Jump to content

TXSooner518

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2295
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by TXSooner518

  1. Welcome!

    It shouldn't ever be easier to beat good players than bad players. If it is, you are either playing worse against the bad players, or you are mistaken as to what makes players good or bad. You make money when people call 7-10x raises with trash, even if you have short-term frustration.

    It's basically impossible to put MP on KK since he flatted the PF raise, obv 66 is a risk but that's one combo. But yeah we do have to think about what he can pay off our jam with. Sometimes it makes sense to just call, even if you think you are good 95+% of the time, if there aren't hands that we beat that pay off a raise. One easy example is 4 hearts on board, we hold the king, someone bets. If they aren't super tight, we win the hand quite a lot of the time. But if we raise, most players will fold everything but the ace unless we are a maniac, so it usually just makes sense to "call expecting to win."

    In this hand, it would help to know what the turn blank was. Would it be possible that he turned 2 pair (could if it was a 5 or 7, could not if it was a 2, for example)? If so then he could have rivered a lower boat. Did the turn bring a flush draw that didn't include the 6? If so he could have a 6 with a flush draw, and then made trips. Would this player pay off a jam with trips?

  2. Yeah calling the AT is horrendous in cash or tourney for that many chips. Even worse with four live players behind you.

    Same with calling 76o or J7. Also terrible as tourney chip leader unless the jam is so short that it is +EV to call. Being deeper doesn’t change the equation of calling preflop jams much other than a few weird ICM situations, almost entirely right on bubble or at final table.

  3. I ate here on Saturday. Got a 5 beer flight for $5 which was a hell of a deal. Brisket stew was great. Pork steak with 2 sides for $12 also excellent and a hell of a deal. Did see some people ordering pizza at the brewery which also looked excellent. The ribs are baby backs rather than his standard. Very good, but preferred the standard. The brisket is the same good stuff as always.

    One annoyance - you sit and someone eventually takes your order, then eventually brings it. A lot slower than the "standard" Q experience. Sit and enjoy your cheap flight.

  4. On 12/14/2019 at 5:44 PM, deech said:

    When they hit you with the you don't have a _____ speech, snap fold.  

    This. Without the speech, snap call, shrug, roll on. But when they say "I don't think you have ___", they 100.0% of the time can beat ___.  See Rounders. "I don't think you got the spades Teddy, so I'm gonna go all in."

    That's where you need KK and say "You're right. I don't...have...ze ten. Kings fooool." 

    Def not one to lose sleep over, just a gross flop and you could have lost a lot more. He just tried to let you off the hook. 

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  5. 1 hour ago, Lurch said:

    I hope we don’t have any surly players that ask the dealer to wash the deck. Telling the table you harbor irrational beliefs about the deck is exceptionally -ev

    So annoying. Even worse when they justify it with "I got the same hand two hands in a row" or whatever.  So last hand you got the 4th and 13th cards, this time you got the 3rd and 12th. Do you think all those cards somehow stayed exactly in a row, or is it maybe a random occurrence?

  6. 1 hour ago, Lurch said:

    Nope, 14 hours later and I still hate it.

    4bets and 5bets are so rare at $2/5 he is 99% AA and I can’t think of any other hand he’s play like that for the final 1%.

    I should have raised my first action to $125. He’s going to raise w AA/KK and flat AK, QQ and JJ. I can comfortably fold to any 4bet. If they eventually wise up and start limp 4betting UTG I can adjust, but let’s be honest... that’s not happening at $2/5.

    With the flat line I took (which I too am ok with, though it should be the exception not the standard) I should have gone $200 4bet and folded to a shove

    If you go $200 and he jams, we have to call $550 to win $830, so we need 39.8% equity. Against literally KK+ we have 23%. Against QQ+, AKs we have 52%. So basically if he does this half the time with QQ or AKs we gotta go with it. We played our hand a bit oddly, so I think there is just no way we can say 99% AA. He never just decides you can't have the blade, has AKo, has blockers to AA or KK and decides you fold pairs a lot and if you don't, it's a flip?  Never? He's always just flatting those hands to play them multiway out of position?

    HH of your full double+ with JJ?

  7. Nothing wrong with the KK line, especially when we are OOP and have an aggro in the hand. Also some players won't put you on KK+ since you just called multiway the first time. I don't think he HAS to have AA.  If you think his 5b range is only going to be AA, then 4b smaller and then fold to the 5b, but it's gonna be really rare to accurately range him to {AA}, especially when we played our hand nonstandard (not saying it wasn't good/fine, just not standard).

