A simple true or false: Going "all in" on every hand in Texas Hold em is the fastest way to

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Me and a buddy were debating this. Is it true or false?

[IndyTom 0]

Me and a buddy were debating this. Is it true or false?

 

No...because you scare away the fish. By going all in, you may be only collecting the blinds after scaring everyone out. In a perfect world, you would lead everyone into the river card, then going all in. That way the pot is larger.

 

All of this assumes, of course, that you win every hand. No one does this because you need to hedge your chips with lower betting to stay in the game - due to risk that your hand sucks.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

No...because you scare away the fish. By going all in, you may be only collecting the blinds after scaring everyone out. In a perfect world, you would lead everyone into the river card, then going all in. That way the pot is larger.

 

All of this assumes, of course, that you win every hand. No one does this because you need to hedge your chips with lower betting to stay in the game - due to risk that your hand sucks.

 

 

The first part of your answer seems to make a little sense.

 

The second part, not nearly as much. The question didn't ask "the lowest risk method" or "the most efficienent method", it only asked "the fastest method".

[RicemanX 20]

stick your hand in the cookie jar too many times and you'll eventually get your hands chopped off.

[IndyTom 0]

The first part of your answer seems to make a little sense.

 

The second part, not nearly as much. The question didn't ask "the lowest risk method" or "the most efficienent method", it only asked "the fastest method".

 

Fine. Yes, it would be the fastest method only if you are guaranteed someone matches your bet. Otherwise, no - stringing along is faster.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Fine. Yes, it would be the fastest method if you are guaranteed someone matches your bet. Otherwise, no - stringing along is faster.

 

 

You're not guaranteed anything.

 

If you were to ask a Scientifically Certified Mathemetician-ologist with a minor in Statistics and Probability, "True or False: Going "all in" every hand is the fastest way to build up your chips in Texas Hold 'em Poker", what would he say?

 

He only gets to say "True" or "False". He can't read into it or give "well only..." or "well that depends on....."

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

IndyTom and Riceman are both right. But if you're looking to make the most money fastest, you probably want to play a lot of hands where other players are betting. If you do the betting, they'll get scared and wait until they have a monster. You let them bet, you can play whatever the fock you want. Of course, you'll most definitely lose with this method......

 

I do know that one common theory at the WSOP is that you have to double up a couple times on the first day to have a chance. Dunno how true it is but I remember watching an episode where a guy bought in three or four times on day one after busting out over and over trying to double up.

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

You're not guaranteed anything.

 

If you were to ask a Scientifically Certified Mathemetician-ologist with a minor in Statistics and Probability, "True or False: Going "all in" every hand is the fastest way to build up your chips in Texas Hold 'em Poker", what would he say?

 

He only gets to say "True" or "False". He can't read into it or give "well only..." or "well that depends on....."

I'd say the answer is false.

 

Also, it's an idiotic question with probably no answer at all. You're talking about 7-9 variables with players and unknown billions of variables with cards you'll get.

 

You can't win a lot of money fast unless you get people to play with you if you're going to bet like that.

 

The truest answer to the question is that you and your friend are both idiots.

[IndyTom 0]

You're not guaranteed anything.

 

If you were to ask a Scientifically Certified Mathemetician-ologist with a minor in Statistics and Probability, "True or False: Going "all in" every hand is the fastest way to build up your chips in Texas Hold 'em Poker", what would he say?

 

He only gets to say "True" or "False". He can't read into it or give "well only..." or "well that depends on....."

 

In that case - still false.

[IndyTom 0]

The truest answer to the question is that you and your friend are both idiots.

 

Precisely.

[frank 2,174]

Assuming everyone at the table calls you and you win, then yes, this is the guaranteed fastest method.

[kutulu 1,564]

Are you All In Tony?

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

In that case - still false.

 

 

Okay, so this "probability expert" says "false". After he said "false", and you asked him "Okay, then what is the 'fastest' way?", how would he answer?

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

Okay, so this "probability expert" says "false". After he said "false", and you asked him "Okay, then what is the 'fastest' way?", how would he answer?

Are you retarded?

 

We explained that you have to get people to play with you. It varies. There is no other answer. Get a focking life, jackass.

[KSB2424 3,087]

Okay, so this "probability expert" says "false". After he said "false", and you asked him "Okay, then what is the 'fastest' way?", how would he answer?

Each hand is a separate and unequal event than the previous hand. The fastest way to build your chip count is to maximize the amount of chips you can win given each hand. Going "All In" is but one of a plethora of options that is used to accomplish this goal.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Each hand is a separate and unequal event than the previous hand. The fastest way to build your chip count is to maximize the amount of chips you can win given each hand. Going "All In" is but one of a plethora of options that is used to accomplish this goal.

