IrishBhoy
-
Posts
3,735 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by IrishBhoy
-
-
30 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
I can't make a case for how she played it, I fold that every time (or raise it aggressively if I'm a few cans down). Her being close with Rip is definitely a bit off but again, I know f**k all about these people so I can't judge if spotting money to someone you're shagging to play high stakes poker is the done thing for them. Its a mental hand of poker.
Aye the fact that it’s so mental makes me think that nobody in their right mind would try to cheat in that spot. But if you think that, then you need to believe that she genuinely went all in with J4o on that board
which is equally mental.
I seen she had been getting coached by a pretty high profile guy out in LV, who was quick to come out and defend her. I don’t know what he charges for his coaching but he must have taken a hit after having one of his clients involved in such a high profile hand which was played so, so badly.
I don’t know much about the guy Rip either apart from learning that he is involved in Jake Paul’s promotional company, and may even have the title of Jake Paul’s manager. Apparently he was the funding behind Robbi playing the HCL streams, and that was why he was so angry when Garrett accepted the money being refunded. There is a clip where he comes back to the table and starts shouting about how Garrett ‘cornered her and took his money back’. I actually think Garrett is completely in the wrong by holding on to the money, as whilst there is no hard proof of cheating he was beat on the felt, and until cheating can be proven Robbi won the hand with J high. Apparently he’s gave the full amount to a charity which is quite poor imo, even if he didn’t want to give the money directly to Robbi it should have been placed in a neutral account until such time there was hard evidence either way.
0 -
55 minutes ago, SlipperyP said:
You know, I know, any and ever word out of place from the SNP is headline on Scotch BBC and now happening in UK wide press. They (UKr) are hurting just now, but it can still bite.
That’s very true. I should add it’s absolutely astonishing that in Liz Truss’ short tenure as PM she didn’t once meet with Nicola Sturgeon, or even speak to her via phonecall. By all accounts she had no contact with Drakeford, the First Minister of Wales, either. What absolute disdain she has shown towards the people of Scotland and Wales, that in her 40 odd days in office she couldn’t even find the time to speak to the elected leaders of countries which apparently make up such an important part of this ‘union’.
2 -
53 minutes ago, SlipperyP said:
1 of those questions made the biggest headline. Pensions. Nationwide.
He sat down and the rest in history....
As much as I would love Blackford to be barbing the PM and creating headlines, I think the point about pensions and state welfare rising with inflation was already a well trodden path. Jeremy Hunt was grilled on it during all of his media appearances on Tuesday, although didn’t commit to the triple lock. Truss then DID commit to the triple lock during PMQs, for what that’s worth, but I don’t think it was Blackfords question that prompted the headlines.
I will always vote SNP for as long as the party is a vehicle towards independence, but I really do wish they would ruffle more feathers in Westminster. Mhairi Black had a good interview yesterday which you can find on YouTube where she’s standing at Parliament sqaure. She ripped the Tories, Labour and the Westminster pantomime to pieces, and done it in such a way that anyone trying to debate against her would be overwhelmed by her deep and full understanding of the facts, and the manner in which she presents them. The SNP will never be given respect from either a Tory or Labour govt in Westminster (Blackford regularly gets shouted down or spoken over the top of), but I think Black could be someone that would command a respect from her peers purely down to her character. Hopefully we never need to see another SNP leader at Westminster after Blackford but if we do I think Mhairi Black would be the perfect candidate.
0 -
1 minute ago, SlipperyP said:
I think he holds back and rightly so. It's not a Scotland v England dog fight that they are trying their hardest to make.
He also had a few tap ins this week at PMQ's, however, why hold a hand out(makes the news) to a dying PM.
I understand that but he only gets 2 questions to ask, and with Blackfords nature he always tries to demean the position of the PM whilst finding the angle that makes Scottish independence look the most appealing. I’m not saying he’s doing anything wrong, although he’s had Johnson and Truss to go at so far which should be shooty in for him. I would have liked to have seen him rebuke the point Truss made about building nuclear power stations in Scotland though, especially when we have invested so much in to wind and tidal energy.
