Bigger Mistake: Phillips or Hansen?

[Vince Lepore]

In the WPT Finals at Bellago. OK I don't know the dates but it's the one where the last three are Philips, Hansen and Tomko. Hansen has 2.3M, Philips 2.8M and Tomko has 800k.

I ragged on Philips about this situation last year. I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that but I wonder which made the bigger mistake. For those of you that didn't see the hand:

blinds were T25-50K.

sb: Phillips T2.8M
bb: Tomko T800k
button: Hansen T2.3M

Hansen: TT, Raise T250K
Phillips: All-in T2.8M
Tomko: fold
Hansen: Call.

The only play that I think was correct was Tomko's fold. I also believe that Hansen's call was a bigger mistake than Phillips move in. Anyone agree? Why?

Vince /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[riverboatking]

well its hard to say who made the bigger mistake since i don't know what PP had here.
but i can comment on what each player might have been thinking.
while i don't know the exact payout structure i'm assuming there is a pretty significant jump in prize money between 2nd and 3rd place.

with that in mind PP (paul phillips) probably knows that gus can't call an all in without a premimum hand due to the fact that dewey is so short stacked. pp may then try and steal from gus so that he can increase his chip lead and have a greater shot at winning the title, which we know is pp main goal.

now gus may know this fact and therefore put pp on a wider range of hands and therefore decide that he has way the best of it and call, knowing that if he wins he is virtually assured first place.

it is very possible that in this situation neither player made a mistake whatsoever.

pp knows that it will be hard for gus to call in that spot without aa or kk and gus knows pp knows this so he calls w/10-10.

by the way what did pp have i never saw the episode.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow that's cute when david does it. With you, the effect is to prove you should keep your psychiatrist on speed-dial.

[riverboatking]

just curious....what did you have? and how did the hand play out?

[Seadood228]

Paul had AQ... That was one of the more memorable hands from last year.

I don't see how anyone can criticize Paul's play here, or Mr. Hansen's for that matter. Paul's AQ figures to be good against a wide range of Gus' holdings, and his extreme overbet might even get Gus to fold some of the hands that are ahead, especially ones that have a significant preflop edge.

I'm not sure of any better way to play that hand in Paul's situation. Calling out of position seems pretty weak, especially for a big stack. Re-raising could be dangerous as well, given Gus could very well move in with a smaller ace..

As far as Gus goes, I guess he could have folded to the allin, but the way Paul appeared to be playing Gus that evening, I don't think you can fault him for taking the chance. Plus, if I recall correctly, Paul had position on Gus for 2/3 of 3 handed play..

But hey what do I know? I haven't come close to the pressure of a 10k event, let alone one that is being televised.

That episode was the best to date IMO. I only wish we could have seen all the hands..

[drewjustdrew]

I think the play was fine. Neither player at this point could put the other on a dominating hand when playing three handed. My question is - what are the blind and ante sizes? Was Tomko in a desparate situation with only $800,000? If not, Tomko can wait for a chance to double through and it would be anyone's game. I don't think this is similar to what happened at the Bellagio last week with the Phams and Mortensen with regards to moving up the prize ladder.

[sammysusar]

who made you the authority on good or bad plays?
where can i get your book?
if you think there was no chance hansen was ahead you're wrong(a chance he was up against a smaller pocket pair). if you dont think aq is a pretty good hand 3 handed you're also wrong.
you probably play 5 - 10 limit at most.
i guess you will say they should have waited for the short stack to bust but not all that inciteful.

[Ghazban]

I think the blinds were 50K/100K with a 10K ante, giving Dewey Tomko about 8xBB-- Hansen and Phillips could probably have guaranteed themselves 1st and 2nd if they specifically aimed to knock out the short stack. As it was, they both wanted 1st badly enough to get involved in a race situation that would result in one of them entering the headup portion with a huge chip advantage and the other going home in 3rd place. For what its worth (i.e. not much given my low stakes/low experience situation), I don't think either of them played it badly.

[jomatty]

I think they both played it well. Paul has been coming over the top of Gus regularly and while there is always a slight chance that he will run into a monster, with Gus's opening standards he is very likely to have the best hand or a coinflip and unlikely to be dominated. Gus will probably have to lay down but if he dosent Paul will still usually be in OK shape. With as much pressure as hes been putting on gus, and guss' penchant for not likeing to get pushed around he may even get called by a weaker hand. I also think Gus made a big league call there. He (i think correctly) realized that he needed to draw a line in the sand or pp would continue to take pot after pot away from him.
It should also be mentioned that neither of these players is likely to be playing the move up the ladder game. While im sure they both are not trying to maximize their expectation they are trying to win the tournament(the ev is a little hazy in these situations with the extra money people winning WPT events stand to possibly make)
Anyhow, there certainly are other ways to play this hand but i think the way it was played was a resonable choice for two players focused on winning the tournament.
matty

[jakethebake]

Tomko seems to often end up on the short stack late in tournaments. Anyone more familiar with his play have an idea why?

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
In the WPT Finals at Bellago. OK I don't know the dates but it's the one where the last three are Philips, Hansen and Tomko. Hansen has 2.3M, Philips 2.8M and Tomko has 800k.

I ragged on Philips about this situation last year. I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that but I wonder which made the bigger mistake. For those of you that didn't see the hand:

blinds were T25-50K.

sb: Phillips T2.8M
bb: Tomko T800k
button: Hansen T2.3M

Hansen: TT, Raise T250K
Phillips: All-in T2.8M
Tomko: fold
Hansen: Call.

The only play that I think was correct was Tomko's fold. I also believe that Hansen's call was a bigger mistake than Phillips move in. Anyone agree? Why?

Vince /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul and Gus both played correctly.

Gus raised 3 handed with TT like anyone would.

Paul put him on an underpair or a typical Gus BS hand, and raised all in. This is a standard play three-handed. Paul is only behind AK, AA, KK and QQ. Gives Paul 2 chances to win - Gus folds, or Paul wins a coin flip.

If Paul just calls, he misses 2 flops out of 3 and will be forced to fold to a Gus bet, and Gus is first to act. If Paul reraises 750K, Gus would either go all in or call, and Paul has the flop problem again.

Gus correctly put Paul on overcards and not an overpair, and was getting 6-5 pot odds in a hand in which he was a 11-9 favorite.

Where is the mistake?

[fnurt]

I think you oversimplify when you say Gus put Paul on overcards. If Paul has overcards, the call is EV neutral in terms of prize money, maybe a little bit negative.

Think of it this way. How do you suppose Dewey felt when he saw all the money go in? Do you think he was indifferent? I'm sure he was thrilled, knowing that either he would move up to 2nd place, or that one player would be reduced to an even shorter stack than Dewey had. It's a zero sum game, so if Dewey is happy, then someone must be correspondingly unhappy. Someone gave up EV somewhere along the line.

Putting that aside, the reason why Gus has to make this call is because there is a significant chance he is a 70-30 favorite in the hand, for the reasons other posters have explained. While he might be behind a big pair, he might also be ahead of a smaller pair, so those considerations cancel out.

If Paul's cards are face up it is probably slightly right for Gus to fold, in terms of prize money, but the swing is not huge.

[Easy E]

[ QUOTE ]

I ragged on Philips about this situation last year. I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that but I wonder which made the bigger mistake. For those of you that didn't see the hand:

blinds were T25-50K.

sb: Phillips T2.8M
bb: Tomko T800k
button: Hansen T2.3M

Hansen: TT, Raise T250K
Phillips: All-in T2.8M
Tomko: fold
Hansen: Call.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that Paul priced Dewey into calling, with a much larger range of hands than normal? Or were you looking for Paul to TRY to price Dewey in, by limping, and get a better chance of knocking him out between Paul and Gus?

Or was it the AQ specifically that you didn't like, since if it gets called it's likely a loser?

Are you saying Gus shouldn't have risked his tournament life here, and the resulting prize jump, on TT against the overbet?

So many questions about your thoughts, Vince

[cornell2005]

a preflop all in play? yawn

[Vince Lepore]

nm

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
you probably play 5 - 10 limit at most.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? If you think tournament poker is poker you are wrong? BTW would you say that these plays were good in a live game?

Vince

[knucklehead]

Paul, care to comment further here?

If you have overcards, you're like 65% to pair by the river, correct? Did you assume a fold from Tomke? Did you put Gus on rags or a hand? I'm assuming you felt you're reads on Gus were very good, continually going over the top gave you some great info! Did you put him on a percentage of holdings based on percentage of folds?

Tomke (spelling?) looked to me like he was playing for second, trying to avoid any clashes, they showed one hand he folded AKs...

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that Paul priced Dewey into calling, with a much larger range of hands than normal?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that Paul priced Dewey into calling, with a much larger range of hands than normal? Or were you looking for Paul to TRY to price Dewey in, by limping, and get a better chance of knocking him out between Paul and Gus?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[ QUOTE ]
Or was it the AQ specifically that you didn't like, since if it gets called it's likely a loser

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying Gus shouldn't have risked his tournament life here, and the resulting prize jump, on TT against the overbet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes

Vince

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
the effect is to prove you should keep your psychiatrist on speed-dial.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now see Paul, I say your play was a mistake and you divert my ontention to one of personal attacks. I guess you'll never change. Poor baby.

Vince

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul has been coming over the top of Gus regularly

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what?

[ QUOTE ]
It should also be mentioned that neither of these players is likely to be playing the move up the ladder game.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what?

[ QUOTE ]
draw a line in the sand

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that what you call Gus's play? He makes weak calls all the time and this was a prime example of that.

[ QUOTE ]
also think Gus made a big league call there

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever heard the term bush leaugue? Gus Hansen has been touted as a great tournament player. Even Sklansky has been up here touting his abilities. Why would a great tournament player risk his very good chance of winning the tournament on at best a toss up so early in the competition. Why wouldn't he let his great play find a better situation to risk all of his chips or continue to apply pressure to the small stack as e had effectively been doing? Since when is it good tournament stratey to go up against another big stack? Why aren't both Phillips and Hansen guilty of playing against the big stack?


[ QUOTE ]
With as much pressure as hes been putting on gus, and guss' penchant for not likeing to get pushed around he may even get called by a weaker hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what?

[ QUOTE ]
i think the way it was played was a resonable choice for two players focused on winning the tournament.


[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong! It was a reasonable choice for two players willing o "gamble", not focused on winning through skill.

Vince

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
pp knows that it will be hard for gus to call in that spot without aa or kk

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you have never watched Gus Hansen play. PP knows Hansen WILL call with a heck of a wider randge of hands than A,A or K,K.

Vince

[Vince Lepore]

Did you ever play short handed? Well, yes. And I've won the great majoriyty of the time that I have. So?

Hansen and Philips were playing in a tournament. Short handed live action play takes second place to tournament strategy where you must win all of the chips to win and when you are busted you are gone.

Vince

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have overcards, you're like 65% to pair by the river, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno. That's not the kind of thing I think about.

[ QUOTE ]
Did you assume a fold from Tomke? Did you put Gus on rags or a hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was no way to narrow his range much. His button raise is nearly automatic in that spot. So the only questions were how AQ did against a nearly random hand, which hands he'd call me with, how much I'd win if he folded, how I'd be doing if he called, and what I'd have left if I lost.

The answers looked good for me so I pushed.

[ QUOTE ]
Tomke (spelling?) looked to me like he was playing for second, trying to avoid any clashes, they showed one hand he folded AKs...

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you 100% sure of that? I have no memory of it which makes it feel very false because it's the kind of thing I'd expect to remember.

[Paul Phillips]

Notice how vince conspicuously evades telling us the "correct" way to play AQ in that spot. I sure wish he would so we could all learn how the real pros do it.

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]
His button raise is nearly automatic in that spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

a lot of people seem to be missing that.

[knucklehead]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you 100% sure of that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been trying to pay attention to everything, I'm pretty sure, OK, I'll hedge a little, 99.8% SURE!, AK clubs. Sorry, if I'm wrong...

[WEASEL45]

KQ clubs

[ugaistheteam]

How anyone could question the play of Dot.com or Gus is way beyond my rational thinking.........I will be in the main event next year and I hope my table is in the other direction of both.......UGAISTHETEAM.

[TransientR]

I didn't see any problem with either Gus's or Paul's play. AQ vs. a pair of tens three handed? Looks like a good showdown to me! Besides, as others have pointed out, Paul had been pushing Gus around a bit (based on the TV hands), and does anyone expect Gus to fold a pair of tens?

I was just upset one of the backgammon players didn't win the tourney /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Frank

[ChrisW]

> blinds were T25-50K.

I believe that the blinds were 50-100K with a 10K ante.

> sb: Phillips T2.8M
> bb: Tomko T800k
> button: Hansen T2.3M

> Hansen: TT, Raise T250K
> Phillips: [AQ], All-in T2.8M

Moving in with AQ was obviously correct. This situation is not particularly complex or advanced. Paul needed to reraise; his hand was an order of magnitude better than the average Gus three-handed button raise. AQ is a very difficult hand to play out of position, so the reraise needed to be substantial, enough to make Gus lay down a hand like KT. There was already 420K in the pot, 670K if you include the chips that Paul would be using to call Gus's 250K, so what did you want Paul to do? Raise 800K more, committing a total of 1.05M and 38% of his stack? He couldn't lay down AQ to an all-in reraise after putting all those chips in the pot, so why not move in himself?

[bones]

[ QUOTE ]
Gus Hansen has been touted as a great tournament player. Even Sklansky has been up here touting his abilities. Why would a great tournament player risk his very good chance of winning the tournament on at best a toss up so early in the competition

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul and Dewey aren't exactly internet qualifiers. If Gus has any skill advantage, it isn't gonna be so great that he can pass up chances to double through against someone who is capable of making that play with such a wide range of hands, given the situation.

Gus doesn't strike me as someone who cares that much about waiting out Dewey for 2nd. And considering how well Dewey has played short stacks in the past, that isn't a given either.

I'm sure Paul would be thrilled if everyone laid down everything but JJ or better to his raises.