  8. Lol it’s a 5 unit sample size. Again, people are completely clueless as to probability and statistics. It’s not some amazing thing that a 30% event has failed to happen 5 times in a row.

    8 of the last 11 NCAA BB champs have been a 1 seed, one was a 2, one a 3. OMG HOW DO THEY KNOW WHO IS GOOD WITH EYEBALLLLLLS

    EDIT to add: On top of that, the seeding isn't really a "power" rank, it's a resume rank. LSU isn't the 1 seed because of some overwhelming feeling they are the "best" team, but they have the best resume. I think that most observers think LSU, Clemson, and tOSU are really close as far as who is "best." Any of the 3 would not be a surprise to win the title. But, for example, nearly everyone agreed tOSU should get the 2 seed over Clemson, yet Clemson is a slight favorite. Does Clemson winning mean the "eyeballs" are wrong again? Of course not.

    Sagarin Predictor says LSU is the 4th best team in the country. Most computer systems have LSU at 2 or 3. But if they don't win the title, you'll be back here talking about eyeballs being wrong, when the eyeballs don't have LSU #1. 

  9. 1 hour ago, C-Man said:

    Does it? Top seed has still yet to win the CFP! 😎

    The more teams you have, the more seeding matters, you start adding in dramatically weaker teams, byes, home games, etc. Yes, neutral site games between only 4 top teams doesn't make seeding matter as much. For example, in the model you listed, Memphis is a considerably easier game for LSU than Baylor and Oregon for tOSU and Clemson, despite it being razor-close on who deserves the 1 at least. Most observers think the 3 teams are pretty close power-wise, with Clemson's resume obviously considerably weaker. 

    56 minutes ago, C-Man said:

    Yeah, this would suck. 

     

    I said with all champs and only champs. That model doesn't have all champs and doesn't have 'only' champs. It has Baylor and UGA, who aren't champs. It is missing 4 teams who won their conference. 

  10. 20 minutes ago, Auto Driller said:

    Nice straw man.

    Look, we all know that the lowest levels of college football will realistically never compete for a national title.

    Cut Division I down from the current ~130 teams to 80 or 96. Eight conferences with 10 or 12 teams. Conference title winners make the playoff. Everyone else plays bowl games like usual.

    Or if we absolutely can’t stomach the idea of demoting the Rice’s and UAB’s of the world, give auto bids to the P5 winners + highest ranked G5 + 2 at-large.

    A playoff with all conference champs and only conference champs will suck suck suck. Every OOC game is now an NFL preseason game. Fuck that nine ways from Sunday. 

  11. 45 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

    Not really, you can have a playoff with no subjective judgment required. Only conference champions get in. Subjective opinion would only be required for seeding, not inclusion.

    I don't want that system, but it's certainly possible and would require no subjective analysis or opinions. I agree with you that a blend of both makes sense, that's why I think that a playoff with all conference champions plus at-large teams is the right thing to do.

    And another thing is that subjective analysis and opinion could even be further removed if you used rating sets with published inputs for the at-large positions.

    You would still have to seed it, which dramatically impacts likelihood of winning, so I still say I'm right! :)

     

  12. 9 minutes ago, Auto Driller said:

    Lol. Why even play the regular season? Let’s just watch some 7 on 7 tape from fall camp and award a title.

    The Giants were very obviously not better than the Patriots. They didn't even go 1-0 vs the Pats, they were 1-1. Again, you seem to have a hard time grasping that the best team doesn't always win. The Giants were the 2007 NFL Champions, but not the best team in the NFL in 2007. It's really not at all a hard concept.

    If you ran this year's CFP 1000 times, you would probably get a breakdown of roughly 300 LSU titles, 300 tOSU titles, 300 Clemson titles, and 100 OU titles. Whichever team wins this year won't prove to be the year's best team, but they will be the 2020 CFP Champion, which isn't exactly the same thing.

    Side not - giant LOL at you saying "why even play the regular season" while arguing that a 9-7 team was better than a 16-0 team, which beat that 9-7 team in the regular season. You're arguing AGAINST the validity of the regular season there.

     

    To Teddy Bear - NO LOSS MAXIMUMS AT ALL. They encourage pussy scheduling. Use the formula you advocate above, which considers SOS, MOV, etc., and if you're below a certain level, you're out.

