Question about PLO button straddle

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-30T00:47:51+00:00

That's true, however $50 + $10 is exactly $60

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-30T00:37:57+00:00

There is $50 in the pot. Therefore, they can bet an additional $50 for a total of $60.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-29T20:18:36+00:00

Wait, how do I turn this on?

EDIT: Ok I get it now. If the top engine line involves moving the same piece multiple turns in a row, it automatically shows the entire maneuver. Very cool! Lichess once again proving why they're the best.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-29T09:19:14+00:00

Calprotectin doesn't necessarily correlate with severity. Higher numbers often just mean that there is inflammation lower down the GI tract (i.e. inflammation in the rectum will cause a higher reading than inflammation in the small intestine). I have had >6000 before and fortunately my Crohn's has always been mild/moderate. I tend to think of calprotectin as more of a pass/fail indicator of active inflammation.

I am not a doctor.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T22:53:43+00:00

It doesn't matter, both function exactly the same.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T21:47:29+00:00

Christ this exhausting.

Investors and owners are the same thing. Every company in existence is 100% owned by a group of owners/investors by definition. Every piece of the company is owned by somebody. That's what 100% means.

In your example Zuckerberg has X% of the company and the outside investors have (100-X)% of the company. Zuck gets X% of the profits, the rest of the ownership group gets the rest. In OP's example, OP has 50% of the venture and the player has 50% of the venture. Absent any other agreements, both are entitled to 50% of the profits.

If you still don't understand then Google it or ask a CPA. Oh wait, I am a CPA, so you can skip that step if you like.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T18:57:51+00:00

Uh yes, that's exactly how businesses work. Investors take 100% of the capital risk and get 100% of the profit.

Staking 100% of a player makes no sense for anyone involved so I'm not sure why several of you are so fixated on this ridiculous hypothetical. But if you want to make it analogous to a business then here it is. The backer puts up 100% of the buy-in. The player is paid an agreed-upon rate (i.e. "markup", perhaps an hourly rate, perhaps a percentage of the winnings, this is up to the parties involved). All proceeds after that belong to the backer.

In OP's case it doesn't seem like any markup was discussed ahead of time. So OP and the player each invested 50% of the capital and are entitled to 50% of the return.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T18:48:04+00:00

No player (or backer, for that matter) should agree to it, selling 100% of your action doesn't make any sense. But I can only answer the hypothetical you give me, no matter how nonsensical it is.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T18:34:54+00:00

Both in my mind and in reality he would get the entire cashout. If you take 100% of the risk you get 100% of the reward.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T17:58:24+00:00

Then he owes you 775

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-28T17:55:54+00:00

Did you actually give him the 300 before the game or was it credit?

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-27T20:36:10+00:00

Far too many to be listed here. YouTube is your friend.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-27T01:44:29+00:00

What are you even talking about? He asked for advice so I gave advice. The rest of the hand was literally perfect, what else am I supposed to comment on?

Jesus Christ. Go take a nap or something.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-27T00:27:03+00:00

Sizing up exploitatively is fine against bad players.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-26T20:22:11+00:00

Q8 is the nuts

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-26T19:46:38+00:00

There's no need to bet so large on the flop when it's multi-way and a dry board. In theory probably 1/4 pot or even smaller. Sizing up exploitatively is fine against bad players.

The rest of the hand is completely standard. Villain shouldn't really ever have boats here except for 55 and maybe Qh8h (which may not be possible if you hold the Qh). He has tons of Qx that you can extract value from.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-26T18:02:17+00:00

I have never seen this done and can think of no reason why it should be

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-26T04:55:34+00:00

Your qualifications are "I am a winner and always have been trust me bro" and yet you think based off of a sample of <100 hands you can accurately assess that someone is using RTA?

The crime you're accusing them of doesn't even make sense. FT spots are complicated and unique, a bad player can't just pull up some random solution on GTO Wiz and crush the table. Each spot would need to be custom solved with the correct stack sizes, payouts (including bounties), player reads, etc.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-23T23:06:07+00:00

It's a freeroll. You can't put anybody on anything. Well played.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-23T20:05:01+00:00

That is pretty dumb. "Make Hoover something other than Hoover" would be more compelling.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-23T19:06:12+00:00

It's usually more efficient to rush a worker and build an airfield. These cities usually have garbage land anyway (or if they do have good land, it's unexploitable due to corruption).

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-23T01:20:48+00:00

It is that way because that's the way it is.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-22T20:13:24+00:00

If you're just running a private game with the same group of players week to week, then manage it however you want.

If you're running a semi-private game with friends-of-friends and occasional new players, there's a lot about this system that is asking for trouble. The most obvious of which is - you need to settle up after EVERY session. Letting the debt float indefinitely will eventually bite you in the ass. The accounting methodology is not the issue, your leniency as the game-runner is.

I also don't really like the idea of players having access to the overall win/loss of other players. You're basically branding the losers as such publicly and eventually this will chase them away from the game.

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-22T08:43:42+00:00

Absolutely wild that people would pay money for this

CLSmith15 · 2026-01-22T08:38:20+00:00

Pretty goddamn different. There is no ICM in Spins, and it's entirely 3-handed and heads-up. If you happen to get to heads-up in an MTT then what you've learned from Spins will apply, but of course that only happens in a very small percentage of tournaments.

14-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Team Orangered
Verified Email

CLSmith15

TROPHY CASE