[morello]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that but I wonder which made the bigger mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love to hear how you'd play this hand.


Paul played it absolutely correctly IMO. There is 325k of dead money in the pot for him to pick up. And even if he loses, he has 500k vs Tomko's 750k.

I think if Gus makes a raise to 150k, Paul is faced with a much more difficult decision.

[riverboatking]

[ QUOTE ]
pp knows that it will be hard for gus to call in that spot without aa or kk

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you have never watched Gus Hansen play. PP knows Hansen WILL call with a heck of a wider randge of hands than A,A or K,K.

[/ QUOTE ]

which makes the play even more correct. if as you say PP knows gus will call with "a heck of a wider range then AA or KK" then why not reraise and welcome a call by a dominated hand? however PP doesn't in fact know this.
you talk as though all this happened after most of gus's tv appearances.
in fact this was one of the earlier episodes before PSI and the other wtp shows.
your assumptions as to PP thinking about what gus will call with are absurd and not really based on objective facts.
besides that maybe you should reread my intial response (the first in this thread) in which i clearly laid out why neither player made a mistake in this hand.
ITS CALLED POKER and sometimes in poker two hands go to showdown!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
besides that not one person has given a different opinion.
no one besides you has attempted to show that one player made a mistake and your attempts have not been compelling.


ps. how do you do the quote inside a quote?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that

-------------------------------------------------------------

Somehow that's cute when david does it. With you, the effect is to prove you should keep your psychiatrist on speed-dial.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice refutation.

Anyway, even though you don't agree with Vince on that point, would you care to comment on Vince's view that Gus played his hand less optimally than you played your hand?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, even though you don't agree with Vince on that point, would you care to comment on Vince's view that Gus played his hand less optimally than you played your hand?

[/ QUOTE ]
Can one play less optimally than another? Are there degrees of optimal or is optimal an absolute? Hmmmm......

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
Notice how vince conspicuously evades telling us the "correct" way to play AQ in that spot. I sure wish he would so we could all learn how the real pros do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although I must admit to agreeing with your assessment about Vince's rather oblique analysis, in the interest of being at least somewhat constructive...

...could it not be a good spot here to simply call and take a flop? If we can agree that Gus is likely calling pairs tens and up (an assumption, I know, but not a huge stretch), AK, and AQ, seeing the flop relatively cheaply might not be the worst thing in the world. If you flop a pair and Gus doesn't have the goods, he might be in for the long haul. If you miss, you can get away, and 3rd place money is not even in the picture yet.

If you're dominated, you were, of course, going to be dominated anyway. Minimizing your commitment to this pot might definitely serve as damage control should the flop miss you both, particularly AK vs. your AQ.

I would think that minimizing 3rd place as a newly-distinct possibility would be a fairly large consideration.

I see no value in raising a smaller amount here.

The allin has two big advantages--moving Gus off a small/medium pair (and, I suppose, possibly off of AQ), and, obviously, pushing Dewey out of the pot. This (perhaps too liberally) assumes Gus will call with his tens.

God, how I hate AQ, especially short like this in a tough situation.

I'd like to see the math, even though I cringe at some of the math I see here, and weep at my woefully inadequate math skills.

OK. I've said too much.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
If Paul just calls, he misses 2 flops out of 3 and will be forced to fold to a Gus bet, and Gus is first to act. If Paul reraises 750K, Gus would either go all in or call, and Paul has the flop problem again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seven words:

Implied odds, limited liability, and prize money consideration.

I like your thinking; it's some of the only potentially constructive posting in this thread.

I simply disagree. I think that we're all so (generally correctly) anti-calling that we fail to see that sometimes, it might make the most sense.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
KQ clubs

[/ QUOTE ]

Different universe.

[realbad101]

A couple of notes here...

To second-guess Paul or Gus's play here shows a big misunderstanding of the game. Three handed TT and AQ are going to lead to a race 99% of the time.

During that episode, Paul talked about his "anti-Gus" strategy or something to the like. Obviously it was successful, and I think I see a lot of the other pros emulating Paul's strategy. So much so, that it looks like Gus has tightened up a bit and evolved his strategy. Since he doesn't get credit for having a hand he's been cashing in when he does and folding more small pairs and suited connectors than he has in the past. At least from what's shown on TV.

And about Tomko - he's a pro's pro tight player. Folded AJo on the button 4 or 5 handed on one of the earliest episodes. This risk aversion leads to him being short stacked on occasion, but he's got a couple of bracelets so he's doing something right.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, even though you don't agree with Vince on that point, would you care to comment on Vince's view that Gus played his hand less optimally than you played your hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think Paul is bothering to respond to this part because he's rehashed this hand a ton already on his web site. I don't blame him for not wanting to do so again, when this tournament took place over a year ago.

[Daliman]

REAL simple.

Paul's raise= overaggressive but good, especially vs a player like GH. Word is/was out for more than a few pros on how to play Gus; play back at him strong. The first couple WPT's he won, you didnt see really any insane KJo calls of 8-10x allin reraises like we have been on PSI. Not alot of hands for PP to worry much about, plus the added incentive of Most people folding there, not wanting to bust before the much smaller stack. TONS of hands most fold, only slightly fewer GH does. "I play for first place, not second" does not apply here,(and rarely does anywhere,as it is usually said after someone makes a bad tourney position call).

Gus's call= Bad. At BEST he has to figure he is a coinflip, unless the very small chance PP reraised with a smaller pair happens. Sticking all your chips in on something you are 95% sure is a race at best is simply weak poker. Why spend all that time outplaying people, accumulating a stack, protecting that stack, and making high-level plays when you're just going to flip a coin when it comes down to the big $$$? From his chatter, you know he thought he was racing. Bad call, and he got what he deserved.

[KJS]

This whole question cannot be analyzed based on knowing both hands, IMO. The real question is "in a 3 handed game, the button (and close 2nd in chips) raises 2.5 times the blind, you have AQ, what is your play" and then asking the question from the opposite point of view. You write it from the perspective of "you have TT and your opponent has AQ, what should you do". That is my inference at least. I think if you ask it only revealing the hand of the person whose action you are interested in, and no one had seen the show and knew both hands, you'd get a much much different set of responses.

KJS

[fnurt]

You "flip a coin" because you are a favorite in the hand, and because there is money in the pot already.

This emotional hand-wringing about "I didn't play good poker all day just so I could settle for a race now" really doesn't seem to have much to do with playing good poker. If you fold, it should be because you expect to win more prize money by folding, not because you stubbornly insist on only winning a certain way.

[ChrisW]

> Gus's call= Bad. At BEST he has to figure he is a
> coinflip, unless the very small chance PP reraised with a
> smaller pair happens. Sticking all your chips in on
> something you are 95% sure is a race at best is simply
> weak poker.

This reasoning is pretty silly. Let's say that Gus had committed half his stack to the pot already. Should he fold if he's "95% sure he's in a race"? Of course not. Racing is an equity decision like any other tournament decision. Here, Gus was calling about T2M into a total pot of T4.7M. He was 57% to win the "race." That makes his chip equity from the call T679K better than folding on the actual hands.

Of course, it's dollar equity that matters, not tournament equity, and there the decision is close. I'm not inclined to do the math, but my guesstimate suggests that calling and folding will turn out to be within a few percentage points of each other cashwise given Paul's actual hand. Perhaps Gus thought that Paul might make the same move with some underpairs but not with as many overpairs. In that case the call is probably correct at cash as well. It certainly wasn't horrible.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice refutation.

[/ QUOTE ]

What sort of refutation would you suggest for someone who says "I know I'm right that everyone made big mistakes on this hand" but does not tell us what the clearly correct way to play it is? I gave him a far, far more detailed refutation than was warranted.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, even though you don't agree with Vince on that point, would you care to comment on Vince's view that Gus played his hand less optimally than you played your hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

As I've written at length elsewhere, I think his calling the all-in was (easily) correct.

If I was going to take any issue with his play, I'd say that given our stack sizes and the large strength of his hand, he would have been better off limping the button. That would have pinned us perfectly. If dewey moved in (which he might do with random cards) gus could call him and figure to be a large favorite. If I raised him he could limp re-raise me off a hand like AQ. And if we checked it, TT is still a great hand to have three-handed with position.

Gus and I are pretty clueless though so I don't think you can learn much from me. We should wait to hear how vince would have played it so we can put all this uninformed speculation to bed.

[bunky9590]

Well, gus could have literally anything to raise the button 3 handed. Thats where he shines. Dewey is very tight for the most part and will probably wait to try to double up with a very good hand. Paul plays a lot of hands as well and is very aggressive with them.

Knowing gus the way Paul does, an raise is certainly in order. Question is, Is it worth an all in? Well, an all in will almost certainly knock out dewey, and gus will have to have a hand to call. As it sits. Paul's gross overbet all in clearly looks like a muscle play to Gus but its clearly not AA or KK. Probably closer to AK or AQ something that needs to see 5 cards if called. And should certainly be at least a coin flip to gus hand and possibly even dominate a hand that Gus may call with. Calling Gus raise is just a licence for him to steal the pot on the button when Paul misses.

Seems like a reasonabel line, especially if Gus is running over he table 3 handed. Gotta back him off somehow. I certainly don't like the call of the all in for Gus with Dewey still in with TT. Knock Dewey out first and then push the smal edges.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
You "flip a coin" because you are a favorite in the hand, and because there is money in the pot already.

This emotional hand-wringing about "I didn't play good poker all day just so I could settle for a race now" really doesn't seem to have much to do with playing good poker. If you fold, it should be because you expect to win more prize money by folding, not because you stubbornly insist on only winning a certain way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you answered your own contention.

Also, flipping a coin is BEST CASE SCENARIO. That HAS to be factored. It's not good poker, period.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
> Gus's call= Bad. At BEST he has to figure he is a
> coinflip, unless the very small chance PP reraised with a
> smaller pair happens. Sticking all your chips in on
> something you are 95% sure is a race at best is simply
> weak poker.

This reasoning is pretty silly. Let's say that Gus had committed half his stack to the pot already. Should he fold if he's "95% sure he's in a race"? Of course not. Racing is an equity decision like any other tournament decision. Here, Gus was calling about T2M into a total pot of T4.7M. He was 57% to win the "race." That makes his chip equity from the call T679K better than folding on the actual hands.

Of course, it's dollar equity that matters, not tournament equity, and there the decision is close. I'm not inclined to do the math, but my guesstimate suggests that calling and folding will turn out to be within a few percentage points of each other cashwise given Paul's actual hand. Perhaps Gus thought that Paul might make the same move with some underpairs but not with as many overpairs. In that case the call is probably correct at cash as well. It certainly wasn't horrible.

[/ QUOTE ]

You say MY reasoning was silly, yet then refute it by using a hypothetical situation when a literal one exists. Gus had raised barely over 10% of his stack and called 2M more for a shot at ~2.6M.

And yes, the equity of calling vs folding given EXACT hands, not factoring that PP might have an overpair, is pretty close, but why make a high variance play with little actual difference in EV, silly?

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You "flip a coin" because you are a favorite in the hand, and because there is money in the pot already.

This emotional hand-wringing about "I didn't play good poker all day just so I could settle for a race now" really doesn't seem to have much to do with playing good poker. If you fold, it should be because you expect to win more prize money by folding, not because you stubbornly insist on only winning a certain way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you answered your own contention.

Also, flipping a coin is BEST CASE SCENARIO. That HAS to be factored. It's not good poker, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you made the case that Gus wins more prize money by folding, I didn't hear it. All I heard is how a real poker player wouldn't settle for a race, yadda yadda.

Is being a 55-45 favorite REALLY the best-case scenario? Paul would never make this move with, say, AT 3-handed? How about 99?

[MMMMMM]

My saying "Nice refutation" was partly tongue-in-cheek (especially when comparing it to your refutation of some of CrisBrown's posts), but I couldn't expect you to know that. Unfortunately I hate putting little smiley's after every minor attempt at sardonic humor (or any humor, for that matter) often tends to ruin the attempt (especially the weakest attempts).

I will say that I think Vince is a pretty decent guy if you actually get to know him a little bit. Don't know about the meds or the hotline bit.

I'll check out your web site; I've never visited it and didn't know you had discussed the hand in depth there.

[Daliman]

All covered in my initial post, sir....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You "flip a coin" because you are a favorite in the hand, and because there is money in the pot already.

This emotional hand-wringing about "I didn't play good poker all day just so I could settle for a race now" really doesn't seem to have much to do with playing good poker. If you fold, it should be because you expect to win more prize money by folding, not because you stubbornly insist on only winning a certain way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you answered your own contention.

Also, flipping a coin is BEST CASE SCENARIO. That HAS to be factored. It's not good poker, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you made the case that Gus wins more prize money by folding, I didn't hear it. All I heard is how a real poker player wouldn't settle for a race, yadda yadda.
[ QUOTE ]
Paul's raise= overaggressive but good, especially vs a player like GH. Word is/was out for more than a few pros on how to play Gus; play back at him strong. The first couple WPT's he won, you didnt see really any insane KJo calls of 8-10x allin reraises like we have been on PSI. Not alot of hands for PP to worry much about, plus the added incentive of Most people folding there, not wanting to bust before the much smaller stack. TONS of hands most fold, only slightly fewer GH does. "I play for first place, not second" does not apply here,(and rarely does anywhere,as it is usually said after someone makes a bad tourney position call).


[/ QUOTE ]
Is being a 55-45 favorite REALLY the best-case scenario? Paul would never make this move with, say, AT 3-handed? How about 99?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gus's call= Bad. At BEST he has to figure he is a coinflip, unless the very small chance PP reraised with a smaller pair happens. Sticking all your chips in on something you are 95% sure is a race at best is simply weak poker. Why spend all that time outplaying people, accumulating a stack, protecting that stack, and making high-level plays when you're just going to flip a coin when it comes down to the big $$$? From his chatter, you know he thought he was racing. Bad call, and he got what he deserved.


[/ QUOTE ]
The above is why I said 95% chance.