I may be wrong but was it not an SNP manifesto pledge not to build any more nuclear power stations in Scotland? Even if it wasn’t, the money needed to build one from the ground up would be astronomical. We’ve had Hunterston A and B, and Torness which have recently produced nuclear energy in this country. Both are going through decommissioning if I’m correct, either that or partial shut downs of the plant which takes literally years of money and man power to carry out safely. Britain still hasn’t found a way to safely dispose of nuclear waste either, and we are still disposing of it above ground at numerous sites across the country. Other countries like Germany who invested heavily in nuclear have found ways to dispose of their waste underground which is much safer, although still not an ideal situation and their government have recently been getting grief from the public about waste that had been disposed of in old mining shafts close to suburban areas. This is a technology Scotland should be moving away from, and to be fair to the SNP they are actively trying to. To have the British PM shout at the elected leader of our most prominent party in Westminster about our lack of urgency in building nuclear power stations should have been given short shrift imo.
0 -
On 09/10/2022 at 02:50, IrishBhoy said:
By all accounts she is absolutely incompetent in to the bargain, and her tenure as Attorney General was a complete disaster, with standards of practice being absolutely decimated under her watch as well as regularly going against lawyers in order to side with Johnson’s government. An AG who knowingly broke the law on more than one occasion, that’s how low this government has dragged us. How she managed to get a promotion to Home Secretary we will never know, but the quicker she leaves that role the better or there’s going to be an awful lot of damage done to an awful lot of peoples lives.
Posted this a couple of weeks back and I’m very pleased to see Braverman ousted from such a position in government, wether voluntarily or not. Inside a more stable government Im certain she would have wreaked misery on an untold number of people, from this country and abroad.
It really is a sad state of affairs when you are watching a guy like Grant Shapps (or whatever he’s calling himself this week) take a position like Home Secretary and seeing it as an improvement. As much as Shapps comes across as an incompetent buffoon, I don’t think he’s any where near as heartless as Braverman, and if this government is to continue for its full term then I hold out more hope that his department won’t drift further towards the vision Patel and Braverman had for this country. I would like to be able to say that with some certainty but unfortunately I can’t. Imagine being a unionist in Scotland watching this Tory implosion unfold, as has been ongoing for the best part of the last 4 years, and thinking that this is the best we can hope for. A party in power that was outright rejected at the ballot box in Scotland, enforcing a catastrophic Brexit that the majority of the country voted against, but being dragged through the worst of it by way of being attached to a neighbouring country ten times our size where our voting system dictates we have absolutely no say in a UK election process.
I keep hearing Unionist leaning politicians saying that this is not the right time for Scotland to hold a ‘divisive’ independence referendum, due to the global financial instability and growing tensions with Russia etc. Referendums by their nature are divisive, there is never going to be a time when it isn’t divisive. However, if now isn’t the right time to hold a referendum, with this Tory Govt. in Westminster in utter turmoil, then when exactly will be a good time?
I had a good laugh at Truss during last weeks PMQs when she responded to Blackford by screeching something about the Scottish Government refusing to build new nuclear power stations to help with our reliance on foreign energy. It seemed to get a big cheer from the Tory back benches, but I thought Blackford missed a bit of an open goal by not replying to her by letting her know that Scotland regularly fulfils all of its energy needs by way of renewables, and sends its surplus to the national grid which supplies Englands shortfall. In an independent Scotland there would be no need for nuclear power, the existing nuclear stations we have in Scotland are going through either total or partial decommissioning, and will require many millions of pounds spent on them for future shut downs and the disposal of nuclear waste. This is a technology England and the UK Govt are championing which Scotland should be doing it’s best to distance itself from. For all the SNPs faults their investment in to the renewable energies sector can’t be faulted, and we are genuinely a world leader in the development of wave and tidal energy and the understanding around it.
An independent Scotland could harvest its natural resources like wind and wave energy, build on the already solid base we have, and invest in the development of future technologies in that sector. The companies that developed sea bed drilling technology in the 1980s became multi billion pound corporations. As the world moves towards renewable energies such as solar, wind and tidal, there is no reason Scotland couldn’t be at the forefront of this new age.
