrete evidence she did cheat are two separate things

I am just saying I am not accepting one in place of the other.

 

[Master Zik]

I don't see the compelling evidence or explanation that is so concrete that it makes "she took a massive risk and got very lucky".

You have to go back and look how she played the hand once she got her cards and every round until the river.

Especially after he went all-in.

Its not going to be some in your face evidence like she thought he had 9 high. You gotta consider her chip amount, when he raised, when he checked, other players folding, etc.

More importantly she straight up said she put him on Ace high when she had Jack high. She then called his all-in. That makes no sense especially since a Jack did not land on the river.

That sentence makes her entire play look incredibly stupid. Its doesn't make sense.

 

[RustyShackleford]

It is what was suggested by the announcer in the video.

The vid was posted in here mainly cuz of how she played the hand and how he reacted to it.

In trying to make reasonable poker sense of how the hand was played it is suggested she may have cheated which is why she called the all in. I don't think anyone has suggested she has cheated in any other type of way.

Regardless none of it has to do with her being a woman. Its literally about how the hand was played and the feeling that she does not know how to play the game.

Putting it simply choosing to gamble your hand (especially when you don't have a huge chip advantage) makes you look like a bum *** player to pros.

The post was deleted but calibeebee

The only explanation is that she’s a complete idiot or she somehow was cheating. Wild to me that someone can play that high a level and be that dumb though. Her reasoning is ABSURD.

“This is a bluff catcher.”

Biiih you have NOTHING. And was behind the entire time until the river. I would have reacted the same way as dude.

Here dude says that her being a woman is keep her from being called a cheater...

It's always amusing seeing people who have 0 knowledge of poker discuss poker.

Sexism,

Her gender and single digit IQ is helping her here, if this were another male professional player, it would be labeled cheating by every professional player on the planet.

She calls off 110K in a spot where she claims she thought she has 10% equity but manages to have 47% equity.

This is really the only bluff in his range that she's doing ok against, that's why people who understand poker think there's something up.

There was a MAJOR cheating scandal just a few years ago on a live poker stream, the outrage is warranted.

So cheating has been mentioned as the possible explanation in here.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I'm not gonna respond anymore, because I feel we are derailing the thread at this point with this ****

And I am mostly responsible for that at this point

 

[NASA 2.0]

100% this dude died. Wtf.

 

[Master Zik]

I'm saying that not only professionals are commenting on this

People who watch the game and understand the play can feel they same way as a pro about how she played the hand.

I am making a general comment about norm-breaking in regards to professionals and fans

Its not really norm breaking.

This type of play is more of an outlier.

If you think the person you're going heads up against has the better hand, you see the river and still bet the majority of your chips thinking the other person will win why did you do it?

You saying here is the offense was worse than I implied, ok find, I still don't see it as something a normal person should get mad at without proof of cheating

Of course a normal person shouldn't get mad.

I just assumed everyone who has reacted to how she played the hand poorly understands why she played the hand ridiculously. Even more so after she said what she said.

I haven't read a post reaction that wasn't in line with how she played the hand. The posts are made under the assumption she doesn't know what she was doing or that she solely decided to play the player and gamble Jack high would win (but even her own statement contradicts the latter)

If she cheated, ppl would just says that was ****** up and unfair.

A theory of why she probably cheated, and concrete evidence she did cheat are two separate things

I am just saying I am not accepting one in place of the other.

The suggestion of cheating is only made to make sense of her play.

If she cheated then all the reactions would just be about his reaction to losing and not understanding why she did that.

The post was deleted but calibeebee

The two options of the way she played the hand that way is she is an idiot or a cheater.

Here dude says that her being a woman is keep her from being called a cheater...


So cheating has been mentioned as the possible explanation in here.

That's based off of what was said in the video and watching how she played the hand.

Concrete evidence of her cheating would not be getting these type of reactions.

None of that has to do with her being a woman.

 

[MetalMario]

last two pages was wildin. walls of text.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

 

[keko jones]

No unwritten rule, she just made an insanely idiotic move STATISTICALLY. If she herself put him on ace high, then she knows EXACTLY the odds of winning in that situation. She knows how many cards are available to beat that hand, with what she herself has. Not too complicated. But she made the call anyway.

Look at it like this: she’s playing Russian roulette for her life. A 6-shooter revolver can carry 6 bullets in the cartridge. She watches a person, with her eyes, put 6 bullets in the cartridge and spin it, and ask her if she wants to pull the trigger. She thinks about it and thinks about it. She knows every bullet is in the chamber. She could just pass and not die for sure. Or she could pull the trigger knowing there’s 100% chance she’ll die. SHE DECIDES TO PULL THE TRIGGER AND SHOOT HERSELF.

“Why did you pull the trigger, you thought there were 5 bullets? Wait, you thought there were SIX BULLETS AND YOU STILL PULLED THE TRIGGER?!”

I think is the general gist of the situation……

I really don’t get what’s so hard to understand about that poker vid.

If you play it or at least understand it you know why her winning that hand had nothing to do with skill and was a pure gamble.

It has nothing to do with their gender.

The whole thing definitely belongs in here for several reasons.

Ya tripping ...

Only reason dude was ahead at the draw because he has more outs chasing the straight and flush .... but just like her, he is a moron to bluff with nothing ... at the end of the day she had a better single card which was the winning card ... so statistically he had a slight lead but once the draw and river came we saw the best hand win.

You're gambling that the card you beed is coming out, if you want to gamble an all in with nothing and I mean nothing, there are plenty of hands that could of have beat his and he didn't know what she had .... that means is just as big if not a bigger idiot than her.

That was a stupid Bluff!!!! Stop over analyzing the video and listening to whata being said ... she probably wanted to tilt his ***.

 

[C.Magneto]

If i hit on a lucky call, I’m not giving A penny back …. J S.

 

[had pants]

 

[had pants]

 

[had pants]

 

[picasso swerve]

 

[ahat]

Dudes be writing essays on NT

 

[kingkoopa]

RustyShackleford Please leave, you know what you’ve started in here?!?

 

[WASHED KING]

 

[DripNick]

 

[had pants]

 

[had pants]

Dudes be writing essays on NT