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
I sure wish he would so we could all learn how the real pros do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real pros I know, and I don't claim to be a pro, tell me that they don't play tournaments and call it "poker".

I admit it, I made a mistake. I should never have used the word "mistake" concerning your play in this hand. I should have guessed that you would take offense solely on the assumption that others would believe you were capable of making mistakes. Unfortunately my command of the english language sometimes causes me to burp when I should swallow. So, I continuously find myself apologizing especially to very sensitive ego's.

Now, as to how I would have played the A,Q in the hand in question.

First, when I play tournaments I am in the same mode as when I play live. I play to win money. I do not have the luxury of playing for fun. The difference between 3rd and second in a major tournament is usually a significant amount of money (at least to me). For example, I believe that the difference between 3rd and second in the 2004 WSOP was well over 1.5 million dollars. To me thats "WoW". I do not play WPT events because I cannot afford to lose the buy-in(s). However, I am confident that properly bankrolled I would show a profit over a significant number of tournaments.

Now as for the hand. I would not like to find myself in the position that Philips found himself. A,Q is a powerful holding three handed but it is still just Ace high. In this situation Philips is out of position against an unpredictable mediocre player who could have anything and has proven that he is willing to gamble. As I've said, I am looking to move up in addition to winning the tournament. I do not want to easily give up my chip lead and find myself in a weak third place. I want to avoid, if possible, a run out against a stack that can really hurt me. I also understand the strength of A,Q when playing 3 handed. For this reason I would like to see a flop with an A,Q before committing a significant amount of my chips. In poker and in tournaments information is extremely valuable. In this case Gus's raise was right in the category of insignificant to Philips stack. By that I mean that calling will not significantly affect his chip position. But raising all in will only significantly change his position if he is called! He either moves into a commanding heads up position or puts himself into a weak third place. But I believe that he is only called if he is beat! Sure, I know that Hansen will call with a wider range of hands than a solid pro but even Hansen would be hard pressed to call without a pair or A,K or A,Q. If Hansen has a pair, any pair, Philips is at best a slight dog, if he has A,K he is a big dog.

The bottom line is that given the situation and my goals of winning as much (real) money as I can I believe that calling Gus's raise is Philips best play. I do not believe that moving in is a horrible play but I do not believe that it is the best play (nor even second best play), but it is why I rate it as a better play than Hansen's call. I retract my "mistake" comment. Sorry.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Ghazban]

You make no mention of the folding equity of pushing with AQ out of position here. Sure, IF CALLED, the AQ is probably going to be a small dog (to a pocket pair less than queens) or a big dog (to AA, KK, QQ, or AK). However, Gus would be likely to fold the smaller pocket pairs and almost definitely 2 unpaired cards other than AK or AQ. If you just call with AQ, you have no idea where you stand on the flop even when you hit top pair because Gus could literally be raising with any two cards (and when he hits a weird two-pair, it will be well-concealed). If Paul reraises less than all-in and Gus comes over the top, Paul will have a tough decision to make and will have already committed a lot of chips to the pot. By doing the pushing himself, Paul puts Gus in the position of having to make a difficult decision. Gus should fold many hands that are slight favorites against AQ (for example, there's absolutely no way Gus calls all-in w/22) and, even if he does decide to call, only QQ, KK, AA, and AK hold a great advantage over AQ.

[morello]

[ QUOTE ]
unpredictable mediocre player

[/ QUOTE ]

ha ha ha. This coming from the guy that cannot afford to buy-in to WPT events. If mediocre players like Gus are doing so well, why isn't an expert like you able to even get in to the tournament?

By the way, you said you would "call and see a flop", yet you fail to mention what you would do after the flop. There will be 550k chips in the pot, and 2/3 times you don't make a pair. How do you play it now? Are you really going to suggest that you check-fold every time the button raises 3 handed and you don't make a pair on the flop?

[knucklehead]

Of course, now I'm unsure and have to watch again...

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
In this situation Philips is out of position against an unpredictable mediocre player

[/ QUOTE ]


While I will say that I believe most people on this forum are FAR more mediocre than they would care to believe, I would further point out that anyone who believes Gus Hansen to be mediocre has absolutely no idea what he is talking about and that simply including that statement automatically makes the next 1,000 things you say irrelevant, you are that far in deficit.

There are thousands of people who participate in these forums. I'd wager that, at best, only a few of them are better than Gus Hansen at poker ... and that anyone ACTUALLY better than him would realize he is anything but mediocre.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
Why spend all that time outplaying people, accumulating a stack, protecting that stack, and making high-level plays when you're just going to flip a coin when it comes down to the big $$$?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because

A) You think you have the best hand,
B) there's dead money in the pot, and
C) You're playing against Paul Phillips and Dewey Tomko, not your brother in law and his neighbor

It's 3 way, and he's Gus Hansen raising from the button - Paul Phillips all in in no way means he has a monster. And TT three way IS a monster. I definitely wouldn't be 95% sure it's a race in that position.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, you said you would "call and see a flop", yet you fail to mention what you would do after the flop. There will be 550k chips in the pot, and 2/3 times you don't make a pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

People keep getting the numbers wrong: we had 50K-100K blinds and Gus made it 280K preflop. So if I'd just called there would have been 660K plus the antes -- I forget what those were but let's say 15K. So over 700K in the middle.

[ QUOTE ]
How do you play it now? Are you really going to suggest that you check-fold every time the button raises 3 handed and you don't make a pair on the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seemed apparent that was going to be his "improved" strategy, call and check-fold. You can see why gus does well in tournaments.

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
ha ha ha. This coming from the guy that cannot afford to buy-in to WPT events

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, you said you would "call and see a flop", yet you fail to mention what you would do after the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do not feel confident that you will make the correct play after the flop then you should by all means move-in before the flop as Philips did. I say that as the same guy that can't afford "to lose" the WPT buy-in(s).

Vince

[PITTM]

gus hansen doesnt make big laydowns...har har

rj

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
It seemed apparent that was going to be his "improved" strategy, call and check-fold. You can see why gus does well in tournaments

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul,

This statement leads me to believe that you do not feel confident in your ability to make the correct play after the flop. Consequently, you were probably the weaker player of the three and were correct in gambling here. I guess you didn't make a "mistake" after all.

Vince

[bones]

You're confident playing AQ out of position against Tomko and Hansen?

Wow...

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
If you do not feel confident that you will make the correct play after the flop then you should by all means move-in before the flop

[/ QUOTE ]


OR, you should move in pre-flop if you think you can trap a hand in which you have a monster edge on (a weaker Ace, KQ, QJ) OR one where you can get him to lay it down and pick up the pot right there...

There are other reasons to push in pre-flop besides a lack of confidence.

Even mediocre players know that.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
You're confident playing AQ out of position against Tomko and Hansen

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Apparently Phillips isn't.

Vince

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It seemed apparent that was going to be his "improved" strategy, call and check-fold. You can see why gus does well in tournaments

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul,

This statement leads me to believe that you do not feel confident in your ability to make the correct play after the flop. Consequently, you were probably the weaker player of the three and were correct in gambling here. I guess you didn't make a "mistake" after all.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very stupid post. How does saying that "calling with the intention of check-folding is dumb" establish that he doesn't know how to play the flop?

It seems like you have no clue how to play the flop after calling preflop, so you're trying to distract attention from that by insulting Paul's skill. Good luck with that.

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
OR, you should move in pre-flop if you think you can trap a hand in which you have a monster edge on

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh. so now you believe that Philips moved in all of his chips trying to "trap" Gus with a Q,J. You know I saw Philips face when Gus called his bet. I may be wrong but he sure looked like a guy that was hoping that his opponent folded.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[David Sklansky]

The play is obviously just call or move in. Moving in is clearly better if you don't factor in the difference between second and third place. When you do factor it in it is close.

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like you have no clue how to play the flop after calling preflop,

[/ QUOTE ]

What? Philips makes a "dumb" comment about playing a "check-fold" strategy after the flop (I never claimed that was how to play after the flop. It's not) and you accuse me of not having a clue how to play after the flop. Take your lips off of PP's hiney and try reading who says what in these posts.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[willie]

done trollin yet?

you advocate calling and seeing a flop, then saying that check folding wasn't your line after the flop. When you miss the flop then what are you going to do? if it's all unders you're not going to bluff hansen off of tens-

i'd say from the way the hand was played that hansen played it the worst, but that is only because i'm working with full information- he probably shouldn't have taken a cointoss with phillips when he is covered and the third player is on life support. The almost guaranteed jump in prize cash makes the fold profitable.

It's just a tough hand- but i don't think you can fault paul for moving in preflop- and callin him the weakest of the players 3 handed is just insane-

he did not accumulate all the chips in his stack by being weak tight and pushin in every oppurtunity. i'm not kissing ass- but have some respect for a pro that has been at a few final tables and knows the game. If you can constructively criticize then feel free but throwin out insults isn't exactly worthwhile.

[Vince Lepore]

I agree with you David it is a close decision but I think that factoring the difference between 2nd and third sway the decision to a call.

What about Hansen's call? Hansen has been touted as a world class player. Why would a world class player opt for a coin flip at best with a possibility of being a big dog? Why would'nt he wait for a better situation to risk his chips especially considering his chip position vs Tomko's.

Vince /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
he probably shouldn't have taken a cointoss with phillips when he is covered and the third player is on life support. The almost guaranteed jump in prize cash makes the fold profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tomko wasn't exactly on life support just yet...800k right (didn't see this, going on what is written here)?

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
have some respect for a pro

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes Paul Philips a "pro"? And I'm not the one that needs to treat people with respect. You need to talk to the man in the mirror about that.

Just to set the record straight. I do indeed advocate calling and seeing a flop. However, I never said check and fold was the strategy to follow after the flop. Since you accuse me of saying this I will not respond to you unless you either find a quote of mine where I state what strategy to follow after the flop or apologize to me for the false accusation you make here.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Tomko wasn't exactly on life support just yet...800k right

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not positive of the exact amount Tomko had. It may have been less, But even at 800k he is almost a 3 to one dog to either player to finish second.

Vince

[DimensionPresident]

Is it just me or is Vince just a giant douche bag?

I'd think of a more clever insult if I really cared.

What a snooze fest.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It seems like you have no clue how to play the flop after calling preflop,

[/ QUOTE ]

What? Philips makes a "dumb" comment about playing a "check-fold" strategy after the flop (I never claimed that was how to play after the flop. It's not) and you accuse me of not having a clue how to play after the flop. Take your lips off of PP's hiney and try reading who says what in these posts.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

So how do you play after the flop?

[theBruiser500]

Vince, interesting points you raise. Why does the difference in 2nd to 3rd place money make the decision to call better?

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that but I wonder which made the bigger mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with you David it is a close decision but I think that factoring the difference between 2nd and third sway the decision to a call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrite, imbecile, or Sklansky ass-kisser?

[ohgeetee]

It looks like your command of the english language got hte better of you again. Paul didn't criticize your saying he made a mistake, and I highly doubt his ego came into play when replying to such an idiotic statement.

You claimed to KNOW you were correct, but just wanted some sort of coordinate on the grid of your absolute correctness.

The real humor of the post was that you could make such a bold statement as to know you are correct in your assertation, but didn't have the confidence in your diagnosis to know exactly why you were correct and to what degree?

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or is Vince just a giant douche bag?


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Are you allowing this kind of stuff on this forum now? I'd like to see this fellows posting priveleges suspended. If you don't suspend him then please ensure he cannot reply to any of my posts. I will do in kind to his.
If neither can be done, I do understand but regrettably will not post on 2 + 2 again. Thank you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ohgeetee]

[ QUOTE ]
What makes Paul Philips a "pro"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this?

Paul Phillips (http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=s&n=1134)

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
diagnosis

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean "analysis"? Sorry, but my english isn't very good. If you would bother to read the rest of my posts in this thread I believe thst I explain exactly what my position is. Of course you seem more interested in flapping your jaws than discussing this situation. Wouldn't bother me if you didn't bother reading anything I post. I'll do the same for you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Vince Lepore]

Nothing in those two quotes is contradictory. Why not just keep yourself from reading aanything this imbicile has to say. I'll do the same for you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Vince Lepore]

So a pro is someone that only shows his winnings. I get it.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
You're confident playing AQ out of position against Tomko and Hansen?

Wow...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, i suppose it could be said that PP pretty much eliminated the poosition factor by playing the way he did.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or is Vince just a giant douche bag?


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Are you allowing this kind of stuff on this forum now? I'd like to see this fellows posting priveleges suspended. If you don't suspend him then please ensure he cannot reply to any of my posts. I will do in kind to his.
If neither can be done, I do understand but regrettably will not post on 2 + 2 again. Thank you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


WAAAH!

Use yer ignore function.

[riverboatking]

[ QUOTE ]
You're confident playing AQ out of position against Tomko and Hansen


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes. Apparently Phillips isn't.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

ROTFLMAO.

wow man you are great.

you feel comfortable playing three handed out of position w/aq with dewey and gus.

you should get paul to crossbook with you.

[riverboatking]

[ QUOTE ]
If you do not feel confident that you will make the correct play after the flop then you should by all means move-in before the flop as Philips did. I say that as the same guy that can't afford "to lose" the WPT buy-in(s).


[/ QUOTE ]

and yet you still have not decided to divulge any of your great poker wisdom by telling us amatuers how to play post flop? so what if you hit no pair? what if you hit a queen?
you're now playing out of position vs. an opponent you admit could have any two cards and is willing to gamble.
is this the optimal situation to get into?
lets say the flop is Ace 9 2 rainbow.....whats your play?

please elaborate oh great poker guru.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
So a pro is someone that only shows his winnings. I get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! In reality I'm buried by the $3,000,000 in tournament entry fees I've dropped the last three years. Those $500,000 buyin tournaments really add up in a hurry. I give up, I need a backer. Know anyone?