Norway famously built their trillion dollar oil fund from North Sea explorations, whilst Scotlands oil was sold off to the highest bidder by the British Government. Unfortunately we are never going to realise the true worth that North Sea oil and gas fields should have benefited us, but as the world moves further away from reliance on oil and gas we should be working towards building our own future by being the the worlds leader in renewables.
3 -
On 14/10/2022 at 21:09, RH33 said:
Inchinnan from.swing bridge to red smiddy by any chance?
No I read on and it isn't.
No it was Elderslie Main Road, along the Beith Road towards Spateston, and they stopped somewhere near where the old Bird in the Hand pub used to be if you’re old enough to remember that. The bollards caused such chaos that they lasted about 6 weeks, and god knows the cost to Renfrewshire council for the installation and subsequent removal of these bollards. I would be guessing that it at least cost mid 6 figures all in. Complete shambles.
0 -
58 minutes ago, HEY_SIDNEY said:
It feels like the Doyle Brunson hand idea that people will play it, just this willbe a short time thing(hopefully)
boy tried it on my online club other night whilst i was watching and got picked off for £100/£120 bluff.
let’s get back to Poker After Dark
If she had played the hand aggressively as a total bluff then I would be putting some respect on her name. But once she calls pre flop, then min raises Garrets 10k bet on the turn and calls an all in shove? I’m not the most experienced poker player out there, but even I would be reading her as weak on a board that has straight and flush potential.
Im in the middle of reading Doyle Brunsons first Super System book. It’s quite the read. Was it yourself that said you have a poker community on the go? If you’re happy to send me over the details by PM on here I wouldn’t mind joining in.
1 -
On 13/10/2022 at 09:05, The Moonster said:
I think this is where a lot of poker players are going wrong - thinking that every player will do things sensibly and by the book. A lot of "you just don't call with a hand like that" going on but she said herself that a lot of men will bluff her thinking she's an idiot (which might be true) so she might be more empowered to make silly calls.
On 14/10/2022 at 09:25, HEY_SIDNEY said:Well the plot thickens for Robbi and Garrett.
Robbi passed the lie detector test but admitted to soft playing against RIP (Shock)
Of course everyone will moan about which Lie Detector company was used etc so she will never really 'win' out of that scenario but i suppose a sense of relief if anything to know she has been telling, on whole, the truth.I’ve still been following the story along and I don’t particularly give too much weight to the lie detector test.
To @The Moonster, I agree with what you are saying generally, but when analysing her decisions pre flop, post flop etc., can you make an argument for her continuing in that position? If I was playing a 0.01/0.02 cash game on pokerstars, and I got raised in a similar fashion as she did on that flop with J4 offsuit, I would be folding. To call $135,000 with J high on a paired board with two clubs is putting yourself into such a negative EV position that it should just never be considered, either at high stakes or micro stakes.
[Edit] Just to expand on this, I seen a Twitter account that gave equity percentages of Garrets all in shove range against Robbis J4off post flop. Being generous and putting Garret on a range of top set, trips, over pairs, a straight flush draw, flush draw and straight draws (all of which were highly likely on a TT9 board 2 clubs), put her J4 as a 9% underdog. Now obviously you’ve got to factor in other circumstances such as her holding the J of clubs which blocked the top straight flush, but that board texture was ripe for lower straights as well as A high flushes. With 2 cards still to turn she was continuing against that board, that’s what I can’t get my head around. There was hardly a card in the deck that improved her hand, and she would have been well aware that the majority of turns and rivers have her in a ridiculously difficult spot. The sort of spot where she had absolutely no shove equity to make Garret fold a better hand, seeing as he had already led post flop and turn. It’s literally the easiest fold of her life and she’s called with J high, when even the majority of Garretts bluffing range has her beat never mind his shove betting for value range. Even forgetting everything she had ever learned about pot odds, putting $130k in to win a $270k pot, with J high, against Garretts shoving range which has you as a 10/1 underdog is such a ridiculous position to get yourself into that I can fully understand the cheating allegations. If I done something like that at The Grosvenor casino on a Tuesday night I would be expecting someone to query it, never mind it happening on a live stream at a table with Phil Ivey.
