lol pretty easy fold imo

The real question is: What is the weakest hand we call this with ? ( he is obv a fish )

vladimir0775 ($960.86 in chips)

JJ or KK scurred money fold TT ftw

obviously he is a fish... with 9 buyins ;(

When was the last time you had 9 buyins on a table?

I'd call this with TT JJ KK AA and have a hard time with 99/88 because meh.

On February 08 2014 09:26 cariadon wrote: obviously he is a fish... with 9 buyins ;( When was the last time you had 9 buyins on a table?

what does this comment even mean lol

Generally someone with 9 buyins on the table must be doing something right.

not sure if you're leveling, but it is super-standard for maniac-fish to run up crazy stacks once and a while because of the variance being super high vpip+super aggro bring to the game.

Not leveling. People are quick to label other players as "fish" for no reason, pseudo reasons or just to make hero feel superior.

ye cause fish never have big stacks
Submitted by : LemOn[5thF]

PokerStars Game #40424923584: Holdem No Limit ($0.25/$0.50 USD) - 2010/02/27 23:21:15 WET [2010/02/27 18:21:15 ET]
Table Guinevere V 6-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: stiltonblue ($134.50 in chips)
Seat 2: Dolleman12 ($124.80 in chips)
Seat 3: kezako2009 ($271.60 in chips)
Seat 4: DoC.LemOn ($286.50 in chips)
Seat 5: jamesy1963 ($47.90 in chips)
Seat 6: koomo ($75.35 in chips)
kezako2009: posts small blind $0.25
DoC.LemOn: posts big blind $0.50

Holecards(Odds)
Dealt to DoC.LemOn
jamesy1963: calls $0.50
koomo: folds
stiltonblue: calls $0.50
Dolleman12: folds
kezako2009: calls $0.25
DoC.LemOn: raises $4.50 to $5
jamesy1963: calls $4.50
stiltonblue: calls $4.50
kezako2009: raises $266.60 to $271.60 and is all-in
DoC.LemOn: raises $14.90 to $286.50 and is all-in
jamesy1963: folds
stiltonblue: folds
Uncalled bet ($14.90) returned to DoC.LemOn

Flop(Odds) (Pot : $286.60)

   

Turn(Odds) (Pot : $286.60)

   
Dolleman12 said, "jeeee"

River (Pot : $286.60)

   

Showdown
kezako2009: shows (two pair, Kings and Fours)
DoC.LemOn: shows (a pair of Fours)
kezako2009 collected $550.20 from pot

Summary
Total pot $553.20 | Rake $3
Board  
Seat 1: stiltonblue folded before Flop
Seat 2: Dolleman12 (button) folded before Flop (didnt bet)
Seat 3: kezako2009 (small blind) showed and won ($550.20) with two pair, Kings and Fours
Seat 4: DoC.LemOn (big blind) showed and lost with a pair of Fours
Seat 5: jamesy1963 folded before Flop
Seat 6: koomo folded before Flop (didnt bet)

On February 08 2014 09:27 cariadon wrote: I'd call this with TT JJ KK AA and have a hard time with 99/88 because meh.

On February 08 2014 18:59 cariadon wrote: Not leveling. People are quick to label other players as "fish" for no reason, pseudo reasons or just to make hero feel superior.

that is a very weird and irrelevant tangent of psychoanalysis for you to go on...given what was posted, it seems pretty reasonable to to conclude villain is a fish.

honestly, thinking someone is pretty likely to be good solely because they have a big stack is very typical casual fish logic, right along with "but how much did you lose?", or thinking someone is a fish because they call down with bottom pair in a spot where the other guy is polarized to nuts or air.

and i know you weren't a fish when you played (not sure if you still play), which is why i'm surprised you think having 9 buyins would have such a strong correlation with being good.

you fail to make the distinction between two things
a) calling villains fish without any reads and/or significant data is bad practice
b) me making a statement claiming villain is good (which i haven't done)

My initial comment was maybe misleading because if you agree with a) you will get it, at least thats what i thought. Typical hand discussion bullshit that starts with "So i was in the pot with this fish right..." we've all heard it one too many times. Even after years of the same shitty pattern of biases there is little hope of improvement. I provided my 2 cents which was more than called for in this meta-question attempt at a discussion. You aren't even deep. If it was for 200bbs and you had 77 or 88 it becomes interesting.

From my experience the fish who run up a big stack splash around but when it gets down to monster pots they atleast have some equity or a false impression of their relative hand strength. This was a spot to splash.

