Lou wants more

JAM said:
Some play better on other people's dough, and others play better on their own dough.

One unnamed pro told me one time that he played better on other people's dough so that he did not have to worry about losing his rent money or money he needed to pay bills. The pressure of that weighed heavy on him when he was in action.

Another player might play better on his own dough because they need that money. They're hungry for a win.

I think everybody is different when it comes to this. :)
Click to expand...



That's very true, Jam. I always played much much better when playing on other peoples money, even when I had plenty of money and no worries of bills or debt. As hard as I tried to change that, I never really did. Of course I wasn't a world beater in the class of Keith anyway..
 
I think it is pretty clear that if John really wanted to raise the bet because he was confident he would win (#1 below) then he would follow through with it once Lou agreed to it. All the talk of "it's the last minute" and "too much time passed" is utter nonsense. If you were trying to win extra money because you thought you would win, you wouldn't be turning down that extra money at any point, even at the last second. It seems he was just trying to get in Lou's head by high rolling him and his bluff got called. Happens all the time.

John initially offered to raise the stakes. There are only four reasons for offering to raise the stakes in a gambling match.

1. You think you are the favorite, and want to increase the amount you will win. Known as "maximizing profit".
2. You think increasing the stakes or the threat thereof will have a negative psychological impact on your opponent and his game, thereby increasing your chances for winning. Also known as "gamesmanship" or "good strategy" depending on who you ask. Sometimes considered a form of "high rolling".
3. You are trying to impress others with how much "confidence" and "heart" you have, all while secretly having no intention whatsoever of raising the bet amount.
4. You don't want to play the match at all, likely because you feel your opponent is favored to win. You hope that by trying to raise the stakes your opponent will back down and refuse to play, allowing you to not only save money, but save face. Also known as "being scared" and considered to be a form of "high rolling".

We know we can rule out #1 because John didn't follow through with it.

John subsequently refused to raise the stakes once it was offered to him. There are only six reasons for not wanting to raise stakes in a gambling match.

A) You do not feel you are the favorite, and do not want to lose that much more money.
B) You feel you are the favorite, but not by enough to justify risking above a certain amount.
C) You are afraid that a bet of that size will have a negative psychological impact on you and cause you to play worse and lower your chances of winning. Known as being "smart" or "scared" depending on who you ask.
D) You are honoring the wishes of someone else, such as a significant other, to not play above a certain amount. Known as "I don't want to be in the doghouse". Also known as "considerate family man" or "whipped" depending on who you ask.
E) You simply do not have that amount of money and can't bet what you just don't have.
F) You technically do have that amount of money, but can't afford to lose it. You will never bet what you can't afford to lose, no matter how much the favorite, because you never know when lightning will strike, everything goes wrong, and the improbable (losing) happens. Known as "responsible" or "nit" depending on who you ask.

We can rule out D, E, and F because John already said he could bet more than the amount that Lou offered.

I personally see nothing wrong with someone not wanting to bet more than a certain amount no matter what their own personal reasons. However, its kind of crappy and makes one look dumb when they offer and even prod someone to raise the bet to a certain amount and then refuse to honor their own bet once the offer was accepted. No need for all that false chest puffing you weren't willing or able to back up.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I think it is pretty clear that if John really wanted to raise the bet because he was confident he would win (#1 below) then he would follow through with it once Lou agreed to it. All the talk of "it's the last minute" and "too much time passed" is utter nonsense. If you were trying to win extra money because you thought you would win, you wouldn't be turning down that extra money at any point, even at the last second. It seems he was just trying to get in Lou's head by high rolling him and his bluff got called. Happens all the time.

John initially offered to raise the stakes. There are only four reasons for offering to raise the stakes in a gambling match.