(Although that’s one thing that has always pushed me towards thinking that she didn’t cheat. If she was going to cheat at Hustlers Casino, I think she would have been able to find a better spot than the night where Phil Ivey was at the table?)
Another thing that caught my attention was that the guy RIP was apparently bankrolling her whilst she was playing these Hustler streams. If she is as wealthy as she claims to be, why would she need staked to play in these sort of games? And also, why would someone voluntarily put money in to a person who has only been playing the game for 2 years? So many questions that I’m sure we will never get the answer to.
I was playing a tournament on GG poker during the week, where I raised pre flop with pocket Kings. The flop came J4Q and my first thought was has someone called me with J4. Barrelled to the river and of course the player ended up having J4 off suit. I am directly losing money because of Robbi’s bad decisions.
0 -
24 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:
They are providing you with something you want, and which you seem to value, and setting a price for it.
if you don’t want to run, I’m sure they will take any donation you offer.
I understand that, and if that’s the way they work I’m sure they will have more than enough people willing to meet their minimum donation.
Even thought they are offering you a place in the marathon I personally find the amount they want to be the unreasonably high. It’s not like it’s cost them 2 grand to reserve a place in the marathon for you, I imagine being a charity they won’t need to pay anything at all. If someone signs up with that charity and only raises £1500 do they tell them to ram it? Is anything less than £2000 not good enough for a charity, in exchange for something which is of no real monetary value? Charities should be happy people are willing to spend their own time collecting sponsor money and donations for them, as well as training for and running the marathon. Specifying a minimum amount that you need to donate seems a touch ungrateful imo.
0 -
34 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:
Not sure where you are going with the “not in the spirit of the charity cause” line. The charity object is trying to raise money, not to allow you to run.
Most charities are usually happy to accept ANY money are they not, they don’t usually specify a minimum donation. It’s not a route I’m going to go down anyway but 2 grand seems a bit much for a charity to demand.
0 -
8 minutes ago, Scorge said:
I've had 10 ballot rejections for London now. Fair play to anyone going for a charity place - trying to raise £2k and above in the current climate no matter what the cause feels quite daunting to me.
As morrison said, plenty other decent ones out there with far less hassle.
Yep 2 grand as the minimum donation surprised me a wee bit. It doesn’t seem to be in the spirit of the charity cause. What happens to someone who tries their best to raise the £2k but only ends up with say £1200, are they forced to find another £800 or their place in the marathon is taken away?
£500 and I could maybe have justified it. Even if I got friends, family and work colleagues involved I doubt I would get close to £2k anyway.
0 -
2 hours ago, morrison said:
You'll be glad to hear there are other marathons.
London's shite. Manchester's around the same time and no ballot. Dublin's in the autumn and a great one. I'd recommend Loch Ness but it's sparse on support so depends what you're after.
Nah I know that mate I just done it on the spur of the moment when I seen an email to enter the ballot.
My friend done Loch Ness this year and that’s one I will probably aim for next year. Depending on my fitness I am going to try and do the Bilbao marathon in March next year, but I fear it might just come too soon for me seeing that the Glasgow Half last Sunday was the furthest I’d ran before and my first ever organised event.
1 -
22 minutes ago, Oystercatcher said:
Prostate cancer want 2g
Quite demanding from them. Why can’t they just take what they are given and be grateful for it. Not very charitable of them.
0 -
10 minutes ago, Oystercatcher said:
Is it not a couple of grand to get a charity space? I know what you mean about pestering folk for sponsorship, especially now with everything that's going on.
Jeez I’ve no idea I assumed it was going to be a few hundred quid
0 -
Just now, Bully Wee Villa said:
They were absolutely shite then, except against us.
Did we not beat them home and away in a more recent campaign or am I wrong?
0 -
1 minute ago, Bully Wee Villa said:
Yes but we know Georgia are exactly the sort of team who will get twatted by Spain and Norway but make like difficult as f**k for us.