Way to go Lemon, your argument can not be denied. Just because there was one instance of allin with KQo it carries over to every other fishy player with more than a few buyins in front of them. You are one of the most biased players on this site from what i observe. Instead of finding proof to your one tunnelvision claim try and see the bigger picture for a change.

you didn't say villain was good, but you pointed out his stack as a reason for why calling him a fish might be flawed, which doesn't make sense.

anyway, i don't doubt that there is some level of unjustifiable fish-labeling to make people feel better about themselves, to the extent that that sort of thing is part of human nature. but i don't believe it's as common as you think, i think usually people just don't feel like posting all the things that went into them making that label, whether it's their stats or previous history or whatever. i mean, even then, it's not like you need huge databases to call someone a fish, a lot of times 1 hand is enough to call someone a fish with 90% certainty.

You aren't even deep. If it was for 200bbs and you had 77 or 88 it becomes interesting.

what does this mean? he didn't ask about 77 or 88, he asked about what the minimum hand he should call with should be...

but since you're mentioning it, you also said "I'd call this with TT JJ KK AA and have a hard time with 99/88 because meh." so why do you have a hard time with 99/88 at 100bb's, and say it 'becomes interesting' with 77/88 at 200bb lol

...

Consider this statement: Someone with 9 buyins on the table is a fish. Do you agree?

People tend to consider fishy what they don't do themselves. Or extremes of stats as you mentioned. However more often than not this transfers into how their play - they don't adapt. Which is a mistake in its own right because you aren't getting maximum value from having such a player on your table.

I don't know why i entertained myself in answering this question that is actually a hidden brag post. Just by looking at the hand TT+ is just instacall no matter what or who. If it is presumed villain is a fish nobody with half a brain will say calling with 77 is bad. However lacking such specific information this only becomes a discussion when the players are deeper and we have a lesser holding, the true bottom of the range.

On February 09 2014 07:49 bigredhoss wrote: what does this mean? he didn't ask about 77 or 88, he asked about what the minimum hand he should call with should be... ...

The minimum hand he should call this with should be a pocket pair under tens. ba dum tsss ?

nobody said 9 buyins was the reason he is a fish, what are you talking about? you are the one who brought his stacksize up implying it suggests he's not a fish. i don't know why you're being so cynical/existential about this hand of poker, why would you call it a brag post? what is he bragging about, having quads and winning a buyin? his hypothetical question is perfectly legit and relevant.

The minimum hand he should call this with should be a pocket pair under tens. ba dum tsss ?

so it went from having a hard time with 99/88 for 100bb's to being a close spot with 88/77 for 200bb's, makes sense.

Banwagoning the fish train when his 9 buyins are in plain sight doesn't make sense.

Here is what you can take away from what i have said:
a) with TT+ it is a snapcall against anyone
b) with 88/99 you should take a second to think about your situation
c) with 77 deep against a fish this shouldn't be a quick fold and is a spot worthy of discussion

I wouldn't blindly take someones word for villain being a fish without fuck all for evidence because it gets dropped way too much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases I suggest taking a large mirror and looking into these things called biases.

On February 09 2014 18:29 cariadon wrote: Banwagoning the fish train when his 9 buyins are in plain sight doesn't make sense.

what do his 9 buyins being in plain sight have to do with it?

On February 09 2014 19:33 bigredhoss wrote: Show nested quote + On February 09 2014 18:29 cariadon wrote: Banwagoning the fish train when his 9 buyins are in plain sight doesn't make sense. what do his 9 buyins being in plain sight have to do with it?

The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof".

On February 10 2014 10:25 cariadon wrote: Show nested quote + On February 09 2014 19:33 bigredhoss wrote:   On February 09 2014 18:29 cariadon wrote: Banwagoning the fish train when his 9 buyins are in plain sight doesn't make sense. what do his 9 buyins being in plain sight have to do with it? The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof".

the fact that you think he made a premature judgement about villain being a fish doesn't really answer my question about what him having "9 buyins in plain sight" has to do with it.

i also don't know why you keep linking to wikipedia about these cognitive biases that everyone learned about in psych 101, just say "begging the question" and everyone will know what you mean (...or not, because your use of it doesn't really make sense).

You rather presume he is a fish, i rather not.
If Eluflop busts out his typical "villain is obv a fish" line and i see villain having 9 buyins it kind of begs the question, doesn't it ?

If you want quality advice you provide quality information. No such advice was given and it questions the sincerity of really wanting to discuss the hand.

You are turning something that isn't, into an elephant. What is your agenda?

Stop thinking you are the best player in the world and everyone else being fish. Wake up.