[riverboatking]

[ QUOTE ]
Matt,

Are you allowing this kind of stuff on this forum now? I'd like to see this fellows posting priveleges suspended. If you don't suspend him then please ensure he cannot reply to any of my posts. I will do in kind to his.
If neither can be done, I do understand but regrettably will not post on 2 + 2 again. Thank you.

Vince




[/ QUOTE ]

well judging by this thread.........that would be a huge loss.

[riverboatking]

vince its really sad how you keep saying you'd just call but you wouldn't check/fold the flop...but refuse all requests to elaborate on what your play would be on the flop.

since you obviously KNOW the correct play....why don't you humor us with a reply to these scenarios:
1) flop comes A 10 2 rainbow.......whats your play

2)flop comes K 4 7 rainbow...........whats your play

3)flop comes 2 9 7 rainbow.........whats your play

4)flop comes 10 4 3 rainbow.......whats your play

i would just love to hear your reply.

hmmm........when i flop top pair and gus flops a set i'd check fold...when the flop comes K high i would bet out to get gus to fold.....and when the flop helps neither of us then i'd check fold again. sound like what you'd do vince?

[Vince Lepore]

No way. I will just quit posying if this is allowed.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Vince Lepore]

No way. I will just quit posting if this is allowed.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Vince Lepore]

So you are a pro poker player. You earn you your living playing poker or did you make up your own definition of a professional?
/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Vince

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would a great tournament player risk his very good chance of winning the tournament on at best a toss up so early in the competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is at best a toss up. I believe Paul has stated that he felt Gus' raise was virtually automatic. Obviously Gus is aware of how aggressive he plays.

As it turned out, Gus was a better than 57% favorite (no one has said that his AQ was suited, so I am assuming it wasn't). Your initial post said Gus raised to 250k, but it also said the blinds were 25/50k. Given that the blinds were 50/100k, I'm not sure what Gus' raise was (somewhere Paul mentioned how much dead money was in the pot), but even if it was still only 250k, that's still 650k or so of dead money in the pot that he is giving up his equity in by folding the best hand. Obviously if his actual raise was 300 or 350, then you're talking another 100 or 200k.

Sure, Tomko is the most likely for 3rd, but he is certainly far from done. And 1st pays twice as much as second

1 Paul Phillips $1,101,980
2 Dewey Tomko $552,853
3 Gus Hansen $276,426

How tragic would folding here be if Paul made his move with 99? Or 88? What about AT?

His opponents are also excellent players...if it was Vince Lepore in this position instead of Gus Hansen, and you would lay down your tens in the same position, you are giving the green light to Paul Phillips to significantly improve his chances of winning first by going over the top of you...increasing your chances of third at the cost of reducing your chances of first.

I'm calling in Gus' shoes every time absent a great read that I'm against a monster. But since it's been stated several times that the consideration of Tomko finishing third reduces the benefit of calling here, I would love to see some mathematical analysis to show it - couldn't help but benefit me and everyone else reading.

[dr.gonzo]

Vince, you ever thought that this no one correct way to play this hand? Just because the way you would play it differed to how Paul played it doesnt mean that you are correct.

You say that you would have just called because the drop-off between 2nd and 3rd was huge. Calling may well be the correct play for YOU here then, as not placing 3rd is your primary concern. For someone who's main goal is winning the tournament, and given the hands that Gus is likely to raise in this position with (ie anything), then moving in is clearly a good option if your main focus is to actually win the tournament.

A-Q in this situation had a very good chance of being a favourite, or making Gus fold. gus actually gave quite a lot of consideration into folding his 10s here. If he did then everyone would be saying what a great play it was by Philips. As it was he called, Paul was still only a small dog and figuring the money that was already in the pot due to the blinds and antes was definately getting the correct odds to make up for being a small dog.

If winning the tournament is your primary goal then moving in is clearly not a bad option. It put the pressure on Gus to make a decision for all his chips and that is never a bad thing.

Playing not to lose is no way to win.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh. so now you believe that Philips moved in all of his chips trying to "trap" Gus with a Q,J. You know I saw Philips face when Gus called his bet. I may be wrong but he sure looked like a guy that was hoping that his opponent folded.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


He could've looked like that to you. He also could've looked like a guy trying to look like a guy trying to look like that.

My point is that there are more reasons to push in other than a lack of confidence. Trapping an inferior hand is one of the reasons I wouldn't mind pushing in. Likewise, pushing a man OFF a problematic hand (say, a small pair) is likewise an incentive.

And there are more factors to take into consideration OTHER than the aforementioned (and incorrect) lack of confidence.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[ChrisW]

> You say MY reasoning was silly, yet then refute it by
> using a hypothetical situation when a literal one exists.

Do you really have such a poor understanding of logical argumentation? It's called a "counter-example." The point is that racing vs. non-racing has nothing to do with whether to call a bet. The idea in tournaments is to avoid high variance, small +EV plays. Often times, a race falls into that category of plays to avoid, but not always, especially when you've already committed chips to a pot and expect to be on the better side of the race.

> Gus had raised barely over 10% of his stack and called 2M
> more for a shot at ~2.6M.

There are those pesky little blinds and antes, so it's more like 2.7M.

> And yes, the equity of calling vs folding given EXACT
> hands, not factoring that PP might have an overpair, is
> pretty close but why make a high variance play with
> little actual difference in EV, silly?

Are you talking about chip EV when you say "little actual difference in EV"? If so, you need to retake junior high school algrebra before you post again. Gus was calling T2M to win a pot of T4.7M 57% of the time. His mathematical expectation is to come away with .57*T4.7M, which is T2.68M.

To understand the absurdity of your claim is that there is "little actual difference in EV" between calling and folding, let's imagine that Gus lays down the TT. On the next hand, Gus is in the BB with AKo, and he has T2M left before posting. Paul moves Gus in from the button and accidentally flashes Gus 87o. Should Gus call? This looks like an ideal spot, right? Well, AKo will beat 87o 62.4% of the time for a T4.06M pot (T2M each from Gus and Paul, plus T60K from Dewey's SB and ante). That gives Gus an expected chip return of .624*T4.06M, which is T2.54M. That's T140K less than his EV from calling on the actual TT vs. AQ.

This example proves that given the actual hands, Gus's best chance to have a lot of chips and win the tournament was to call, as even a great situation of all in with AK vs 87 on the next hand would yield a lower chip EV than calling with the TT.

As I said in my previous post, there are some payout considerations that make the cash EV question closer.

[Bernas]

Neither made a mistake. Both made great plays here.

[RowdyZ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or is Vince just a giant douche bag?


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Are you allowing this kind of stuff on this forum now? I'd like to see this fellows posting priveleges suspended. If you don't suspend him then please ensure he cannot reply to any of my posts. I will do in kind to his.
If neither can be done, I do understand but regrettably will not post on 2 + 2 again. Thank you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Mat,

I think I speak for all of us please continue to allow DP to post and respond to Vince, in fact perhaps you could put in an auto alert feature that everytime Vince posts DP gets a message so that he can respond more quickly.
Countless posts over 2 threads and even one of the Great Gods of 2+2 have come down from Olympus and said he is wrong and he still persists in fighting. Lets see how many final tables has Hansen made? I can't count all of them, How many tables has Phillips made? A bunch I remeber one day I think I saw him on 4 different show on 3 channels. Loved the orange hair BTW. So lets see, Hansen=lots of final table and making the money, Phillips, lots of final table and money finishes. Lepore.... Lepore... Damn who is this guy again?
I think it is pretty clear who is WRONG.

RZ

[fnurt]

If you are talking about expected prize money rather than chip stacks, the decision comes out to be extremely close. You might even call it a coin flip.

Paul might have a hand like 99, but he also might have JJ. I think the chances of him having a higher/lower pocket pair pretty much cancel each other out.

So putting that aside, if you think there is even a 10% chance that Paul has something like AT (i.e., hands that Gus is a solid favorite over), the call is clear.

Another factor no one has mentioned is future position. Until Dewey busts out, and who knows when that will be, Gus is going to be in bad position with respect to the other big stack. That factor should make Gus more inclined to take a gamble.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
The play is obviously just call or move in. Moving in is clearly better if you don't factor in the difference between second and third place. When you do factor it in it is close.

[/ QUOTE ]

You made my day.

I was beginning to think I was an absolute donk.

[Bernas]

[ QUOTE ]
No way. I will just quit posting if this is allowed.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Fingers crossed.

[MMMMMM]

Vince, if I may make a suggestion: you have some good thoughts in this thread, but the absolute way you stated some of them drew a lot of attacks. I know that stating opinions bluntly is the 2+2 way, and I have even been known to do it myself at times, so I'm not faulting you for this, just observing.

Some of these posters even descended to the mean lowness of personal attacks; however, if you were to couch your poker strategy observations and questions in somewhat more exploratory and less absolutist terms I would think that you would get much more cooperation and encounter far less resistance. Not faulting you here, just trying to make a suggestion, since it seems that on the Internet, egos get involved even more so than in live game settings. People get the mistaken feeling that if their ideas were wrong, THEY themselves as a person were wrong; hence we see ego wars and flame wars exploding all over the Internet.

You took a hiatus here a long time ago and got wrapped up in that wasteland known as RGP(;-)); I hope you will not disappear again. As for the other posters attacking Vince: give him a little bit of a break, he's only human too, and even if some of his ideas are wrong, he comes up with many good ideas too, and unique perspectives as well. You guys just need to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. Of course it will help if Vince doesn't claim it's all wheat (and he doesn't, even if he sometimes claims something wrongly).

Anyway until I read Paul's description of the hand on his website, I'll have nothing further to add, except for this: I too would probably have just called with AQ because of the prize money considerations. I could well be wrong but that is what seems intuitively best to me.

[ChrisW]

Paul Phillips wrote:

> If I was going to take any issue with his play, I'd say
> that given our stack sizes and the large strength of his
> hand, he would have been better off limping the button.
> That would have pinned us perfectly. If dewey moved in
> (which he might do with random cards) gus could call him
> and figure to be a large favorite. If I raised him he
> could limp re-raise me off a hand like AQ. And if we
> checked it, TT is still a great hand to have three-handed
> with position.

Paul,

One thing I have noticed from poker broadcasts is that Gus rerely seems to limp (I saw him limp a couple of times at a full table with a small pair in early position, but not otherwise), and to my recollection he has never been shown limping in a shorthanded game. So, two questions:

1) Obviously, TV doesn't show many hands. Does Gus limp more than it appears?

2) If your answer to #1 is "not appreciably," wouldn't the TT limp look fishy? I agree that limp reraising on the button can be a good way to avoid a confrontation (Howard Lederer used that technique against Ron Rose in what I believe was WPT Foxwoods to win a nice pot with AK vs TT), but it seems like that technique could only be utilized by a player who also limp-folds.

[Daliman]

Wow, are YOU barking up the wrong tree, Fido.

[ QUOTE ]
> You say MY reasoning was silly, yet then refute it by
> using a hypothetical situation when a literal one exists.

Do you really have such a poor understanding of logical argumentation? It's called a "counter-example." The point is that racing vs. non-racing has nothing to do with whether to call a bet. The idea in tournaments is to avoid high variance, small +EV plays. Often times, a race falls into that category of plays to avoid, but not always, especially when you've already committed chips to a pot and expect to be on the better side of the race.


[/ QUOTE ]

First off, I'm very familiar woth point and counterpoint, but THERE IS A POINT AT HAND!!! Why counterpoint with a different example when the different example has a COMPLETELY different BASIS of fact? Here's an example, what if gus had raised initially to 1.8 million, and paul pushes, then shows Gus he has two aces, Dewey folds HIS two tens face up, then a little kid in the audience throws a red hat into the air, and a purple monkey climbs out of a dishwasher? What's the right play then?

THERE IS CONTEXT AT HAND, MORON!

Funny that you also say;
The idea in tournaments is to avoid high variance, small +EV plays.

But try to temper it with the fact that;
Often times, a race falls into that category of plays to avoid, but not always, especially when you've already committed chips to a pot and expect to be on the better side of the race.

Ok, exactly what tells him he can "expect" to be in a race with a 57-43 edge? He could just as easily be an 82-18 dog, or even in a race with lesser odds than 57-43. Unless PP makes this play with 88 or 99(possible, but doubtful), a race is his BEST case scenario, as I have stated before..


Next up, yer BS mincing;
[ QUOTE ]
> Gus had raised barely over 10% of his stack and called 2M
> more for a shot at ~2.6M.

There are those pesky little blinds and antes, so it's more like 2.7M.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, lets see,
50K BB + 250K raise + 2.3M effective reraise(of which the 25K SB is included)=2.6M, plus possibly 30k in blinds, but I was going off of the info at hand in Vince's initial post, as you seemed to be. Either way, my estimate was closer. If yer gonna bust balls over a less than 4% difference, it helps to be right.

P.S. ChrisW, meet ~. ~, meet ChrisW. Since you two obviously have not been formally introduced, I'll explain that ~ is called "tilde" and means "about" or "approximately" in this context.

On to;
[ QUOTE ]
Are you talking about chip EV when you say "little actual difference in EV"? If so, you need to retake junior high school algrebra before you post again. Gus was calling T2M to win a pot of T4.7M 57% of the time. His mathematical expectation is to come away with .57*T4.7M, which is T2.68M.


[/ QUOTE ]
Well, first off, this is 4th grade math, not algebra. B., I was inferring either way, chip or money EV, but more so $$ EV, but since you brought it up, let's factor in the fact that GH may be against a bigger pair only 20% of the time(which is probably a low estimate, but I'll play along). We'll even continue with the 57/43 even though it could just as easily be a 54-46(since you introduced the mincing, I'll play too, except I'm right in mine).
.57 X4.6M X.8=2,097,600
.18 X4.6M X.2+165,600

So total EV then is 2,263,200 IF only factoring a 20% chance it is behind. +EV, to be sure, but assuming a LOT. With the difference in prize $$$ factored, it's a marginal play at BEST. Also, before you say tens are WAY more likely to be ahead 3 handed, I refer you to the 2002 WSOP where 3 handed, Julian Gardner's TT which he mucked preflop due to the action was the THIRD best hand dealt to Varkonyi's AA and Ralph Perry's JJ. Julian knew he may have had the best hand, but folded for the equity of second ALONG WITH the fact that he may have been beaten already. You REALLY need to quit assuming a race was a given. It wasn't.