1. You think you are the favorite, and want to increase the amount you will win. Known as "maximizing profit".
2. You think increasing the stakes or the threat thereof will have a negative psychological impact on your opponent and his game, thereby increasing your chances for winning. Also known as "gamesmanship" or "good strategy" depending on who you ask. Sometimes considered a form of "high rolling".
3. You are trying to impress others with how much "confidence" and "heart" you have, all while secretly having no intention whatsoever of raising the bet amount.
4. You don't want to play the match at all, likely because you feel your opponent is favored to win. You hope that by trying to raise the stakes your opponent will back down and refuse to play, allowing you to not only save money, but save face. Also known as "being scared" and considered to be a form of "high rolling".

We know we can rule out #1 because John didn't follow through with it.

John subsequently refused to raise the stakes once it was offered to him. There are only six reasons for not wanting to raise stakes in a gambling match.

A) You do not feel you are the favorite, and do not want to lose that much more money.
B) You feel you are the favorite, but not by enough to justify risking above a certain amount.
C) You are afraid that a bet of that size will have a negative psychological impact on you and cause you to play worse and lower your chances of winning. Known as being "smart" or "scared" depending on who you ask.
D) You are honoring the wishes of someone else, such as a significant other, to not play above a certain amount. Known as "I don't want to be in the doghouse". Also known as "considerate family man" or "whipped" depending on who you ask.
E) You simply do not have that amount of money and can't bet what you just don't have.
F) You technically do have that amount of money, but can't afford to lose it. You will never bet what you can't afford to lose, no matter how much the favorite, because you never know when lightning will strike, everything goes wrong, and the improbable (losing) happens. Known as "responsible" or "nit" depending on who you ask.

We can rule out D, E, and F because John already said he could bet more than the amount that Lou offered.

I personally see nothing wrong with someone not wanting to bet more than a certain amount no matter what their own personal reasons. However, its kind of crappy and makes one look dumb when they offer and even prod someone to raise the bet to a certain amount and then refuse to honor their own bet once the offer was accepted. No need for all that false chest puffing you weren't willing or able to back up.
Click to expand...




Very good. It's not the last minute anyway. There's still a week to go, right??
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I think it is pretty clear that if John really wanted to raise the bet because he was confident he would win (#1 below) then he would follow through with it once Lou agreed to it. All the talk of "it's the last minute" and "too much time passed" is utter nonsense. If you were trying to win extra money because you thought you would win, you wouldn't be turning down that extra money at any point, even at the last second. It seems he was just trying to get in Lou's head by high rolling him and his bluff got called. Happens all the time.

John initially offered to raise the stakes. There are only four reasons for offering to raise the stakes in a gambling match.

1. You think you are the favorite, and want to increase the amount you will win. Known as "maximizing profit".
2. You think increasing the stakes or the threat thereof will have a negative psychological impact on your opponent and his game, thereby increasing your chances for winning. Also known as "gamesmanship" or "good strategy" depending on who you ask. Sometimes considered a form of "high rolling".
3. You are trying to impress others with how much "confidence" and "heart" you have, all while secretly having no intention whatsoever of raising the bet amount.
4. You don't want to play the match at all, likely because you feel your opponent is favored to win. You hope that by trying to raise the stakes your opponent will back down and refuse to play, allowing you to not only save money, but save face. Also known as "being scared" and considered to be a form of "high rolling".

We know we can rule out #1 because John didn't follow through with it.

John subsequently refused to raise the stakes once it was offered to him. There are only six reasons for not wanting to raise stakes in a gambling match.

A) You do not feel you are the favorite, and do not want to lose that much more money.
B) You feel you are the favorite, but not by enough to justify risking above a certain amount.
C) You are afraid that a bet of that size will have a negative psychological impact on you and cause you to play worse and lower your chances of winning. Known as being "smart" or "scared" depending on who you ask.
D) You are honoring the wishes of someone else, such as a significant other, to not play above a certain amount. Known as "I don't want to be in the doghouse". Also known as "considerate family man" or "whipped" depending on who you ask.
E) You simply do not have that amount of money and can't bet what you just don't have.
F) You technically do have that amount of money, but can't afford to lose it. You will never bet what you can't afford to lose, no matter how much the favorite, because you never know when lightning will strike, everything goes wrong, and the improbable (losing) happens. Known as "responsible" or "nit" depending on who you ask.