  13. But that is the point. You're giving "the #1 team lost" as proof they weren't the #1 team. 

    Also "playing it on the field" will by definition again include some subjective judgments about who the better teams are, for inclusion in the bracket. There is no way to do it otherwise, unless you want a 130 team playoff. Same thing happens in basketball, which settles its champ on the court, but still relies on a committee to decide who the best teams are for both inclusion and seeding. 

  14. Being the best team doesn't mean you always win the games.  A 60-40 edge would be a HUGE edge to have in a game between top 4 teams, and yet if the 1 seed is a 60/40 fave against every other team in the playoff, they only win the playoff 36% of the time. If you have a 53-47 edge on the other teams, you win the playoff 28% of the time. 

    Probability is a bitch, and virtually no one in sports understands them. 

  15. 17 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

    Just imagine him without #2 and tell me he deserves the award.

    I'm not saying he deserves the award. I think the trip to NYC is deserved.

    16 minutes ago, texifornia said:

    I get that, and I generally prefer stats-based analyses, but man he did not pass the eye test like Mayfield and Murray did. He seemed buoyed by the offensive system and skill position talent, while the other two seemed to take the offense to a new level.

    I'm hardly upset, his numbers are great, but I'd have preferred one of the awesome RBs this year (Hubbard, Taylor, Dobbins) in his place.

    Fair. Would have also liked to seen Hubbard get an invite. 

    5 minutes ago, sidis said:

    the thing about hurts is that his pass efficiency is hugely aided by guys like ceedee breaking about a hundred tackles per catch and running for an additional 30 yards and shit.  that can be incredibly helpful to efficiency, as does throwing screen passes to rbs that run forever with them.

    that said, you don't want want him dropping back and throwing the ball with the game on the line.  that's why they never do that in a must-convert situation.  lincoln always runs him in that situation (and most of the time, remarkably it works).

    that said, he definitely deserves the toughest player in the country award.  the fucker has SEVENTY-FOUR (74) more rushing attempts than their starting running back for god's sake.  he rushed the ball 219 (ricky williams had 279 attempts in 97) times and he has taken hits on a huge percentage of them.  in both baylor games, he took some absolute shots from their defenders to the point that i didn't think he would get back up and nope, there is popping up like nothing even happened every single time.  dude is strong and tough as shit and is going to not be able to feed himself after the age of 40.

    Fair points for sure. I will say he made multiple great plays throwing the ball in the B12 title game, including one where CD just couldn't quiiiiiiiite get his hands under it after Jalen kept the play alive and made a great situational throw, which allows OU to likely win in regulation if he catches it. He also threw the ball a ton, and very well, in the rally in Waco to save the season.

    And yeah, his toughness and leadership (being voted captain as a senior transfer says a lot, as does the sheer number of Bama fans who are rooting for him) to me do help elevate him as a player and make him deserving of the invit.e

  16. On 10/1/2019 at 9:40 AM, WBT said:

    He's not going to finish with the highest rating of all time.  You should be asking how many QB could have his rating playing for OU against UH, South Dakota, UCLA, and Tech.  A real murderers' row of defenses there.  My guess is at least a dozen.

     

    2 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

    This is an objectively easy year.  Burrow should win easily, even if the vote gave Young a fair shot.  He sat out 2 games.  Fields and Young should both have won in weaker years, but not this year.

     

    On the bitching front, OU's QB hype machine is very impressive.  Hurts was arguably a liability for them in close games, including both Baylor games.  He's kind of a turnover machine in the clutch.  Yet he gets to go to NYC.  CeeDee Lamb should be there instead if you really need a Sooner to round out the list.

    Tough to recruit a QB against that.  Maybe you use the fact that "OUs next Heisman invite is going to someone playing QB at another school right now."

    But I'm sooooo tired of it all.

    Jalen definitely had some turnovers at inopportune times. He did also, despite what WBT said, finish with a higher pass efficiency rating than every previous season in history (though behind 2019 Tua and 2019 Burrow). That rating doesn't include his 219/1255/18 TD rush stats (or his receiving TD!). His numbers, not just his helmet/hype, justify his inclusion, though of course Burrow will very deservingly win the award.

  17. 21 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

    Again, if this is the model, why play the games?  You apparently already know the outcome. In 2014 you would have Bama and FSU. I’d have Ohio State. In your world Ohio State doesn’t get a chance because your eyes tell you Bama was better because they beat completely different teams and lost to another Ohio State didn’t play. 
     

    all of your hypotheticals prove the point. You prefer a system that values opinion over results. Let’s say Tus is hurt week one and Bama loses 4 straight (1 conf game to LSU in OT). They then go on to run the table and win the conference championship game beating everyone by 4TDs or more.   I would bet my house they would beat a 1 loss PAC 12 team in a one game playoff but that doesn’t change the fact that Bama would have no business being given the chance based on RESULTS. 

