|
|
|
|
#1
03-11-07, 04:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
i cannot beleive the plays these guys make, so many of them make no sense. also the announcers are completely wrong with their commentary so often it's ridiculous.
i really feel like a regular at 25/50 could beat this game. |
|
#3
03-11-07, 09:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Personally, I'd find HSP much more interesting if it were $2000/$4000 limit stud.
__________________
"Animals die, friends die, and I shall die. But the one thing that will never die is the reputation I leave behind." Old Norse adage |
|
#4
03-11-07, 03:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If the commentary is already horrible at NLHE, imagine the clusterfuck it would be with this game.
|
|
#5
03-11-07, 04:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
maybe i dont really get the whole "Running it twice" thing, but why would Lindgren want to run it twice when he has
TT on a 36T board with 2 hearts, and gets it all in vs Harmans AK of hearts when he's like a 65% favorite. |
|
#6
03-11-07, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's the same EV. Running it once or twice doesn't change how big of a favorite you are, just makes their expected hourly return lower since this takes more time.
|
|
#7
03-11-07, 06:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, it lowers *short term* variance. You'll have more chopped pots, less 100% bad beats, and so on.
I'm indifferent. |
|
#8
03-11-07, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I feel like a winning player at 3/6 would beat this game.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
