Anyone else not thrilled with Annie's continual check raises?

[binions]

Sure, Phil made a nice laydown or two, but they were when Annie check-raised him. Annie bets out with KK99 on the flop, and Phil has a harder time getting away from the KK7.

About the only thing the check-raising accomplished was to get under Phil's skin.

The 666KK flop for Annie was a closer call. Phil raised the pot preflop. She acted first and checked the flop. Phil checked, and she bet the turn. If she bets the flop, then Phil either hit his K and goes all in a big dog, or might think she is trying to represent a K when she has none. If she checks the turn, Phil puts her on AQ and bets it, trying to represent the K. Either way, checking the flop and betting the turn was about the worst course of action IMO.

[toots]

[ QUOTE ]
About the only thing the check-raising accomplished was to get under Phil's skin.


[/ QUOTE ]

You make it sound like an insignificant factor.

[The4thFilm]

Really easy to critique the 3 hands they show us.

[KanigawaCards7]

Gettingunder phils skin was the way annie duke won. it was by far and away the most important factor in heads up /images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[binions]

U think? Let's give Phil KK99 to Annie's K7 and see what happens.

Annie got a ton of cards. And she did not maximize her chips with the cards she got. Reverse the hands and Phil wins going away.

[burningyen]

It seemed to me she won by repeatedly having better cards, not by psyching Phil out. His finally taking a stand with top pair seemed to be a statistically sound move rather than tilt.

[Sundevils21]

[ QUOTE ]
It seemed to me she won by repeatedly having better cards, not by psyching Phil out. His finally taking a stand with top pair seemed to be a statistically sound move rather than tilt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Still, Phil kept convincing himself he folded the best hand. That simply was not true. He also got incredibly lucky when they both had 3 of a kind. The rest of the hands, Duke got lucky to have the better hand when Phil also had a pretty good hand.

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
Still, Phil kept convincing himself he folded the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

How could you watch the A9 fold to the 666KK and take anything Phil says at face value. He has an act.

Annie *might* have gotten under his skin with the check-raising, but it did not affect Phil's play. He did not fold any winners.

He took a stand with top pair two handed and lost. Hardly on tilt.

[burningyen]

I would not take everything Phil (or any other poker player) says at face value.

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, Phil made a nice laydown or two, but they were when Annie check-raised him. Annie bets out with KK99 on the flop, and Phil has a harder time getting away from the KK7.


[/ QUOTE ]
Hm... I think you're right about the second hand, but about the first... You can extract more money with the bet, but remember, you still fear that straight draw out there. Check raise makes a lot of sense to me, IMHO, and after the turn comes, you really can't do anything but push.

There a lot of options here.
Bet out, get raised, call, and check-raise the turn.
Bet out, get raised, reraise all in.
Check-raise flop, bet turn. (probably should be done with a bit worse hand)
Check-call flop, check raise turn.
Check call flop, bet turn.

In retrospect, against the straight draw, Annie played really well, but Phil didn't have it. That's not likely though. Against Phil's hand, it's obviously best to bet out, and you should try check-calling the bluffer (gotta do something with that turn though, so many draws).

Though, I don't know if the bet out could have made more money against Phil Hellmuth's hand. If she bets and reraises, Phil's likely to fold, putting in two bets, exactly the same amount he did against what really happened.

CR is actually a better play to bluff with than just a simple bet out, so it could be a bluff.

I think there a lot of ways to play it, and she didn't play it particularly poorly.

[dakine]

Excuse me... Who walked away with the 2 Mil? You're talking Phill shoud've, could've, would've or If?? If...my mother had Balls, she would have been my father. You don't give Annie Duke credit for outplaying Phill. She read him good and got into his head. Congratulations Annie!! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
Excuse me... Who walked away with the 2 Mil? You're talking Phill shoud've, could've, would've or If?? If...my mother had Balls, she would have been my father. You don't give Annie Duke credit for outplaying Phill. She read him good and got into his head. Congratulations Annie!! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
I really do like analyzing these televised hands, though we don't get to see all of it. The play is much sharper on things like these and PSI than you see on our forums or other TV shows where amateurs are involved, and you get down to discussing really good stuff, not relatively no-brainer plays or plays so bad that everything else is better (see David Williams and a third of chips w/ 55).

As for this hand, knowing now that Annie Duke CR-bluffed him 4 times before this, her play looks a lot better, and Phil's laydown looks a lot harder to make. Now, instead of Annie's play being more questionable, we have to think about Phil's play.

Do you have that laydown in you, and was Phil being weak-tight, or did he have a read? I think Phil had the right read on that hand because of his comment on Annie's two pair, but he did lay down 5 straight check-raises, 4 on a bluff. I think Annie really got into his head that time, and he made a reraise, which, IMHO, that was really tilted.

[tewall]

If he folded 4 times to check-raise bluffs, he folded 4 winners (unless he was also bluffing)