Weird question of the day:

Putting ethics aside...


At the Aladdin casino in Vegas you buy an antique lamp from the gift shop. It's a bit dusty, so you rub it a little. Suddenly, a magic poker genie named, Stuey, appears and says he can grant you one of two abilities while playing Texas Hold Em. -

1) You can see what all 5 board cards are going to be preflop.

or

2) You can see what hole cards your opponents have.

Which ability would you choose and why do you think it's better to have than the other one?

Interesting.

I think it would be better to see what cards your opponents have because that would allow you to always win the maximum when your opponents have "2nd best" hands to your "best" hands, and allow you lose the minumum when you have "2nd best" hands vs. "best" hands ... which is usually when most of the money changes hands in NL.

If you were a limit player, I think being able to see the board pre-deal would be better, though.

seke2 wrote:Interesting.

I think it would be better to see what cards your opponents have because that would allow you to always win the maximum when your opponents have "2nd best" hands to your "best" hands, and allow you lose the minumum when you have "2nd best" hands vs. "best" hands ... which is usually when most of the money changes hands in NL.

If you were a limit player, I think being able to see the board pre-deal would be better, though.

I'd have to go with the same answer, just because the board gets revealed in time and you can still get that info cheaply in most cases. The big bugaboo is that opponents can still suck out on you.

What about late stages of a SNG? I would think knowing the board could help immensely, especially when youre short and looking for chips.

The Red Tornado wrote:What about late stages of a SNG? I would think knowing the board could help immensely, especially when youre short and looking for chips.

Maybe, as the big value of knowing your opponents cards is in building and winning huge pots relative to the blinds. When that's not possible because the blinds are high and the stacks are short in relation, knowing whether or not you'd make a strong hand preflop would probably be more valuable. But so much of the time at the later stages big pots are won by high-cards or 1 pair when you get 2 crappy hands both all-in preflop, so I'm not sure.

I mean, I guess in the VERY late stages with super-high blinds relative to stack sizes and you basically have 0 FE, seeing the board might be better.

Seeing your opponents cards would also help you know when you could safely steal with 72o because your opponents are holding 62o and 84o or something. If all you knew was that the board was going to come AKK96, you might fold 72o there. If you knew your opponents had 62o and 84o, you'd move all-in. I think in the longrun, knowing when you can "safely" steal is more profitable even still.

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:What about late stages of a SNG? I would think knowing the board could help immensely, especially when youre short and looking for chips.

Maybe, as the big value of knowing your opponents cards is in building and winning huge pots relative to the blinds. When that's not possible because the blinds are high and the stacks are short in relation, knowing whether or not you'd make a strong hand preflop would probably be more valuable. But so much of the time at the later stages big pots are won by high-cards or 1 pair when you get 2 crappy hands both all-in preflop, so I'm not sure.

I mean, I guess in the VERY late stages with super-high blinds relative to stack sizes and you basically have 0 FE, seeing the board might be better.

Seeing your opponents cards would also help you know when you could safely steal with 72o because your opponents are holding 62o and 84o or something. If all you knew was that the board was going to come AKK96, you might fold 72o there. If you knew your opponents had 62o and 84o, you'd move all-in. I think in the longrun, knowing when you can "safely" steal is more profitable even still.

But on the flip side, if you see that the board is 77395 and you have 9 6, you know could go all in and get called by a broadway hand and win the pot.

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:What about late stages of a SNG? I would think knowing the board could help immensely, especially when youre short and looking for chips.

Maybe, as the big value of knowing your opponents cards is in building and winning huge pots relative to the blinds. When that's not possible because the blinds are high and the stacks are short in relation, knowing whether or not you'd make a strong hand preflop would probably be more valuable. But so much of the time at the later stages big pots are won by high-cards or 1 pair when you get 2 crappy hands both all-in preflop, so I'm not sure.

I mean, I guess in the VERY late stages with super-high blinds relative to stack sizes and you basically have 0 FE, seeing the board might be better.

Seeing your opponents cards would also help you know when you could safely steal with 72o because your opponents are holding 62o and 84o or something. If all you knew was that the board was going to come AKK96, you might fold 72o there. If you knew your opponents had 62o and 84o, you'd move all-in. I think in the longrun, knowing when you can "safely" steal is more profitable even still.

But on the flip side, if you see that the board is 77395 and you have 9 6, you know could go all in and get called by a broadway hand and win the pot.

Given that most dealt poker hands are crappy and only the top 20% or so are played by most good players at all, I think it would be better in the longrun to know what your opponents have.

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:What about late stages of a SNG? I would think knowing the board could help immensely, especially when youre short and looking for chips.

Maybe, as the big value of knowing your opponents cards is in building and winning huge pots relative to the blinds. When that's not possible because the blinds are high and the stacks are short in relation, knowing whether or not you'd make a strong hand preflop would probably be more valuable. But so much of the time at the later stages big pots are won by high-cards or 1 pair when you get 2 crappy hands both all-in preflop, so I'm not sure.