Now, you REALLY start getting dumb;
[ QUOTE ]
To understand the absurdity of your claim is that there is "little actual difference in EV" between calling and folding, let's imagine that Gus lays down the TT. On the next hand, Gus is in the BB with AKo, and he has T2M left before posting. Paul moves Gus in from the button and accidentally flashes Gus 87o. Should Gus call? This looks like an ideal spot, right? Well, AKo will beat 87o 62.4% of the time for a T4.06M pot (T2M each from Gus and Paul, plus T60K from Dewey's SB and ante). That gives Gus an expected chip return of .624*T4.06M, which is T2.54M. That's T140K less than his EV from calling on the actual TT vs. AQ.


[/ QUOTE ]

And you say MY contention is absurd...

You are comparing a POSSIBLE EV to a LITERAL EV. There is a GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE! This is somewhat similar to the oft-posted about AK vs QJ hand first hand of WSOP main event, and accentuates difference in styles, expectations, and amount of gamble in different players. This is WAY different. This is for direct $$$, and possibly a coveted title, not just a slightly better shot at $$$.

I'm not quite sure what you do for a living, but I play poker. Tournament poker, to be more concise, and Sit and Go's, to be exact. I have likely forgetten more about EV that most will ever know, and from the sounds of it, you are DEFINITELY included in that group. Patronize elsewhere.

[ QUOTE ]
This example proves that given the actual hands, Gus's best chance to have a lot of chips and win the tournament was to call, as even a great situation of all in with AK vs 87 on the next hand would yield a lower chip EV than calling with the TT.


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, this means Gus felt uncomfortable actually "playing" poker with Dewey and/or Paul, which he'd not be stupid at all to do, but I can assure you is not the case with Gus. On a PSI episode, he had a similar instance where he had an open-ended straight flush draw on a paired flop, he check rsised Howard Lederer with it, and Howard reraised allin with his flopped trips. Gus went over the #'s in his head, and came to the correct conclusion that even though calling was likely +EV(which it was), factored with the fact that he could be drawing to only 4 total outs, he thought there were better spots for his money. He IS capable of a proper fold when he has a stack worth playing/protecting, yet chose not to here. Your hypothetical situation "proves" nothing.

[ QUOTE ]
As I said in my previous post, there are some payout considerations that make the cash EV question closer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you finally said something right. Congrats. And welcome to the forum, newbie.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Obviously, TV doesn't show many hands. Does Gus limp more than it appears?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think everyone limps more than it appears on television because limped pots are less likely to lead to all-ins and therefore less likely to make the program. However, I'll agree that he doesn't limp all that often. He is much more apt to make small raises.

[ QUOTE ]
2) If your answer to #1 is "not appreciably," wouldn't the TT limp look fishy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is a fair point; I was imagining it in the context of a metastrategy that includes sufficient limping to keep this from leaking too much information. I limp the button more often than a lot of people do precisely to keep this option open to me. Not having played 3-handed with gus other than at that table, I'm not sure how I would have interpreted a limp. It's likely I would have seen it as a sensible attempt to avoid playing a big pot with me, as opposed to an attempt to trap.

[DimensionPresident]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it just me or is Vince just a giant douche bag?


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Are you allowing this kind of stuff on this forum now? I'd like to see this fellows posting priveleges suspended. If you don't suspend him then please ensure he cannot reply to any of my posts. I will do in kind to his.
If neither can be done, I do understand but regrettably will not post on 2 + 2 again. Thank you.

Vince /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Cry baby sh_t like this only reinforces your douche-itude. As previously stated, I would have put a little more time into the insult if I thought you were worth it. Possibly one with no "bad words", but one that also carried the same message... which is I think you're a giant douche bag.

Carry on with SNORE FEST 2004.

[Mat Sklansky]

It is likely that Vince was a little thin-skinned, but this post on top of your other post means you are the one who will be leaving the forums.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
It is likely that Vince was a little thin-skinned, but this post on top of your other post means you are the one who will be leaving the forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly warranted, but MAN, do i hate the stoking effect.

[offTopic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe that both Hansen and Philips made big mistakes on this hand. I know I'm right about that

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow that's cute when david does it. With you, the effect is to prove you should keep your psychiatrist on speed-dial.

[/ QUOTE ]

He may already be doing that...it's been nearly two days, and he hasn't accused you of being someone else yet.

[jomatty]

vince,
all of the things that you said so what too answer your later questions. Cute response but in my opinion wrong.
matty

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is pretty clear who is WRONG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you are correct, it is very clear. It was DP, your hero and he's gone. Thanks Mat.

Vince

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
This whole question cannot be analyzed based on knowing both hands, IMO. The real question is "in a 3 handed game, the button (and close 2nd in chips) raises 2.5 times the blind, you have AQ, what is your play" and then asking the question from the opposite point of view. You write it from the perspective of "you have TT and your opponent has AQ, what should you do". That is my inference at least. I think if you ask it only revealing the hand of the person whose action you are interested in, and no one had seen the show and knew both hands, you'd get a much much different set of responses.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great point!

I do think Gus had a tough decision after PP's big reraise and (divorcing results) a laydown was a good option. Others have already elaborated /images/graemlins/smile.gif

~ Rick

[Vince Lepore]

What do you know, pretty boy? How you been? How's my lady? Say hello!

Vince

[DimensionPrez]

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[DimensionPrez]

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[TM1212]

Didn't read all the posts, so if this was already mentioned sorry.
I don't think either player made a wrong play on this hand. This is because neither player was playing for 2nd place. Neither play cared about the money, both wanted first place, especially Paul.
Now if its me in Hansen position, I can fold TT here because I know Dewey probably won't be around much longer, increaseing my payout, but Hansen saw an opportunity with a strong hand to pretty much end the tournament and he took it. Unfortunately for him he lost the race.

[Vince Lepore]

Why don't you come and see me you cowardly punk!

Vince Lepore

[Vince Lepore]

Wow you da man! what a dope!

Vince

[DCIAce]

Sigh, I can't believe I read this whole thread. The flame-fest was inevitable after pointless "I know I am right" statements that aren't correct.

Anyways, I think Paul's play is fine here. As mentioned, Gus is going to raise with a wide range of hands here, might as well play back at him when you have a big hand. Folding is weak/tight. Calling would be fine except that you're out of position against an aggressive player that's also willing to make big calls. I think that moving in is Paul's best play here.

Gus's call is debatable.. He's probably in a coinflip situation, I think I'd fold in this spot, but calling isn't that bad, and it becomes very viable if Paul's been re-raising his steals often.

Also, I'd imagine that Paul cared more about winning than moving up from 3rd to 2nd place prize money, and this route gives him a much better chance to win, at the cost of lessening the % of the time he'll finish 2nd. Also, even if he loses, he's not that far behind Tomko.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you know, pretty boy? How you been? How's my lady? Say hello!

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

We're multi-tasking. Tired, busy. Short stacked on a NL sit n go. Trying to avoid the dreaded bubble. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

~Rick

PS Boy, you like pushing buttons /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[cero_z]

Hi Vince,

[ QUOTE ]
But I believe that he is only called if he is beat! ...even Hansen would be hard pressed to call without a pair or A,K or A,Q.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if this is the situation, Paul is laying about 7 to 1 to win the pot, when his opponent (by your estimation) will fold 13 out of 14 times! Sounds like a good bet right there, to say nothing of the 60 hands (22-JJ) he's coin-flipping against.

[Vince Lepore]

When I wacthed the hand, and I just watched it again. The announcers said that the blinds were 25-50k. I based a lot of my comments on that. The blinds were in fact 50-100k which created a bigger pot to go after than I originally thought PP went after. I still don't like his all-in raise but it is not as bad as I first thought.

Vince

[Daliman]

Thanks for that. Please disregard this entire thread now, along with the 4 other threads spawned by it.

[Vince Lepore]

Hey Daliman, I would appreciate it if you disregard eveything I post. I just put you on my ignore list please do the same for me. Have a good life and don't bother yourself with me again.

Vince

[Daliman]

Damn shame. You'll no longer view my witty retorts and insightful BS. I guess Mat was plenty right, you are WAY too thin skinned. I make a pithy comment indicting more the tempest created than yourself, and you get yer ass in the air about it.

I'll repeat from earlier....

WAAH!

Now, let me get this straight, yer supposed to be some kind of pro, right?

[Nottom]

This was discussed quite a bit when it first aired, and I think most seemed to agree that against the range of hands Paul would make this play with, Gus was in pretty good shape and needed to call.

However you also believe Paul's push was a mistake. If you feal the Gus's call was a mistake then I don't see how you can thinkg Paul's push was a mistake as well. If he puts Gus on a weakish hand and he is "supposed" to fold it to an all-in, then an all-in seems like the correct play to me.

[Vince Lepore]

Gus's call was a mistake because the risk out weighed the reward. Look at West's math analysis of Gus's call. If West is correct as I believe he is Gus's call over a wide range of hands that PP could have result in a -EV.

Vince

[TurtlePowers]

Im now convinced that Gus gambles a lot.

[curtains]

I like Paul's allin. Worst case scenario Gus turns over AK, Paul ends up not winning the hand, and still has quite good chances at 2nd place.
I don't like calling at all here. It's 3 handed game, you have AQ, and you can face Gus with the prospect of elimination. I don't think it's so close either.
I know for sure I don't want to call here, and I dont want to fold, so by default I'm moving allin.
Also forgive me, my paragraphs don't show up in my message? Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong?

[curtains]

(in response to Rushmore from about 10 pages ago)

I agree that people are often very anti-calling, but I just don't like it at all here. AQ is simply a monster in a 3 handed game. If Gus didn't have TT and happen to call, no one would even be talking about this, and would have written it off as routine.

[curtains]

Paul how about instead of Gus limping on the button with TT, raising to 2.5-3x the Blinds instead of 5x the blinds. When he raises to 250k, almost any normal raise you make, basically pot commits you. With a raise to 130-160k, he shouldn't expect that your reraise will be allin or totally pot committing. You could easily raise it to 600-650k and then fold to his allin.
This is based on the knowledge that the blinds were 25k-50k at the time, so forgive me if they were 50k-100k.

(Unbelievable I just read the blinds WERE in fact 50k-100k, which makes the original summary in the thread quite sloppy, as to try to prove such a point by getting such an important detail wrong is absurd.) Now I'd like to limp on the button with TT and 99 and MAYBE 88. I'd still raise AA-JJ and smaller pairs as well, because you don't mind a reraise with the former, and can easily fold the latter.
What's funny is that without even seeing the hand or knowing anything about it, I suspected that there was a chance the blind amounts were wrong, as Gus almost NEVER would open raise to 5x the BB.

[jedi]

From Nottom:
[ QUOTE ]

However you also believe Paul's push was a mistake. If you feal the Gus's call was a mistake then I don't see how you can thinkg Paul's push was a mistake as well. If he puts Gus on a weakish hand and he is "supposed" to fold it to an all-in, then an all-in seems like the correct play to me.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Gus's call was a mistake because the risk out weighed the reward. Look at West's math analysis of Gus's call. If West is correct as I believe he is Gus's call over a wide range of hands that PP could have result in a -EV.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

Vince, you still haven't responded to Nottom's point. If Gus was making a mistake by calling, then how did Paul make a mistake in pushing all-in? If Paul forces Gus to make that mistake, isn't Paul playing correctly?

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
If Gus was making a mistake by calling, then how did Paul make a mistake in pushing all-in? If Paul forces Gus to make that mistake, isn't Paul playing correctly?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not serious are you?

Vince

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If Gus was making a mistake by calling, then how did Paul make a mistake in pushing all-in? If Paul forces Gus to make that mistake, isn't Paul playing correctly?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not serious are you?

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not worthy to be sitting at the same table as you, oh great Vince Lepore. Please enlighten me as to how Paul made a mistake here.

[Vince Lepore]

Your pointed question, when reading between the lines, implies that if Gus made a mitake PP must have played correctly.

The fact is that Gus made his call not on knowing what PP had but what he could have. I don't believe that PP makes this reraise without a big pair or A,K. As it turns out he also makes it with A,Q. Even so, Gus is risking his tournament life on this assumption when he has a comparative short stack still in. As shown by West, who did the math Gus's call shows a -19k EV. I call that a mistake.

So the fact that PP moved in with A,Q did not cause Gus to make a mistake. He made a mistake based on what hands PP could have. Gus's call as it turned out in this specific instance was correct. He had the best hand and was a favorite. Gee, I guess that means that he didn't make a mistake in calling after all, huh? If you believe that then I have nothing else to say.

Vince

[jedi]

Again, how did Paul make a mistake here? Nottom's original question (not mine) still stands. Paul forced Gus to make a decision for all his chips. As you claim (and the math shows), Gus made a mistake by calling for all his chips against Paul's likely range of hands instead of folding and waiting to attack the short stack.

So then, how did Paul make a mistake?

[Smoothcall]

Paul makes a mistake cause there will be better opportunites to win or lose the tournament than this where if called he's either small dog or huge dog. If Paul feels he's better than Gus he should wait for better spot like after flopping the best hand where he coud be a big favorite as apposed to small dog or big dog if called. Plus lets not forget the equity of 3rd to 2nd jump. So while Paul's play technically according range of hands and all that may be right it was wrong thing to do. So yes they both made mistakes.

[amoeba]

you can say the same thing about AK, where if you are called you are either huge dog or small dog, yet you see people move all in all the time with AK even at earlier times in the tourney.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul makes a mistake cause there will be better opportunites to win or lose the tournament than this where if called he's either small dog or huge dog. If Paul feels he's better than Gus he should wait for better spot like after flopping the best hand where he coud be a big favorite as apposed to small dog or big dog if called. Plus lets not forget the equity of 3rd to 2nd jump. So while Paul's play technically according range of hands and all that may be right it was wrong thing to do. So yes they both made mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

While this type of analysis is good, I think it ignores the fact that this hand isn't being played in a bubble. Paul is up against Gus Hansen, a known maniac who would be raising with any 2 cards in his situation. I disagree that Paul is a small dog/huge dog if called here. Gus could very will have something like AJ or KQ and call, believing that Paul is on a resteal type attempt.

