Gonna share with you guys - Circle of Tilt for poker (gambling in general)

[poker_dummy101]

So you quit poker with a proven track record and continue to bet sports which you lose at all the time.



You are right , no sense trying to tell you anything

1 is for a career and 1 is for pleasure you stupid fukk

[pitman]

Good post.
A friend of mine gave me 2 ritalins, I took them and 1/2 hr later I played the best poker of my life for 3 hours. I think some drugs could be helpful to keep you in the "middle of the circle"

[TheLock]

So I ask a question 1+1 =

and your response is but do you know what 2+1 = ?

Get a fukkin brain. By your post you are saying you'd rather play Phil Ivey because you can read them better than some 10cent donk.

How come every time there is a poker discussion you always have to speak from the holier than thou angle? Didn't you just make a thread that you have to quit playing cards because you're running bad?

It's pretty obvious he was not implying that he prefers to play with good players. He was just stating that sometimes easier to read (ie: they may be more apt to lay down a hand that a donk may not be able to let go of).

Try discussing poker like a professional and maybe you'll play more like a professional.

[poker_dummy101]

nevermind. done with this thread

[TheLock]

I love how the dumbasses stick together. If you would notice any piece of advice pokernut gives it is completely and 100% wrong. Its not my fault I have to call him out on his moronic view time and time again.

What was it last time pokernut? Something about you cashing in and out of poker rooms? Another thread about rebate wager? too easy to correct you stupid fukks around here.

Lock, Go back to making fukkin horrible hand history threads and talk shit when someone tries to help. You are sure to move up from your 10cent tables.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't know pokernut's content history when it comes to poker posting here but I do know that everytime I see you posting in a poker thread you're always telling everyone how stupid they are. I'm 1000% on that.

Regardless of what pokernut has posted in the past, his statement in this thread was not nearly as moronic as you made it out to be.

And I've made at most 2 hand history threads since I joined in 2008 but let's not get facts get in the way of this discussion.

[TheLock]

I replied before you were able to edit your post. Good times.


The guy who knows everything about poker and tells everyone how bad they are is quitting poker fellas:

http://forum.sbrforum.com/poker/436847-time-quit-poker.html

[pokernut9999]

Yea I made a deposit in Fulltilt one day and rolled it up 5x so I requested a payout , what a tool I am.

What would you have done dummy lost it all ? Ever heard of taking ,money off the table ?

[poker_dummy101]

I see you replied before I changed it so I'll respond. you can respond and then i'll move on.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't know pokernut's content history when it comes to poker posting here but I do know that everytime I see you posting in a poker thread you're always telling everyone how stupid they are. I'm 1000% on that.

Regardless of what pokernut has posted in the past, his statement in this thread was not nearly as moronic as you made it out to be.

And I've made at most 2 hand history threads since I joined in 2008 but let's not get facts get in the way of this discussion.

1st bold is 100% wrong. If anyone has ANY poker thread I give my input on the hand and tell noone they are stupid until they start talking shit.

2nd bold.. you posted 2 hand histories you say.. guess what? i cited only ONE recent hand history that you posted. I commented on the hand and you turn it into an online pissing match, like you have again.

[Extra Innings]

I replied before you were able to edit your post. Good times.


The guy who knows everything about poker and tells everyone how bad they are is quitting poker fellas:


http://forum.sbrforum.com/poker/4368...uit-poker.html

Check Mate. Post from the heart...don't ever edit.

[Extra Innings]

I see you replied before I changed it so I'll respond. you can respond and then i'll move on.



1st bold is 100% wrong. If anyone has ANY poker thread I give my input on the hand and tell noone they are stupid until they start talking shit.

2nd bold.. you posted 2 hand histories you say.. guess what? i cited only ONE recent hand history that you posted. I commented on the hand and you turn it into an online pissing match, like you have again.

Don't ever say "I'm done with this thread" and then continue to post...thats rule #1

[hunterwrot]

i happen to like the circle but the problem is figuring out when you have strayed.

[mrmarket]

Poker dummy just don't bother. This is where the money comes from.

[sinmiedo]

add bad poor players , the ones they play aby cards and hit

[magicbuck]

OP, nice post. There's a lot of wisdom there.

[icancount2one]

I don't get it. It seems that the old guy just listed things that put you on tilt and then drew a circle. Also I don't think I've ever gone on tilt from too many good players. If the table is tough and serious I just change games, it doesn't make me upset.

And pokerdummy, I guess what pokernuts' trying to say (but not very well) is that if you ranked poker players on a scale from 1-10, I'd rather play with 3s and 4s than 1s. Of course you want to avoid the 8-10 range. Mediocre, weak players are more certain money than total novices who come in and tend to move chips from player to player before they go busto. And if you're dealing with a table where the best opponent is about a 3, you'd better be healthily overrolled for the stakes your playing.