We can rule out D, E, and F because John already said he could bet more than the amount that Lou offered.

I personally see nothing wrong with someone not wanting to bet more than a certain amount no matter what their own personal reasons. However, its kind of crappy and makes one look dumb when they offer and even prod someone to raise the bet to a certain amount and then refuse to honor their own bet once the offer was accepted. No need for all that false chest puffing you weren't willing or able to back up.
Click to expand...

You expect John to let Lou dictate what happens at the last minute.
Utter nonsense, Ha ha ha
 
Last edited:
Roadking said:
Instead of raising the bet $15,000 on this match I think they should play another match (one of John's choice since one pocket is Lou's game)for $15,000 a man.
Click to expand...

Which game do you feel is JB's best game? Have you seen him play?
 
itsfroze said:
You expect John to let Lou dictate what happens at the last minute.
Utter nonsense
Click to expand...

First, it is not last minute. Second, the time frame is immaterial. Third, John pushed and badgered for something. Lou finally gave in. I don't see how that is Lou "dictating" anything when all he did was give John what he was badgering him for. Fourth, as my post made abundantly clear, if you are trying to up the bet because you think you will win and you want to win more money, you could care less when the opponent agrees to it. You are just glad that they did because it means more money in your pocket. Even if it was two seconds before the coin toss, you would be like "whew, that was close, sure glad Lou finally accepted on raising the bet. I almost lost out on that money."

Now on the other hand, if you never had any intention of raising the bet to begin with, then you are going to gripe and complain and make up some kind of excuse when they accept it. When you are just trying to get in their head, just trying to high roll them, and your bluff gets called, that's when you have a problem with it. "Look! He's 'dictating', I'm not going to take that extra money now!" Give me a break.
 
Last edited:
JohnPT said:
Which game do you feel is JB's best game? Have you seen him play?
Click to expand...

No never seen him play. I just remember reading that the reason they're playing one pocket is because that's what Lou wanted to play. I could be mistaken though.
So no matter what the out come of the one pocket match I think it'd be fair to let John pick the game in the rematch if their would be one.
Just an idea.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
First, it is not last minute. Second, the time frame is immaterial. Third, John pushed and badgered for something. Lou finally gave in. I don't see how that is Lou "dictating" anything when all he did was give John what he was badgering him for. Fourth, as my post made abundantly clear, if you are trying to up the bet because you think you will win and you want to win more money, you could care less when the opponent agrees to it. You are just glad that they did because it means more money in your pocket. Even if it was two seconds before the coin toss, you would be like "whew, that was close, sure glad Lou finally accepted on raising the bet. I almost lost out on that money."

Now on the other hand, if you never had any intention of raising the bet to begin with, then you are going to gripe and complain and make up some kind of excuse when they accept it. When you are just trying to get in their head, just trying to high roll them, and your bluff gets called, that's when you have a problem with it. "Look! He's 'dictating', I'm not going to take that extra money now!" Give me a break.
Click to expand...

The coin hasnt been flipped yet
 
cookie man,

"The coin hasn't been flipped yet "

That one line said more than all his posts, Ha Ha
 
Roadking said:
Wouldn't this be considered a banning offense!
Profanity,name calling
Click to expand...

Indeed.
Drop calling people nuthuggers or we can certainly ban people, including people that went off previously that should have been banned permanently already.

Namely, you.
 
itsfroze said:
cookie man,

"The coin hasn't been flipped yet "

That one line said more than all his posts, Ha Ha
Click to expand...

It did? Well he apparently couldn't explain what he meant by it, can you? He might as well have said "the orange crow flies at midnight". If there was a point there, it sure wasn't clear, so go ahead and enlighten us.

itsfroze said:
John wins will be the result, just letting you know now so you're not shocked. :D
Click to expand...