    No, that's not what I'm arguing. You aren't arguing (or at least weren't previously) that you wanted game results (and not team strength) to be the determining factor. You were arguing that there is no way to actually know which team is better if they haven't played each other, which is an idiotic stance. I disagree with solely results-based, and prefer a blend of analytics and win-losses, basically the most deserving of the best teams. But at least solely results-based is a defensible position, as opposed to the previous nonsense. What you were previously saying is in your hypo, who knows if Bama would win that game. Now you are saying, they would win, but their results don't justify inclusion, which I can't argue against, because that part is just difference of opinion.

  18. 11 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

    So figure skating right? 
     

    Your opinion and “eye test” knows best. Why play the games?   Why not use the recruiting rankings and the NFL draft results to say Bama is the best team? This type of shit thinking is why we hold teams to different standards and tailor the narrative to confirm our bias (best win, best loss, worst loss, championship game etc). 

    OK you keep ignoring the point. So let's go. Straight up no spread. Every game I win you pay me $100, every game you win I pay you $110. Free money for you since after all, these teams haven't played. No POSSIBLE WAY to know who is better except for figure skating horse shit right? They are all exactly 50/50, so you getting 110/100 is a GREAT deal for you!! Oh wait, you won't do it, because even you don't believe this bullshit, you just don't like it because a lot of top teams are in a conference that hurts your feelies.

    I get Bama, you get Michigan.

    I get LSU, you get OU.

    I get UCF, you get Marshall.

    I get Florida, you get Virginia.

    I get App State, you get UAB.

    I get Cincy, you get BC.

    I get Louisiana, you get Miami (OH). 

     

     

  19. Quote

    Based on what? They lost to the only ranked teams they played this year in LSU and Auburn. Their best win was over aggy, who also lost to every ranked team they played. Bama didn't win their division and didn't play for their conference. Maybe Florida is the better team? By this argument, we now have Bama, Georgia, Florida, LSU and potentially Auburn in the Top 8 because we can't decide who is better. (Florida didn't beat a ranked team either) 

    How is Bama better than Baylor on paper, who also beat no one? Now we're back to the eyeball test meaning something argument. 

    So you're saying if someone said "hey a college football team is going to play, if they win, you get $1 million, and if they lose, we shoot you in the face.  You can have Baylor, Florida, or Alabama" that you would be like "herp derrrrp who's to say, they all seem equal, just pick one at random"?  Bull fucking shit. 

  20. 1 minute ago, C-Man said:

    Bama is definitely one of the best 8 teams IMO. I also think they'd beat Georgia, who I think is overrated. Bama was the second-best team in the conference until Tua got injured.

    Do not agree with the bolded part unless you're simply talking about finding out who gets in after the champs of the P5 conferences -- or seeding the eight teams that make it. I could easily see where somebody like Virginia would win a P5 conference champ game in a monumental upset of a team like Clemson and be the #7 or #8 seed. I've got zero problems with that. And I'd eliminate the committee altogether and simply go off BCS like computer-driven rankings with the caveat that all the rankings' algorithms are freely available to be scrutinized by the public. That eliminates any potential shenanigans.

    No, I mean to decide if the P5/G5 champ automatically gets in. I would also use it for the 2 or 3 wildcards, yes.

    I would be more OK with losing the qualification cap on the P5 champ than the G5 inclusion. I would be even more OK losing the qualification cap if all 8 teams are seeded, rather than the conf champs getting the top 5 seeds, and you get some perverse result where the 4 seed gets the easiest 1st round game, because the 5 seed is trash UVA or some such, and then the 3 seed gets fucking Clemson in the first round. 

    UGA has a very strong D that can shut down non-dynamic offenses. They did not shut down OU in 2017, Bama or Texas in 2018, LSU in 2019. UGA's offense is very pedestrian, especially against teams that they can't just overwhelm with talent. Georgia played 4 ranked teams this year. They scored 24, 23, 21, and 10 points, and also scored 19 against Texas A&M, 27 against Mizzou and 21 against Kentucky. Oh, and 17 in overtime against South Fucking Carolina. Sorry, this is not one of the 4 best teams in football, and only a fool would take them straight up against Alabama.