[OmgUrMom]

I don't get it. It seems that the old guy just listed things that put you on tilt and then drew a circle. Also I don't think I've ever gone on tilt from too many good players. If the table is tough and serious I just change games, it doesn't make me upset.

And pokerdummy, I guess what pokernuts' trying to say (but not very well) is that if you ranked poker players on a scale from 1-10, I'd rather play with 3s and 4s than 1s. Of course you want to avoid the 8-10 range. Mediocre, weak players are more certain money than total novices who come in and tend to move chips from player to player before they go busto. And if you're dealing with a table where the best opponent is about a 3, you'd better be healthily overrolled for the stakes your playing.

no, you would need a much bigger roll if the opponents are good rather than bad.

[icancount2one]

no, you would need a much bigger roll if the opponents are good rather than bad.

I don't know, it could be because I normally stick to limit cash games, but it depends what type of bad players your talking about.

I find weak/passive/nitty/nervous players who have a basic knowledge of ABC poker easier to beat then loose/drunk/crazy players who are just there to gamble recklessly. If the whole table is in a crazy gambling mood, it seems to me to be a high risk, high reward situation. Or maybe I just don't play those situations as well as I should.

[PAULYPOKER]

I was having coffee with an old-timer after a 6hr run on the tables, he shared this with me and I'll share with you If you are 100% ready to play Perfect Poker (PP) you are in the center of the Circle Then all sorts of reasons or elements start to pull you off-center. The more off-center the closer you are to playing poorly or tilting There is a struggle to stay centered. Sometimes only one reason is pulling you off center other times there are multiple reasons. We all lose the struggle from time to time. Knowing the reasons and eliminating them or quitting before they pull you to tilt is one key to winning at poker You can add you own reasons or elements on the circumference. This is the old timers hand drawn circle on a napkin .

Very good info but I lost interest

[OmgUrMom]

I don't know, it could be because I normally stick to limit cash games, but it depends what type of bad players your talking about.

I find weak/passive/nitty/nervous players who have a basic knowledge of ABC poker easier to beat then loose/drunk/crazy players who are just there to gamble recklessly. If the whole table is in a crazy gambling mood, it seems to me to be a high risk, high reward situation. Or maybe I just don't play those situations as well as I should.

well where our disagreement mainly stems from is probably just your ranking system of opponents. To me a 1 (terrible opponent, one you wish to play every single day of your life) is NOT an opponent who is aggressive crazy wild reckless, unless they are just reckless to the point of having no hope (like going all in preflop every hand or an extreme like this). An even somewhat hand selective aggressive opponent is always going to be much higher on my ranking system, then a passive predictable (only raise with the nuts) type player, who you are never going to lose a big pot too (cause you know they have it, if they are getting the chips in) and you will win many, many small pots off of. (blind stealing, continuation bets ect.) So basically I think you are just ranking yours players wrong.

Also when your at a table who is in the crazy gamble mood there is a couple different ways you can play. 1. You can try to take advantage of EVERY single edge you can, this is the optimal way to play but can put much more stress on your bankroll. 2. You can play very tight, wait for a big starting hand/big flop and then get it in vs these reckless players, this strategy will give your bankroll less stress since you will usually be getting it in with a very high percentage but it will hurt your win/rate since your passing on the small edges.

[Fadeaway Kush]

lol

[OmgUrMom]

tks for your valuable input fadeaway kush

[TheLock]

lol

We are all very anxiously awaiting your 17th post

Please don't make us wait a long time.

[TheLock]

Actually jokes on me. He's only making his 1 sub-forum post a day to get his points.

[pokernut9999]

Actually all I said was it was easier to read good players , that is all.

Do not know where everyone is reading into all the other crap.

I never mentioned I would rather play good players versus bad players , it just goes to show that 95% of posters here have no reading skills .

[poker_dummy101]

sorry to come back and add more common sense to the thread, but anyone that is "easy to read" is worse than you.

just think about it for a minute

[Phightin' Phils]

Good post.
A friend of mine gave me 2 ritalins, I took them and 1/2 hr later I played the best poker of my life for 3 hours. I think some drugs could be helpful to keep you in the "middle of the circle"

try blow

[Phightin' Phils]

also, after re-reading your post i had hard time saying ritalinS, im not saying you're wrong im just wondering what the correct pluralization of ritalin is. kind of like deer, fish, etc

[Phightin' Phils]

oh and one last thing to everyone in here arguing about whether or not some dude likes to play with knowledgeable players versus bad players:
GET A ****ING LIFE.
that is all

[Sam Odom]

FWIW , the 'old timer' is a retired navy Commander (Lt Colonel) in his late 60s and plays poker 4x a week at Oceans Eleven. He fishes 2 days of the week on his own boat and 'rests' the other day


My hero