No I fully understand that but I don’t think they are as good a team as what they were when they fucked up our campaign previously.
0 -
Probably the 3rd worst Pot 4 team, rather Georgia than Greece or Turkey. Faroes or Luxembourg would have been the dream.
0 -
1 minute ago, bennett said:
They stopped covering our games, that is undeniable and proves Traynors point.
No they stopped attending the games. At no point did they stop covering them. They found themselves in the ridiculous situation where after a goal at Ibrox they would say something along the lines of ‘and apparently that’s Rangers 1 nil up’, as if they weren’t sitting watching a stream of it.
4 -
Do they restart from the pits or back to the grid here? Leclerc nearly had Verstappen at the first corner there, he seemed to just back off slightly and Max didn’t.
0 -
10 hours ago, DA Baracus said:
I'm pretty close to chucking it. A bit sad as I used to really like Open All Mics, but they're such dishonest cowards now that they can't call the show what it really is, that being a Sevco and Celtic chat show that will give occasional updates on scores, and I have no interest in listening to 'discussion' about the two teams I hate the most in all of football.
I wonder what the presenters and the people in charge of the production think about what they are putting out. They surely aren’t sitting at the end of the day saying ‘well done guys great show, especially liked the 40 minute discussion about a tackle that happened in the Rangers game 6 weeks ago’ or ‘top class today Kenny, I’m really liking that thing you do when you shout over the top of someone trying to explain what’s going on in the game he’s watching, so you can make a point about something else that we had already moved on from’. As almost everyone has said it’s a complete shambles, and somehow it seems to be getting worse after already being pretty bad.
They seem to be completely unaware that most people are tuning in to hear about the football, the multitude of games which kick off in Scotland at 3pm on a Saturday, which should give them loads of different subjects to talk about and the show should be moving on quickly as the match day evolves. Instead they seem to think that people would rather hear them going on and on about whatever has been happening in OF land that week. That usually results in petty squabbles breaking out which gets laboured over for an extended period of time because most of them aren’t adult enough to move on from it. By this time the games have started and you’ve not heard a starting line up or a bit of analysis from any non-OF game.
‘Let’s go to Willie at Pittodrie, what’s happening Willie?’
‘Ehhh, well ehhh there was a chance there for someone, ehhh well the balls been cleared now but I was too busy talking to you there and missed it hahahaha’
Absolutely useless.
7 -
I’ve applied for the ballot for the 2023 London Marathon, but from speaking to a couple of people they’ve said it’s unlikely I will be successful. Find out by the end of this month which is good though, and I’m told you can still apply through charities for a place although you need to pledge a minimum donation to them.
This will make me sound like a right p***k but I hate raising money for charity
I don’t hate money going to charity, but I hate having to ask people for sponsorship money and pestering people to donate. I would rather just stick a few hundred quid in myself and hopefully that’s enough to meet their criteria.
1 -
1 hour ago, Boo Khaki said:
Have the Home Office actually deported anyone to Rwanda yet? As far as I'm aware there have only been two attempts so far, both were halted, the last flight had a handful of people onboard and was stopped on the apron.
Just for the record - I'm in no way intending to imply 'oh well what's all this rumpus about since it isn't actually happening anyway', on the contrary. It's an utterly reprehensible policy. The fact they haven't been able to successfully implement it is a testament to the fact that on top of being completely vile, it's being implemented by ideologues who can't actually legislate efficiently because they're being driven by malice and pandering to racist scum rather than coming up with sensible, rational policies.
I think you are correct that no flights have actually left yet, however it wasn’t for the want of trying, and if I recall correctly it was only a last minute appeal lodged at the Supreme Court just hours before the plane was due to take off which gave the last few families a reprieve. I think a kind hearted lawyer agreed to act on behalf of the remaining refugees who were still due to leave, and after the appeal went in the government decided it wouldn’t be a good look to send the plane with only a handful of people on board.
