]]>
-Moose
Statistics: Posted by TheMoose15 — Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:39 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by muszu — Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:44 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
To me, results-based thinking is when you get it all-in as a dog but win the pot anyway, and feel happy. Or when you are glad you folded because the cards that came after the flop would have beaten you, even though you were ahead on the flop. Stuff like that. If you're thinking like that, well, that's just bad poker.
But I think that "results-based thinking" does not apply to a situation like this. The "result" has already occurred: he has the set to beat me already. My worry isn't about the cards to come, it's about the cards that have already come.
Or, if a situation like this does count as "results-based thinking," then the mantra "Never be results-based in your thinking" needs to be balanced against "Trust your reads and your instincts."
I will go through PokerTracker to confirm this, but I think that I have never before laid down a set without an obvious flush or straight beating me. Phil Hellmuth says he's only laid down kings preflop a couple of times, and both times he was right and the guy showed aces. The guy is a jackass but he is right to be proud of this. Making the very occasional, very difficult, but correct fold is the way to go.
So far I'm 1 for 1 making a read that I needed to fold a set.
I don't expect to do it again over the next, say, 100,000 hands....Statistics: Posted by k3nt — Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:37 pm
]]>
]]>