  21. 1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

    you say this like adding a top OOC opponent is easy and guaranteed when scheduling 4 years ahead of time.  See Aggy and Clemson.  Clemson was a bottom feeder when scheduled.  I'm sure Texas and ND both thought they were getting a better opponent when they signed the contract to play a home and home.  Shit changes

    Nope, I recognize that it's not a guarantee. See Mitch's post below. OU scheduled an away game at a P5 team that is frequently upper-tier, and a top G5 team, and both disappointed. Clemson tried to schedule a good game, I'm not blaming them for their OOC schedule really, though I question if they need Charlotte AND Wofford. But you put yourself in position by playing P5 home and aways (and real P5 home and aways, not Northwestern or Duke or Vandy or whatever). 

    1 hour ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

    And Oklahoma beat exactly who OOC? 4-8 UCLA and 4-8 Houston? Their biggest achievement this year was digging out of the hole they dug for themselves against Baylor. And then unimpressively hanging on against Baylor in OT with their 3rd string QB who had something like 3 passes all season in the championship game. How did the Pac cannibalize itself any worse than the Big 12 did this season?

    With regard to the other notion that we will always be arguing about style points, I think it makes more sense to argue about them with the 3 teams after 5 other teams have automatic bids. 

    And what exact data point do we have regarding UGA/Bama? For sure Georgia would get into the playoff. They finished 5 in the final poll. You think Bama with no Tua, who lost to the only two decent teams they played this year would be an overwhelming favorite against Georgia? Or that they would make an 8 team playoff field in a final poll that they finished 13 in? What sport are you watching? 

    Sure, OU's OOC didn't work out this year. Luckily, there were only 4 P5 conference champs with 1 or less losses, so they didn't have to beauty pageant. If either Utah or Oregon loses one less game, they are in a tight battle either way. I think they go over Utah (whose OOC was worse) and Oregon (whose OOC was better) goes over them. 

    I 100% guarantee that if Bama played UGA right now, Bama would be favored, yes. Every single power rating system has Bama > UGA. 

    Common opponents:

    LSU - Bama L by 5, UGA L by 27
    A&M - Bama W by 19, UGA W by 6
    Tenn - Bama W by 22, UGA W by 29
    Auburn - Bama L by 3, UGA W by 7
    S. Carolina - Bama W by 24 , UGA L by 3

    So among 5 common opponents (almost half the schedule), Bama outperformed UGA by 45 points (9 ppg), with each going 3-2. 

    What sport are YOU watching, that you legit don't think Alabama is one of the 8 best teams this year? Not saying resume, saying team. What, in your opinion, given the above makes UGA better than Bama?

    53 minutes ago, S11 said:

    p5 conference champs are in with fewer than three losses or autobid shifts to an at-large.

    why three losses?  It’s 25% of a regular season and two losses is the most Any national champ over 20 years has had.

    I like qualifications for the autobid, but definitely not loss caps, that just encourages garbage scheduling. Make it a formula that incorporates humans/power ratings, which helps to incent tough scheduling. 

  22. 7 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

    I don't know about that. OU hasn't been overly impressive the last half of the season and letting Baylor with its third string QB take you to OT in the CCG probably wouldn't have helped their cause. Oregon's win over Utah and the manner in which they beat them is probably more impressive than anything OU has done the last half of the season.

    And this kinda proves the point -- we are arguing about style points and strength of schedule and all sorts of other variables that wouldn't fucking matter if you just let all the P5 conference winners in. I can't believe there are real college football fans even debating this. We have god knows how many meaningless bowl games and you would rather keep that system in place instead of adding 4 more games that actually count for something. 

    I feel pretty sure about it. Oregon started outside the Top 10 in the polls. The Pac 12 cannibalized itself, and the narrative would be that Oregon and Utah were 11-1, but neither had even played a ranked team between the two of them. Oregon got credibility by controlling the game with Auburn, especially when Auburn proved to be a very good team. 

    Similarly, I think OU jumps Utah if Utah beats Oregon (not positive, but think so, unless Utah smoked them), but if Utah had a really good OOC win, that changes things.

    And also with Clemson, if they lost they were toast, but if they had beaten a top 15 team OOC, that would have helped insulate against a loss. 

    Last, we will always be arguing about style points/etc. Why should Memphis go to the 8 team playoff over Boise or App State? Or let's say we are discussing wild cards. Should UGA's SEC title game loss put them back behind Bama? I mean, if not, we are punishing UGA for making the game and rewarding Bama for not. But should we ignore a pretty conclusive data point on whether UGA is elite/better than Bama?  What % of people would take UGA over Bama on a neutral field right now? I definitely would not.

×
×
  • Create New...