I like Paul's play much more here than Gus' because Paul is being the agressor against someone who likes to bully the table and being out of position, Paul pushed all-in, taking away Gus' advantage there.

If you really think there are better spots for Paul to get his chips in, then he should fold not call in this spot. That would be a Helmuthian laydown.

[fnurt]

You can't just say "...if he gets called" without dealing with the fact that he only gets called 5% of the time.

[Smoothcall]

Gus would not call imo with those hands and no hand that Paul could dominate. Look at the dilema he had with the 1010's he said to himself many times how can i make this call. If he had a dilema with 1010's do you really think he would call k high. He's not stupid he gambles but wouldn't do that especially with dewey so low. I'm sure Gus would like someome to give him extra 300k or whatever it was for 2nd as opposed to 3rd. Headup after tomko was out he might but not before.

As far as Paul making the better play i agree for same reasons. Hansen's call was definately worse.

Oddly enough i think you are right about laying it down. noone mentions that but could be better than calling because of the fact that you have to play it weak postflop. Why not just toss and move on. Don't let Gus know cause then he would really up the pressure but Paul would still have the chip lead. Yes time for a hellmuthian laydown.

[Smoothcall]

Yes same thing kinda. but the other times peopel are moving in is when earlier you speak of they are not throwing away a almost grunteed 300k when they move in if they lose. They need to play some and build chips earlier in tourney. This is an extreme case where folding or maybe calling are better plays imo.

[amoeba]

you also have to realize that neither player might get a hand better than their current one for a long time.

and with big blinds already at 1/25 of their stack, I'm not sure they can wait it out.

[Smoothcall]

Why can't i. i know he doesn't get called very often but when he does he's big dog or little dog and imo not worth the risk of all the money still on the line.

[Smoothcall]

Who cares if its the best hand they see for long time. If the blinds are gonna hurt them(lol) while they both have 2.5 million what u think is going to happen to dewey with 800k. Don't worry about Paul Phillips and Gus Hansen something tells me they won't get blinded out of the tournament lol.

[amoeba]

they don't get blinded out because of steals. and unfortunately if you play as tight as you propose, you will get stolen quite a bit.

[Smoothcall]

Yes sometimes this steal thing works but sometimes it busts them out of tournies. I will be headup locked up 2nd with plenty enough chips to still win the tournament most of the time. To me that is better than all or nothing on coin flip or huge dog 3 handed and givinng up an almost garunteed 300k with shot at 800k more. but to each his own. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Gus would not call imo with those hands and no hand that Paul could dominate. Look at the dilema he had with the 1010's he said to himself many times how can i make this call. If he had a dilema with 1010's do you really think he would call k high. He's not stupid he gambles but wouldn't do that especially with dewey so low. I'm sure Gus would like someome to give him extra 300k or whatever it was for 2nd as opposed to 3rd. Headup after tomko was out he might but not before.

As far as Paul making the better play i agree for same reasons. Hansen's call was definately worse.

Oddly enough i think you are right about laying it down. noone mentions that but could be better than calling because of the fact that you have to play it weak postflop. Why not just toss and move on. Don't let Gus know cause then he would really up the pressure but Paul would still have the chip lead. Yes time for a hellmuthian laydown.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vince,

The problem is that laying it down to a Gus Hansen raise on the button with almost any 2 cards would be EXTREMELY weak. There are 2 issues I can see here.

1) Gus reads Paul for a resteal and will call all-in with less than premium hands. In this case, AJ and KQ qualify as hands Gus would be calling with. 2) Gus reads Paul to have a better-than-average hand, in which case he should be folding his TT. In either case, Paul is right to push with AQ. He's up a creek against AA/KK/QQ/AK, but if you believe Gus has that, then that's serious monsters under the bed.

Paul put maximum pressure on Gus and he decided to call with TT. I don't like the call nearly as much as I like Paul pushing here. I'd hesitate to call either of these a mistake, but since you point out that Gus definetly made a mistake, then it's really hard to say Paul did here.

[Smoothcall]

I explained already that he would not call so thats not an issue. And why if believe he has AA's,KK's,QQ's, or Ak there are monsters under my bed. My bad i wasn't aware that Gus is not allowed to get dealt those. And i'm sick and tired of people saying Gus will raise any 2 cards. Sure he has at times doesn't mean he will do everytime especially with Paul on his left coming over him often with big stack. So on average i would eliminate the worst of the worst. And point is the times Gus does what does wake up with big hand's he crushes you. Most of the time paul's play will work but not worth the major downside that could happen. And you can call it weak i'll call it smart. I don't play to show how big my sack is i play to make money.

Paul made a mistake if he's playing tournaments to maximize his profit.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
I explained already that he would not call so thats not an issue. And why if believe he has AA's,KK's,QQ's, or Ak there are monsters under my bed. My bad i wasn't aware that Gus is not allowed to get dealt those. And i'm sick and tired of people saying Gus will raise any 2 cards. Sure he has at times doesn't mean he will do everytime especially with Paul on his left coming over him often with big stack. So on average i would eliminate the worst of the worst. And point is the times Gus does what does wake up with big hand's he crushes you. Most of the time paul's play will work but not worth the major downside that could happen. And you can call it weak i'll call it smart. I don't play to show how big my sack is i play to make money.


[/ QUOTE ]

Vince,

If you think Paul shouldn't be playing AQ here in this spot, then it IS correct for Gus to be raising with any 2 cards here.

You're tired of people saying that Gus is raising with any 2 cards, but that's the reality of the situation. He's Gus Hansen. If Howard Lederer or Dan Harrington were to make that raise, you'd bet that Paul Phillips would be more hesitant to make that all-in re-raise.

As it is, you're assuming that Gus is raising with a premium hand and will only fold to a reraise if it's not. Obviously that was wrong as Gus called with TT, but that also showed me that Gus was thinking that Paul might be on a resteal.

And why would you eliminate the worst of the worst possibilties? Those are exactly the hands I'd be raising with, because it's so easy to get away from it if re-raised.

It really doesn't sound like you thought things through. You bring up a point, people bring up a counterpoint, and you rehash the same old point.

[Smoothcall]

but gus wouldn't know he is throwing the Aq away. So the reality is he doesn't raise every single time. My guess is he would throw 27 off away and others sometimes reducing his combination of cards. not saying he wouldn't raise with them sometimes just not all the time especially with Paul playing back at him and the fact that dewey is low that i would guess he wouldn't be carried away on the button there.

oddly enough i think i like the move in better against a harrington or lederer cause they would be smart enough to lay 1010's down.

now when you say i'm assuming Gus has a premium hand means either you don't read well or just misquoting me to fit your aregument. On Gus hand requierments to call i didn't say just premium hands. I said only hands he will call with have Aq either a big dog or a small dog. 1010's would fit that criteria.

Yes raising with 27 off would be a brilliant play in that situation lol. you are the solid middle stack with a the chip leader whose willing to tangle and knows what your up to in sb. Then lets not forget about dewey. Alot give the description of him being weak and tight. maybe sometimes he plays that way when the situation calls for it like if they were for handed with a guy shorter than him. Why, cause he knows what he is doing. Imo dewey is the best player at the table. He doesn't get the press but look at his credetials. but now that he's the shortstack he will change gears. And is totally aware of what gus is doing. So he will start moving in. in no more than a couple times he would have more chips than you. Way to pump up the shortstack lol and make you the shortstack.

How did i think things through this time. you don't bring up counter points you just misquote and state unrealistic things people might do to fit your arguement so you can you win lol. If you made a good point i would say so. I rehash cause i need too. Cause your not reading correctly or just convenietely remember things incorrectly. Just trying to help your game. but if i'm gonna help you at least stop misquoting me. I hate rehashing /images/graemlins/frown.gif hope this helps /images/graemlins/smile.gif. oh and by the way stop calling me vince.

[lastchance]

Dewey is a very good, no doubt about that. He just stole hand after hand heads-up.

But I really like PP's play, because Gus Hansen can and will raise with anything. If someone like Howard Lederer raises here, the chances are that much higher he could be up against a monster. Also, Howard Lederer isn't calling with hands PP has dominated, Gus Hansen is. That's sheer Gus Hansen. You know you can't lay this down to Gus Hansen. He's a raiser. If you raised, Vince, I bet PP would just call, or maybe make a monster laydown (yeah, at this level it's a monster laydown). But because it's Gus Hansen, who can and will raise with 72o (not all the time, just some of it), you have to play back at him. You sure as hell don't want to play the flop weak against him, especially when you miss. You're also out of position against the LAG, which let's face it, sucks.

You fail to recognize how much of a LAG Gus Hansen is. That's how he wins money. He just keeps pounding at you, like many top players.

He'll raise when he gets dealt junk 20-25% of the time, at least I think, and of course, almost 100% of the time with anything good or great, cause you are paying him off. But when he comes at you with nothing, you've got to resteal, because that's how the guy loses chips, getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar. That's the only reason he isn't the best player in poker right now. If he didn't get caught with his hand in the cookie jar, imagine how much money the LAG would win on sheer steals.

The only hands that have AQ beat are premium hands (well, with the exception of junk pairs, and if he's calling with those, you've got him on a whole bunch of crap (like A8)). At this stage, even 99 is a premium hand. If AK, KK, QQ, and AA (the only hands AQ is up against it) are not premium hands, then what are?

While Harrington and Lederer can and will lay down TT, there is no way that Harrington and Lederer fold more often than Gus Hansen does when PP comes back over the top of a button raise in this particular situation. Harrington and Lederer may down TT, but they're also not raising with the hands Gus Hansen is, which means they're calling a lot more frequently after the raise than Gus is. For every hand Harrington and Lederer lay down after the all-in raise that Gus Calls with, they lay down 30-40 hands instead of making a Gus Hansen special.

It is quite obvious that against GUS HANSEN (not Harrington, not Lederer), PP can and should raise with AQ all-in almost 100% of the time here.

Now I will say this.

GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!
GUS HANSEN IS A LAG!

What Gus Hansen will raise with, not what he should raise with, is any 2 cards.
Gus Hansen will raise with any 2 cards.
You must play back against Gus Hansen.
Dewey knows this, Howard knows this now, PP knows this. Everyone in the world knows these points I have brought up. Gus Hansen's biggest weakness is preflop LAGgyness, if you adapt correctly to it. Paul Phillips adapted very, very well to Gus Hansen's style of play in this tournament, and this AQ all-in is the perfect example of why.

What you would do in this situation says nothing about Gus Hansen's play. All good players do not think alike.

[Smoothcall]

See other posts. Sorry to tired to rehash again. You say its clearly obvious. Sklansky says all in wasn't the right play given the circumstances. He said It was close though. And i agree close. So i guess not everybody sees it so clearly obvious like you do. At least not obvious in the way you see it.

Your points are good we already know all that though. Just comes down to is it right to do at this moment or wait til dewey's gone. The difference between 2nd and 3rd make is makes the stadard right play wrong.

And stop calling me Vince. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[lastchance]

Yeah, it's all math at this point. We've looked at all the factors going into this hand already, which hopefully improves my play. Two things, where did Sklansky say the call was correct, and didn't West do the math and come up that given Gus's crazy range of hands, PP should go all-in here?

Right now, it's not given Dewey Tomko's going to bust. If he wakes up with a hand or gets lucky, he's right back in it. One double-up, and Dewey Tomko's right back in it.

Smoothcall, there are some situations which it is obviously correct for Paul Phillips to risk his entire stack in the hope of busting Gus Hansen and going for first or third. There are also obviously some marginal situations where Paul Phillips is better off folding or calling compared to going all-in where he should be going in if it was winner-take-all.

[Smoothcall]

Think it was in a post sklansky started in the middle of all these threads called one more reason to just call i think.

Yes according to the math they said PP play was correct and Gus's call was incorrect. but sklansky said because of the big difference in money fom 3rd to 2nd calling is the best play. Something like that. Don't want to misquote him.

Yeah dewey could be back in it. but if pp is smart that even if he did double it would be more likely against Gus as gus raises will probabbly get more push in's from Tomko. So pp stack would stay somewhat same and gus would be lowered to only 1.5 million around same as Tomko.

[lastchance]

Did you read Sklansky's post in that thread?

I seriously doubt the situation Sklansky posted pertains to this situation, where both these players are relatively comfortable.

[ QUOTE ]

Not only do slightly negative EV plays become positive EV when the third stack is short, negative EV plays that REMAIN negative might still be right if chances of finishing second (at the expense of finishing first) and second place money (but not third) can change your life. By this criteria Vince's call with AQ is probably the right play.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I really wouldn't like trying to wait for Gus Hansen to get tangled with Dewey Tomko. They would both steal a lot of blinds from me, as I'm never playing back at them.

[Smoothcall]

Reletively comfortable. Dewey's got 800k at 50-100k blinds against 2 guys with 2.8 annd 2.3 million.

And you really think its gonna take that long for dewey to double up or be gone when according to you he's raising every single time. Gus is almost getting right odds to call with anything already after he rasies if dewey moved in. If you think paul will get blinded out or even dented with 2.8 million here you are really reaching. Gonna be 2 or 3 rounds tops.

[jedi]

Vince, I'll try to take this piece by piece.

[ QUOTE ]
but gus wouldn't know he is throwing the Aq away. So the reality is he doesn't raise every single time. My guess is he would throw 27 off away and others sometimes reducing his combination of cards. not saying he wouldn't raise with them sometimes just not all the time especially with Paul playing back at him and the fact that dewey is low that i would guess he wouldn't be carried away on the button there.


[/ QUOTE ]

WRONG. Gus is not some passive Party Poker fish. He's a world class player and to NOT be stealing blinds at this stage of the game would be totally wrong. He just wounldn't be raising "sometimes," he'd be raising MOST of the time in this spot.