I mean, I guess in the VERY late stages with super-high blinds relative to stack sizes and you basically have 0 FE, seeing the board might be better.

Seeing your opponents cards would also help you know when you could safely steal with 72o because your opponents are holding 62o and 84o or something. If all you knew was that the board was going to come AKK96, you might fold 72o there. If you knew your opponents had 62o and 84o, you'd move all-in. I think in the longrun, knowing when you can "safely" steal is more profitable even still.

But on the flip side, if you see that the board is 77395 and you have 9 6, you know could go all in and get called by a broadway hand and win the pot.

Given that most dealt poker hands are crappy and only the top 20% or so are played by most good players at all, I think it would be better in the longrun to know what your opponents have.

Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

The Red Tornado wrote:Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

Na, not dumb. Better than most stupid poker hypotheticals. There's definitely situations where the other one would be better. But I think if I was forced to pick one in the long-run, I'm going with the opponent's hands.

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

Na, not dumb. Better than most stupid poker hypotheticals. There's definitely situations where the other one would be better. But I think if I was forced to pick one in the long-run, I'm going with the opponent's hands.

Don't patronize me. You think youre better than me?!!!

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

Na, not dumb. Better than most stupid poker hypotheticals. There's definitely situations where the other one would be better. But I think if I was forced to pick one in the long-run, I'm going with the opponent's hands.

Don't patronize me. You think youre better than me?!!!

I know I am?

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

Na, not dumb. Better than most stupid poker hypotheticals. There's definitely situations where the other one would be better. But I think if I was forced to pick one in the long-run, I'm going with the opponent's hands.

Don't patronize me. You think youre better than me?!!!

I know I am?

My baby pairs say no.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:

seke2 wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:Just trying to be devil's advocate, guess it was a dumb question.

Na, not dumb. Better than most stupid poker hypotheticals. There's definitely situations where the other one would be better. But I think if I was forced to pick one in the long-run, I'm going with the opponent's hands.

Don't patronize me. You think youre better than me?!!!

I know I am?

My baby pairs say no.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

LOL, true.

You run good for sure.

dude runs amazing, completely luckboxed against my buddy when he had a set with ace kicker and trt had a set with like a deuce and hit on the river

trt is amazing, rub his big belly for luck

in vegas i played at a table with some guy who apparently gets a lot of air time on the wsop. he was pissed at this one guy, so he called his hand three times in a row before the guy showed it. it was half unbelievable and half douchebagable.

50K HORSE update: John Hennigan is out, last year's winner Chip Reese is out. Ivey still in it.

Kenny Tran, Freddy Deeb, John Hanson, John Juanda, Amnon Filippi top 5

In the ESPN is loving it dept....Phil Hellmuth, Mike Matusow still in it

pacino wrote:dude runs amazing, completely luckboxed against my buddy when he had a set with ace kicker and trt had a set with like a deuce and hit on the river

trt is amazing, rub his big belly for luck

I had a Brunson and your friend had J 2, the flop had both remaining dueces. It was also heads up and no straights or flushes by the river, we were both getting our money in anyways. We both slow played until the river and I hit my ten.

z ipper wrote:in vegas i played at a table with some guy who apparently gets a lot of air time on the wsop. he was pissed at this one guy, so he called his hand three times in a row before the guy showed it. it was half unbelievable and half douchebagable.

Do you know who it was?

The Jig Is Up
In between hands at the feature table, Eli Elezra (often known to portray himself as a bit of a luckbox) said something self-deprecating about his game. Erick Lindgren responded with "You know, this whole things of you acting like you suck is getting a little old. You're the best I've ever seen." Eli is the current chip leader and has been for a majority of the tournament.

Ivey out, btw

Justin Bonomo leading the tourney! Gabe Kaplan 3rd right now! Tuan Lee and Phil Hellmuth teetering, both with less than 8 big bets


Joe Sebok has as awesome of a mindset as his father:

The $2,000 limit event, the most exciting event imaginable!!! This is what I assume the Gods play when they play up in the heavens.

Actually, it's boring as hell. There's nothing going on. And I'm pissed at myself for not getting drunk last night. That way I could've had a hangover and not focus as much as I'm focusing.

Started with $4,000 and at $3,500 now. The early levels are pretty inconsequential. So you just kind of hang out, play your hand; it's easy.

Wish I had more chips though. Check in later we'll see.

pacino wrote:Justin Bonomo leading the tourney!

Justin is a total douche. He was caught multi-accounting major tournaments on one of the major sites (Party, I think) last year. His immediate response/apology was pathetic and half-hearted. On the plus side, the site did seize most of the funds in his account (over 100k?) that I don't think he ever got back.

He might be a decent player, but he's not someone I want to see winning poker tournaments.