 

 

Let's see. I'm not sure how to get my point across. I realize it's not the smartest or most efficient way.

 

Okay. How's this: "Of all 'methods/tactics' in Texas Hold 'em Poker, the method that can potentially build your chip count the fastest, is 'going all in'. No other method possesses the potential of chip gain that going all in does"

[edjr 5,775]

Going all in on every hand is also the fastest way to LOSE all your chips.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Are you retarded?

 

We explained that you have to get people to play with you. It varies. There is no other answer. Get a focking life, jackass.

 

I don't think your mind is capable of the type of thinking needed to understand the question. Seriously. You are one of those people that opens their mouth and starts shouting out answers before thinking. That's part of the reason you struggle with your daily life.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Going all in on every hand is also the fastest way to LOSE all your chips.

 

 

True.

 

[redtodd 7]

Do you by any chance play on Absolute Poker? If so, please let me know your screenname.

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

I don't think your mind is capable of the type of thinking needed to understand the question. Seriously. You are one of those people that opens their mouth and starts shouting out answers before thinking. That's part of the reason you struggle with your daily life.

You just changed the question, jackass. You changed it to "potentially" gain the most chips. Well, of course you could potentially win the most chips by going all in every time if you were called every time.

 

Exactly what we've been telling you since the beginning of the thread.

 

Take your fake high minded philosophy and shove it up your ass. Also, pay your friend because the answer to the original question is false. Only becomes true when you change the question, as you just did.

 

Retard.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

You just changed the question, jackass. You changed it to "potentially" gain the most chips. Well, of course you could potentially win the most chips by going all in every time if you were called every time.

 

Exactly what we've been telling you since the beginning of the thread.

 

Take your fake high minded philosophy and shove it up your ass. Also, pay your friend because the answer to the original question is false. Only becomes true when you change the question, as you just did.

 

Retard.

 

 

I know I changed the question. I ANNOUNCED that I was changing it. Thanks for pointing out what I already knew.

Changing the question does not change the answer. It makes the answer more apparent.

 

Look at it this way, if there is not another method that you can name that is faster, then the the answer is "True", it is the fastest way. It also happens to the be the fastest way to lose your chips.

[KSB2424 3,087]

Throwing the "Hail Mary" in football is theoretically the fasted way down the field (given a set of events happening i.e. your player catching the ball). Practically it is really stoopid, and will more than not end up in a turnover or a 3 and out.

 

Going "All In" in poker is theoretically the fasted way to double up (given a set of events happening i.e. getting called every time, and actually winning the pot.). Practically it is really stoopid, and will more than not get you busted.

 

 

HTH

[Sparkling Wiggles 0]

I know I changed the question. I ANNOUNCED that I was changing it. Thanks for pointing out what I already knew.

Changing the question does not change the answer. It makes the answer more apparent.

 

Look at it this way, if there is not another method that you can name that is faster, then the the answer is "True", it is the fastest way. It also happens to the be the fastest way to lose your chips.

Jackass.

 

First you asked the question. Then I told you that you were retarded. Then you change the question and tell me I'm not capable of understanding. Then, I give you the correct answer to your changed question. Then, you come back with this lameass defense. Pay your friend. You lose. You don't change the game in the middle of the bet.

 

Seeing the way you operate, it wouldn't surprise me to see you try to weasel out of it, though.

 

Retard.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Throwing the "Hail Mary" in football is theoretically the fasted way down the field (given a set of events happening i.e. your player catching the ball). Practically it is really stoopid, and will more than not end up in a turnover or a 3 and out.

 

Going "All In" in poker is theoretically the fasted way to double up (given a set of events happening i.e. getting called every time, and actually winning the pot.). Practically it is really stoopid, and will more than not get you busted.

HTH

 

 

 

Agreed.

[the riddler on ritalin 0]

Jackass.

 

First you asked the question. Then I told you that you were retarded. Then you change the question and tell me I'm not capable of understanding. Then, I give you the correct answer to your changed question. Then, you come back with this lameass defense. Pay your friend. You lose. You don't change the game in the middle of the bet.

 

Seeing the way you operate, it wouldn't surprise me to see you try to weasel out of it, though.

 

Retard.

 

I love the way you are signing off on your responses. That pretty much sums it up.

[Guest RenoZ]

I love the way you are signing off on your responses. That pretty much sums it up.

 

[kutulu 1,564]

Do you by any chance play on Absolute Poker? If so, please let me know your screenname.

 

I drained my bankroll over there. Now I'm stuck at pitbull poker.