[ QUOTE ]


now when you say i'm assuming Gus has a premium hand means either you don't read well or just misquoting me to fit your aregument. On Gus hand requierments to call i didn't say just premium hands. I said only hands he will call with have Aq either a big dog or a small dog. 1010's would fit that criteria.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you already said that Gus made a big mistake in calling TT. So which is it?

[ QUOTE ]

Yes raising with 27 off would be a brilliant play in that situation lol. you are the solid middle stack with a the chip leader whose willing to tangle and knows what your up to in sb. Then lets not forget about dewey. Alot give the description of him being weak and tight. maybe sometimes he plays that way when the situation calls for it like if they were for handed with a guy shorter than him.


[/ QUOTE ]

And if this situation calls for playing tight and not tangling with the big stacks like you said in your original post, then Gus should take advantage of this. Paul knows this.

[ QUOTE ]


How did i think things through this time. you don't bring up counter points you just misquote and state unrealistic things people might do to fit your arguement so you can you win lol. If you made a good point i would say so. I rehash cause i need too. Cause your not reading correctly or just convenietely remember things incorrectly. Just trying to help your game. but if i'm gonna help you at least stop misquoting me. I hate rehashing /images/graemlins/frown.gif hope this helps /images/graemlins/smile.gif. oh and by the way stop calling me vince.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly Vince, you're thinking through this like a weak-tight player. That's what's going on. YOU seem to be the one thinking that people will do unrealistic things here. Start listening to the other posters and realize that your view of Gus just isn't that realistic.

[lastchance]

When did I say Dewey's raising almost all the time here? He's an aggressive player, as almost every good player is, but he's not Gus Hansen. Dewey will be aggressive, but selectively aggressive, and while Gus raises a lot, he is not a fish. He will not call with total crap. TT may not be great, but it's nothing compared to what we've all seen. Oh, and now after reading, I get your point. But remember, Dewey has no folding equity if he goes over the top, unlike PP, which makes him a bit more timid.

[fnurt]

If Dewey doubles through Gus, what is the chip situation?

If Dewey doubles through Paul, what is the chip situation?

Why do you assume that both of these things are so unlikely? You talk as though it would take a miracle for Dewey to get back in this tournament, when it would require exactly one hand.

[Smoothcall]

I'll take one at a time in order of my quotes you responded too. I'm getting tired f this cause there's no reward as you won't apologize for being wrong just like i will prove once again.

1) So i say the reality is he doesn't raise every single time. You answer and say i'm wrong cause you think he will raise most of the time. Ok do you see that when you say i'm wrong that when i say the reality is he doesn't raise every single time your response is he will raise most of the time. I'm sorry is most of the time every single time. Throw me a bone here and at least agree i'm correct here not you or i won't respond anymore as it meanns discussing things with you would be futile cause you act like a child and won't admit your wrong.

2)As i stated many times before it was a mistake to call with 1010's. Even your drone's have proven by math. I don't see how a contradicted myself. Saying he would call with 1010's doesn't i think he's right to call just means i think he would. And its a hand t hat is ahead of Aq off. Your not comprehending my statements well if you think i contradicted myself.

3)Again your not coprehending well. I didn't say the situation calls for dewey to weak and tight now. I said when the situation calls for it dewey would do it. I said for example if they were 4 handed and another guy was shorter than dewey. Just the opposite It is time for dewey to play and would have had Gus and Paul given him the chance.


In closing you are clearly proven wrong here as i have shown. If you don't see it its only cause you don't wan't to see it. Lets see if you are man enough to admit when you are wrong. Especially saying that i'm wrong in saying Gus wonn't raise every single time. When you corraberate me as best you could hope to repy with is Gus will raise most of the time which isn't every single time. Let's see if you admit this. Ok time for you to start misquoting again all yours. Don't dodge the question either if you do your gutless.

p.s. You think Gus is a world class player. See how fame and a t.v. camera can make people think. I was told by many dealers at bellagio he went through most of that money he won in those wpt's up on the top deck games. This is speculation a little but to say he's world class is just your opinion to say the least.

And should i start calling you Antonio. Since you insist on calinng me Vince i thought maybe i should make one up for you. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Smoothcall]

Yes, but if PP plays smart it will be against Gus whether he doubles or not. So he would either be headup almost even in chips against Gus. Or Have 2.8 milion to 1.5 and 1.6 or 1.7 million for gus and Tomko respectively. These choice semm better to me then possibly going out 3rd and losing a almost garunteed 300k for moving into 2nd if played smart on a coin flip or big dog situation but that's just me.

[Smoothcall]

The way i said that came out sounding wrong. Didn't mean to say dewey was gonna be raisin every time if forgot to put Gus in front of that line. So Dewey would be forced to take a stand and doesn't have enough to get Gus to lay down so there would be a confrontation soon.

Thanks for finally seeing one of my points and i'm not being sarcastic. I've given many good one's imo and you the first to give me any recognition i appreciate it. As i've spent more time then i should have with this thread. not looking for a war i like to talk poker and debate. but throw me a bone once in awhile otherwise we will get nowhere. You made some good points as well.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but if PP plays smart it will be against Gus whether he doubles or not. So he would either be headup almost even in chips against Gus. Or Have 2.8 milion to 1.5 and 1.6 or 1.7 million for gus and Tomko respectively. These choice semm better to me then possibly going out 3rd and losing a almost garunteed 300k for moving into 2nd if played smart on a coin flip or big dog situation but that's just me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain to me what it means for Paul to play 'smart', and why Gus cannot play just as smart.

I think clicking the 'sit out' button in a 3-handed situation is a lot tougher than you assume. The other guys are willing to gamble, and if you're not then they're just going to take pot after pot from you. You've got to be willing to play poker.

The entire advantage of Paul having the big stack is that he can bully Gus in situations just like this hand.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]

1) So i say the reality is he doesn't raise every single time. You answer and say i'm wrong cause you think he will raise most of the time. Ok do you see that when you say i'm wrong that when i say the reality is he doesn't raise every single time your response is he will raise most of the time. I'm sorry is most of the time every single time. Throw me a bone here and at least agree i'm correct here not you or i won't respond anymore as it meanns discussing things with you would be futile cause you act like a child and won't admit your wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, he doesn't raise EVERY time, just as I'm right that he'll raise MOST of the time. We can agree on this. The problem is that my conclusion is still right. Gus will still raise with any 2 cards MOST of the time. To assume that he'll have a premium hand is just nonsense.

[ QUOTE ]

2)As i stated many times before it was a mistake to call with 1010's. Even your drone's have proven by math. I don't see how a contradicted myself. Saying he would call with 1010's doesn't i think he's right to call just means i think he would. And its a hand t hat is ahead of Aq off. Your not comprehending my statements well if you think i contradicted myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's wrong to call with TT, then why is Paul wrong to be pushing here? He's up against a known maniac who shouldn't be calling with many hands that Paul is a small dog to. That's what's missing from your math.

[ QUOTE ]

3)Again your not coprehending well. I didn't say the situation calls for dewey to weak and tight now. I said when the situation calls for it dewey would do it. I said for example if they were 4 handed and another guy was shorter than dewey. Just the opposite It is time for dewey to play and would have had Gus and Paul given him the chance.


[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough, but perhaps you're the one that's not comprehending well. By pushing in, Paul limits Dewey's ability to play. The only thing Dewey can do is call an all-in himself, and in this situation it's not going to accomplish anything. In Dewey's spot, he needs a lot of folding equity, something that isn't happening since Paul's already all-in.

[ QUOTE ]

In closing you are clearly proven wrong here as i have shown. If you don't see it its only cause you don't wan't to see it. Lets see if you are man enough to admit when you are wrong. Especially saying that i'm wrong in saying Gus wonn't raise every single time. When you corraberate me as best you could hope to repy with is Gus will raise most of the time which isn't every single time. Let's see if you admit this. Ok time for you to start misquoting again all yours. Don't dodge the question either if you do your gutless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vince, you've been dodging many more questions here. The only thing I've been proven "wrong" on is that you said he didn't raise EVERY time, and I responded that he'd raise MOST of the time. We agree that he'll raise most of the time, yet you still think Paul shouldn't move it? This is ridiculous.

[ QUOTE ]

p.s. You think Gus is a world class player. See how fame and a t.v. camera can make people think. I was told by many dealers at bellagio he went through most of that money he won in those wpt's up on the top deck games. This is speculation a little but to say he's world class is just your opinion to say the least.

[/ QUOTE ]

What relevance does this statement have? Do I have to change my statement to reflect that I think Gus is a world class TOURNAMENT player? Geez.

[ QUOTE ]

And should i start calling you Antonio. Since you insist on calinng me Vince i thought maybe i should make one up for you. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, my name isn't Antonio. But you've already shown yourself to be Vince.

[fnurt]

Maybe he is Vince, but really he's more like Desdia, in that these threads keep ending up with him vs. the rest of the forum, and we keep repeating ourselves thinking he will see the light.

More realistically, we should probably be happy that 99% of the forum has reached a consensus on these hands and move on.

[Smoothcall]

1) At least you finally admit you were wrong. First steps are important. I never said you were wrong about him raising most of the time. You threw that in to make it sound like were both wrong when it was just you that was wrong. What is wrong with your comprehension skills for the millionth time i never assumed he had a premium hand. Again you are wrong and misquoted me. Maybe when you write back you'll say your right but i'm right too cause there's no reason to assume that lol.

2)Paul's push is wrong because of the big difference in prize money from 3rd to 2nd. How many times do i have to repeat myself. You really didn't know my stand through all this posting you are lost no offensebut keep up.

3)Whose not comprehending. You said if Dewey's gonna play weak tight its right for Gus to attack him. Then i prove he won't play weak tight and you don't change your arguement about Gus raising. I personally think its a mistake for Gus to be raising here with nothing cause Dewey's coming over the top with many at this point and will have a good chance of doubling up or forcing Gus to fold. You see it would be better to let Paul take him on cuase either tomko will be gone or double up. but notice if he doubles through PP Gus still has more chips then him then its time to play again or dewey busts out pass go colect 300k and still have plenty of chips to still comeback and win the tourney. but that just isn't Gus, but is the smarter play. Don't understand why you think i am having trouble comprehending. Or are just saying that cause i said it to you. You need a reason to say it. And to respond to Paul pushing on Tomko firstly how could this ever happen since Gus will already have raised oops you forgot about that. but lets say Gus did throw away. If Paul just set him in everytime Dewey will look for anything half decent and go for it. What other choice does he have. Is that smart poker for paul to just move in everytime and give the short stack a chance to double up against a random hand.

4)I have not dodged one question you have asked. Have never misquoted you. never said you were wrong when you were right. You have done all these things to me though. And if your gonna show something Vince dodged take that up with him. Your dealing with Smoothcall. Care to wager whether i am him or not. Have offered others they chickened out now your turn to chicken out. Just say your sorry for calling me Vince, all the you are wrongs, and all the misquotes and i'll let you off the hook.

5)It's ok for you to think whatever you want about Gus Hansen and whether you think he's a world class tournament or live game player. Just be careful not to state it as fact that he's a world class anything and using that info to support your argument because it is unproven.

[Smoothcall]

Care to wager.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Care to wager.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

Have a nice day.

[Smoothcall]

Playing smart for PP would be to not get into any major confrontations with Gus. And allow Gus and his usual button raise to get into confrontation with Tomko. Gus could and should be smart and keep throwing his button away as hopefully PP takes him out if not and Tomko doubles up Gus still had more chips then him although closer now then he could go back to his usual game if that happened. notice if Gus plays that cheese on the button Tomko will have a confrontation and will have the best hand most likely and if he wins will put Gus on the shortstack. Do you agree it better for Gus to let paul take him on unless Gus gets a hand.

Yeah bullying Gus Hansen is gonna work lol great idea.

[Smoothcall]

That's what i thought so keep it closed if your to gutless to back it up.

Have a nice day! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
1) At least you finally admit you were wrong. First steps are important. I never said you were wrong about him raising most of the time. You threw that in to make it sound like were both wrong when it was just you that was wrong. What is wrong with your comprehension skills for the millionth time i never assumed he had a premium hand. Again you are wrong and misquoted me. Maybe when you write back you'll say your right but i'm right too cause there's no reason to assume that lol.


[/ QUOTE ]

Geez, all right. You said that Paul would be a small to big dog when called. You then said that Gus was wrong to call with TT, meaning that Paul would only be behind to a premium hand when called. Sheesh. Sorry for reading between the lines there. Apparantely you can't even comprehend what your words mean.

[ QUOTE ]

2)Paul's push is wrong because of the big difference in prize money from 3rd to 2nd. How many times do i have to repeat myself. You really didn't know my stand through all this posting you are lost no offensebut keep up.


[/ QUOTE ]
Again, this point has already been ruled to be irrelevant. These people are playing for 1st place, not looking to survive to 2nd.

[ QUOTE ]

3)Whose not comprehending. You said if Dewey's gonna play weak tight its right for Gus to attack him. Then i prove he won't play weak tight and you don't change your arguement about Gus raising.

[/ QUOTE ]
What's the argument about Gus raising here? Gus is Gus. He'll raise with almost any 2 cards here. Whether Dewey plays back at him or not is completely irrelevant. If he does, then Gus can fold his crap hand or call with a live hand since he's playing against the small stack as you say. This whole conversation has never been about Gus. Move on.

[ QUOTE ]

I personally think its a mistake for Gus to be raising here with nothing cause Dewey's coming over the top with many at this point and will have a good chance of doubling up or forcing Gus to fold.


[/ QUOTE ]
So are you saying to attack the small stack, or not?

[ QUOTE ]

4)I have not dodged one question you have asked. Have never misquoted you. never said you were wrong when you were right. You have done all these things to me though. And if your gonna show something Vince dodged take that up with him. Your dealing with Smoothcall. Care to wager whether i am him or not. Have offered others they chickened out now your turn to chicken out. Just say your sorry for calling me Vince, all the you are wrongs, and all the misquotes and i'll let you off the hook.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever Vince. Let's just say that you 2 have never been seen in the same place at the same time.