Patel was adamant the plane was leaving right up until the morning it was supposed to go, and tried to find a legal loophole so that she could still send anyone who had lodged an appeal claiming that they would return anyone to the UK whos appeals were successful. That was rejected by a judge and she begrudgingly pulled the plug on the flight.
Patel was a horrible, in-compassionate and downright nasty Home Secretary, but in Braverman they’ve managed to find the only person in Government that I think is even worse. A dangerous, dangerous woman who should be absolutely nowhere near this job.
I remember I used to think Theresa May was a cold hearted HS, Braverman makes her look like Mother Theresa.
4 -
12 hours ago, gannonball said:
I love last minute winners regardless of opposition. You like making up stories about chasing folk in a car, I guess we’re just different people.
We are different people. You are happy to support a team that has a vast financial advantage over 10 of the other 11 teams in the league, to the point where (in my opinion) the satisfaction that can be taken from any success is negated by the amount of money spent in order to achieve it.
If St Mirren had a Scottish Cup tie against a Lowland League club for example, and after a poor display we score a 94th minute winner I can guarantee the support wouldn’t be acting anything like the way the Celtic fans were today. I’m not saying you can’t celebrate the goal, obviously a last minute winner will be celebrated, but to have such a massive financial advantage like Celtic did today over St Johnstone, and have pitch invasions, fans chasing after players to hug them, guys running about with their tops off is just strange imo. That’s not even mentioning the players over dancing at the end of the game like they had just qualified for the Champions League final.
Im not expecting you to agree with me because I imagine you’ve been a Celtic fan for a few years and all that will seem normal to you, but that’s just my opinion. From the outside looking in it seems like most Celtic victories are very hollow achievements, and deep down in the back of their minds the fans know this, so they overcompensate when celebrating things like today so they can all kid on to themselves that what they done was worthy of pitch invasions etc, and not the reality that a team stacked with international players and bought for a combined £50 million quid, scored a last minute goal to see off a team that was put together for almost nothing.
If that’s something you can genuinely take satisfaction from then fair play, you are correct and we are not the same. I think the novelty of regularly sticking 4 or 5 goals past 10 teams in the league not even remotely on the same level as you, season after season, would wear pretty thin quite quickly for me.
0 -
3 hours ago, Tynie Pecksniff said:
Braverman is possibly the most racist, disgusting character to ever hold one of the major cabinet roles in the political history of Britain.
A truly evil vulgar individual. A pox on her.
You would think people like Patel, Braverman and Kwarteng would be able to show the slightest bit of compassion for refugees coming in to the UK, wether they are using legal routes or not. Their families were afforded that opportunity in recent history, but listening to Patel and Braverman especially it seems like they have absolutely no empathy towards these people, and their Rwanda scheme is nothing short of pure evil.
There really is no other word to describe the pair of them, they are nasty people who have benefitted from the UKs historically welcoming immigration policies, who are now pulling up the draw bridge behind them and sending hundreds of families to a country thousands of miles away which has extremely questionable human rights. I genuinely didn’t think the Rwanda scheme would ever happen when I first heard it suggested, and assumed enough sensible voices would shut it down. Obviously there isn’t that many sensible voices at the heart of this government, and to hear Braverman say that it’s her dream to see a front page where she can read about flights full of refugees being sent packing to Rwanda was sickening.
By all accounts she is absolutely incompetent in to the bargain, and her tenure as Attorney General was a complete disaster, with standards of practice being absolutely decimated under her watch as well as regularly going against lawyers in order to side with Johnson’s government. An AG who knowingly broke the law on more than one occasion, that’s how low this government has dragged us. How she managed to get a promotion to Home Secretary we will never know, but the quicker she leaves that role the better or there’s going to be an awful lot of damage done to an awful lot of peoples lives.
5
which is equally mental. 
St Mirren vs Dundee United
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted
That’s exactly what I said to my pal on Saturday there. He’s either solid as a rock and pinging diagonals all over the shop, or he’s slashing at clearances and sailing the ball in to the stand. I still think he’s a good player for us to have at this level but I rate Shaugnessy as a more consistent performer, although he had the odd blunder in his locker as well.