Just thought I would quote this for you because you sure are going to want to come back and delete it later after he loses.

But win or lose, it doesn't change the fact that John tried to high roll Lou once, got called on it, tried to high roll him again, got called on it again, and then backed down the second time and won't even honor the second high roll bet that he himself pushed for and badgered Lou for and made such a big deal about. Now THAT alone says more than anything you have said in this thread combined. It speaks volumes about how confident (unconfident) he really is, about his true intention for trying to raise the bet (an attempt to high roll Lou and get in his head without any desire to actually play for that amount), and arguably about his character.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I think it is pretty clear that if John really wanted to raise the bet because he was confident he would win (#1 below) then he would follow through with it once Lou agreed to it. All the talk of "it's the last minute" and "too much time passed" is utter nonsense. If you were trying to win extra money because you thought you would win, you wouldn't be turning down that extra money at any point, even at the last second. It seems he was just trying to get in Lou's head by high rolling him and his bluff got called. Happens all the time.

John initially offered to raise the stakes. There are only four reasons for offering to raise the stakes in a gambling match.

1. You think you are the favorite, and want to increase the amount you will win. Known as "maximizing profit".
2. You think increasing the stakes or the threat thereof will have a negative psychological impact on your opponent and his game, thereby increasing your chances for winning. Also known as "gamesmanship" or "good strategy" depending on who you ask. Sometimes considered a form of "high rolling".
3. You are trying to impress others with how much "confidence" and "heart" you have, all while secretly having no intention whatsoever of raising the bet amount.
4. You don't want to play the match at all, likely because you feel your opponent is favored to win. You hope that by trying to raise the stakes your opponent will back down and refuse to play, allowing you to not only save money, but save face. Also known as "being scared" and considered to be a form of "high rolling".

We know we can rule out #1 because John didn't follow through with it.

John subsequently refused to raise the stakes once it was offered to him. There are only six reasons for not wanting to raise stakes in a gambling match.

A) You do not feel you are the favorite, and do not want to lose that much more money.
B) You feel you are the favorite, but not by enough to justify risking above a certain amount.
C) You are afraid that a bet of that size will have a negative psychological impact on you and cause you to play worse and lower your chances of winning. Known as being "smart" or "scared" depending on who you ask.
D) You are honoring the wishes of someone else, such as a significant other, to not play above a certain amount. Known as "I don't want to be in the doghouse". Also known as "considerate family man" or "whipped" depending on who you ask.
E) You simply do not have that amount of money and can't bet what you just don't have.
F) You technically do have that amount of money, but can't afford to lose it. You will never bet what you can't afford to lose, no matter how much the favorite, because you never know when lightning will strike, everything goes wrong, and the improbable (losing) happens. Known as "responsible" or "nit" depending on who you ask.

We can rule out D, E, and F because John already said he could bet more than the amount that Lou offered.

I personally see nothing wrong with someone not wanting to bet more than a certain amount no matter what their own personal reasons. However, its kind of crappy and makes one look dumb when they offer and even prod someone to raise the bet to a certain amount and then refuse to honor their own bet once the offer was accepted. No need for all that false chest puffing you weren't willing or able to back up.
Click to expand...

While typically I would agree with all of this there is one problem with your justifications. You are trying to rationalize the actions of a pure narcissist. I do not necessarily mean that in a bad way, but it is what it is.

Furthermore I personally feel that if Lou had posted up saying I accept your offer to double the bet that John would have accepted. IMHO John feels like this is partly a move by Lou to take over some control of this match. Pretty good timing for it as well.
 
Gunn_Slinger said:
In 45 years, I've seen very few of theses " Lets make a date " matches come off. And the few that have were usually business. I doubt this is ' business ", so the odds are long that it wont get played.
Good luck...at least we'll get to see the women play on the feed...lol.
Click to expand...

Well, there is $3k that each player has already posted up. No show forfeits the money. At this point, I'd bet this match gets played. 87% chance
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top