[ QUOTE ]

5)It's ok for you to think whatever you want about Gus Hansen and whether you think he's a world class tournament or live game player. Just be careful not to state it as fact that he's a world class anything and using that info to support your argument because it is unproven.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes, this is just so wrong on so many levels. Even Desdia "Hey, I'm only results oriented" knows that Gus is world class. Fine, don't listen to my opinion. Listen to everyone else's opinion.

[Smoothcall]

I'm tired of correcting you of all your misquotes you did some more. Couldn't you at least go onne reply without a misquote. It's becoming comical.

1)Please don't read between the lines especially when you don't know how to read. ONE MORE TIME. Just because i think he makes a mistake calling with 1010's doesn't mean he wouldn't call with them(he did remember). I said he would be behind when called period. I didn't say only to a premium hand. I said either big dog or a little dog if called. not just little dog as you say. I'm glad you can comprehend my words that i can't but let me stick to telling you what i mean as it might confuse us if you tell me what i mean.

2)Maybe you ruled them irrelevant doesn't mean they were irrelevant. When your actually playing for that extra 300k and 825k difference it might matter a little. Do you really think the thought never crossed Gus's mind when deciding to call PP's all in or not about going out 3rd and missing out on that money cmon. Why do you think he said how could i call this.

3)You made a statement saying it was right for Gus to raise Tomko's blind cause he was playing tight. I showed how this wouldn't be the case of him playing tight and that i think Gus should not be attacking his blind. It is not irrelevant what Tomko will do. If he was gonna still play tight then it could be correct for Gus to raise.

4)So answer is since Tomko will speed up let PP play him instead of Gus being in there with a substandard hand while Tomko's ready to move chip is a mistake.

5)Another lie Antonio.

6)Key words you use here are opinion. A you qualified to rate world class players. How would you know if he's world class. Cause he usually gets his money in with the worst of it then wins runouts. Just curious as to your criteria.

[lastchance]

While PP should be folding marginal situations because of the prize structure, he cannot fold AA here, correct? He cannot fold KK here, correct, even if PP was the initial raiser and Gus was the one going all-in to attack?

Why? Because the Chip EV he gains with these hands is amazingly good. While he does not want to get involved here in marginal situations because Dewey gains $EV, with AA and KK, the $EV he is taking AWAY from Gus Hansen is far greater than the $EV is losing to Dewey Tomko.

To me, this is one situation that Paul Phillips loves to have. You get AQ, Gus Hansen raises in front of you. Right now, Gus Hansen is begging you to take this down.

It is obvious to me that this situation is way too good for Paul Phillips to pass up. You can't fold, and all-in is worth a lot in Chip EV and quite a bit in $EV (remember, it's Gus Hansen). To call here, you need a very strong read on Gus Hansen's hand, and you've got to be able to milk quite a few chips when you win, and be able to bluff him out if you fold. Out of Position, I just don't think you can play well enough postflop to give up this incredibly good opprotunity to resteal a pretty large pot almost automatically. He's gaining about $400k in Chip EV, 1/5th of his stack.

Let me say a few things and see if you agree with them (trying to get a handle on this):

1. If given the option of move-in or fold, Paul Phillips should move in with AA, KK, QQ, AK, JJ, AQ, TT, AJ, and 99. (take it one hand at a time)

2. Playing AQ out of position is not an ideal spot against Gus Hansen.


[ QUOTE ]

Oddly enough i think you are right about laying it down. noone mentions that but could be better than calling because of the fact that you have to play it weak postflop. Why not just toss and move on. Don't let Gus know cause then he would really up the pressure but Paul would still have the chip lead. Yes time for a hellmuthian laydown.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you realize this.

3. Gus Hansen can raise with any two cards some of the time.

4. Paul Phillips can get Gus Hansen to lay down almost 80% of his hands after a Gus Hansen button raise by going all-in.

5. If Dewey Tomko moves in on the button here, then Paul Phillips (he's BB) should call 100% of the time with AQ.

6. Folding AQ 3-handed is incredibly tight unless you have a very strong read you're beat. (against Gus Hansen, this is near impossible)

7. Gus Hansen's original raise with TT was better than folding in this situation.

8. Paul Phillips should not normally laydown AQ preflop if Gus Hansen were to fold. (move in is nice, limp to get Tomko to try to steal is nice as well)

Personally, as Dewey Tomko, if both Paul Phillips or Gus Hansen were willing to throw their hands away here without a raise from me (hell, WITH a raise from me), I would love it about as much as having them both all-in here.

The fact that you are THINKING about folding AQ to Gus Hansen 3-handed shows incredible weak-tightness.

Again, the Chip and $EV coming from all the good things about moving with AQ here far outweigh the $EV you lose if you get busted. You should not fold AA just to move up, and folding AQ here is like those people who are folding AA to move up, though not as bad on degree, but still, against Gus, pretty damn bad.

You have convinced me to account for all Prize EV, and the goodness of folding. But the goodness of making Gus Hansen lay down his steals is worth a helluva lot more.

Again, Paul Phillips play here is exactly what one should do facing this raise from Gus Hansen. This time, Gus had a hand (not a great one, but a very good one).

[fnurt]

This is brilliant. If you are Gus, sit back and let Paul fight it out with Dewey. If you are Paul, sit back and let Gus fight it out with Dewey. Poker is so simple when you put it like that.

[Smoothcall]

Yes, your right. You finally got something right. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Did you care to elaborate or when not know how to answer just stand aside and snicker like you know something when you don't. Show me why this wouldn't work. Think you know your wrong now but would rather eat dirt than admit it.

[lastchance]

You really don't get why this wouldn't work? It should be quite obvious...

Hand 1:
Gus Folds
PP Folds
Dewey takes pot

Hand 2:
PP Folds.
Dewey Raises.
Gus Folds.
Dewey takes pot.

Hand 3:
Dewey raises.
Gus Folds.
PP Folds.
Dewey takes pot.

If either of them playing tight enough to fold TT and AQ to Dewey Tomko, Dewey would have picked this up already and ran over the table. Hell, Gus and PP wouldn't even be at the final table if they played this tight.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, your right. You finally got something right. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Did you care to elaborate or when not know how to answer just stand aside and snicker like you know something when you don't. Show me why this wouldn't work. Think you know your wrong now but would rather eat dirt than admit it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it would work perfectly. Even if both of them tried it, I'm sure it would work for both of them.

Your tone is extremely inappropriate, by the way. Lose the juvenile taunting.

[Smoothcall]

Lol my tone. You are the one with the sarcastic tone throughout the threads like i don't know what i'm talking about yet you've failed to prove anything i'm saying is wrong. You and your drone's constantly misquote me, call me a liar, say i dodge questions, call me vince. All the while all i do is stick to facts annd prove you wrong when you make false accusations. We could have good discussion if you would let the anger and ego go. but it you keep making false accusations i will defend myself for awhile then get tired of lack of substance in your posts and put you on ignore. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[lastchance]

Ok, now mind answering the point, which is that if you play weak-tight, you should be completely run over?

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
call me a liar, say i dodge questions, call me vince. All the while all i do is stick to facts annd prove you wrong when you make false accusations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, you haven't proven ANYONE wrong yet. You still have yet to state why Paul shouldn't move in with AQ. You say that he's a big dog (or a small one when called) but you haven't taken into account that it's GUS HANSEN he's playing against, who will raise with many hands and fold them pre-flop when played back against.

[Smoothcall]

Lol. Once again making false accusations. Are you and all your drone's the same person. As you all have comprehension problems. Maybe your all Paul Phillips sock puppets. i never said nobody play against Dewey. I said one take him one and let the other stand aside. Prefferably Gus would be wiser to step aside a s he has less chips than Paul and had Paul on his left. Where in the world did i ever say either one of them should throw Aq or 1010 away if Dewy went all in. And when i say stand aside about Gus I don't mean to not play good hands against dewey. I mean raising with his 39 offs on the button. He can't afford to be careless and play cheese here cause if paul doesn't raise him dewey probably will as he's running out of time. And be forced into muckinng and pumping dewey up or forced to call with cheese and really get dewey back in not only hunt for 2nd but 1st as well. And if Dewey did double up if through Gus would make Gus short stack but if threw paul Gus would still be ahead of him. You show me where i said for either player to fold Aq or 1010 to a dewey all in. If you can't find i expect yet another apology for yet another lie and misquote.

[Smoothcall]

Do you speak our native language. I did take that into account but the difference between 2nd and 3rd is too great to ignore here to move in. Is this the first time i taught you this. C'mon keep up starting to get bore me.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you speak our native language. I did take that into account but the difference between 2nd and 3rd is too great to ignore here to move in. Is this the first time i taught you this. C'mon keep up starting to get bore me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not the one speaking the language here. Gus and Paul are playing for 1st, not 2nd. This has already been shown to be irrelvant. Just because your OPINION doesn't think so, doesn't make it true. Keep up, you're the one boring all of us.

[Smoothcall]

Ok i didn't answer cause it was absurd to say they would both fold so did feel it warrated a response. but to answer your question you have 2.3 million in chips if your Gus. by the time they figured out what you were doing dewey will be gone or doubled inn a few orbits. And remember they might give you walk or 2 if have nothing especilly against GUS HANSEN blind.

Howbout answering me now yours was easy how bout mine. Oh little tougher right. Thats cause its right. If you have forgotten the question i just wrote it to you or your drone buddy about right for Gus to give up the button junk and let PP play him so dewey can't double threw gus and make gus the short stack.

[Smoothcall]

ok answer me this if 2nd didn't matter why did Gus have dilema calling. Oh good question Smoothcall. because you sure as heck know gus is beating him into the pot if there headsup. So why the dilema. Cause he knows he's risking going out 3rd on a coinflip at best and losing out on extremely good chance of getting 300k and still good chance to win the tourney if he folds. So don't tell me money between 2nd and 3rd isnot an issue. Answer me why Gus doesn't call quickly if it didn't matter. And he in fact said how could i make this call. Where headup its a no brainer. So the money is a factor correct. Just cause in your dream world 300k is irrelevant we live in the real world. It h as never proven tobe irrelevant. In fact i just proved it was relevant. Will you admit this or will you put another twist on it.

[lastchance]

Well, make all of what you are saying clear. Your typing is only slightly easier to read than my handwriting...

[ QUOTE ]
And remember they might give you walk or 2 if have nothing especilly against GUS HANSEN blind.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you saying here? That they're going to fold to you a few times? Very rarely this happens, but I suppose it happens once or twice until they pick up you aren't playing hands...

The problem with not playing back, even in this situation, is that Dewey Tomko and Gus Hansen aren't going to be playing each other anymore, they're playing you now, because they can take your blinds. I would much rather attack a weak-tight big stack than a dangerous short one, and I'm sure that almost everyone on this forum agrees here.

BTW, to your other point, about the math, didn't West calculate all of the math, and say that, even given favorable conditions, Paul Phillips should move-in rather than fold? You yourself said folding was better than calling, and here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1201584&page=3&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1) it seems pretty clear that the equity of moving in is worth the prize jump from 3rd to 2nd.

It comes down to this. Give us a mathematical model which shows that PP shouldn't move in here. Until then, I'm inclined to side with West's model, showing that PP gains $10k in Prize EV.

And I did the math on folding:
.47 chance of PP win.
.39 chance of GH win.
.14 chance of BT win.

.39 * (.47 / (.47 + .14)) + .14 * (.47 / (.39 + .47) = .37 chance of 2nd place.
.47 * 825 + .37 * 275 = $489,500 EV

No way in hell Paul Phillips should fold to Gus Hansen here. No way in hell.

If you want to make assumptions like "the Prize EV of jumping from 3rd to 2nd is too much to move in" QUANTIFY it. We've quantified our argument.

Also, you're right. Dewey Tomko and Gus Hansen might already get tangled up after a few hands... But these are good players, and I really feel match between these guys will drag on, and all the while, your blinds are being lost.

Of course, eventually, you can use this to your advantage by being aggressive and stealing blinds of your own, but as a long term strategy, your opponents are good enough to keep a match going, and they will attack your blind if you are being weak. And eventually, you are getting a very good stack blinded off.

Paul Phillips is better with the stack he has now compared to having an automatic second. Gus Hansen is better off with the stack he has now than an automatic second. Tomko only gained $50k for an automatic second over his stack, before they go all-in.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
ok answer me this if 2nd didn't matter why did Gus have dilema calling. Oh good question Smoothcall. because you sure as heck know gus is beating him into the pot if there headsup. So why the dilema. Cause he knows he's risking going out 3rd on a coinflip at best and losing out on extremely good chance of getting 300k and still good chance to win the tourney if he folds. So don't tell me money between 2nd and 3rd isnot an issue. Answer me why Gus doesn't call quickly if it didn't matter. And he in fact said how could i make this call. Where headup its a no brainer. So the money is a factor correct. Just cause in your dream world 300k is irrelevant we live in the real world. It h as never proven tobe irrelevant. In fact i just proved it was relevant. Will you admit this or will you put another twist on it.

[/ QUOTE ]

While what you state is true, there's a lot more to consider for Gus than there was for Paul. Gus is facing an ALL-IN RE-RAISE. Yes, I'm emphasizing that. He knows that his near-automatic button raise has been attacked and now his advantage of position has been completely nullified. He can only let the math play the game now.

The money IS irrelevant to them and in this context. If I were sitting there in the final 3, I'd surely be considering folding TT in Gus' shoes. The 300K means a lot to me. To them, winning the tournament means more. That's why it's irrelevant. You still didn't prove anything.

[Smoothcall]

1)yes that's what i'm saying. And i didn't say don't play anything. I said the junk on the button throw it away. Why do you have so much trouble following. Cause it does't fit your argument.

2)live in reality please. Are you really gonna say they(pp annd dt) wouldn't play againnst each other antmore. And they don't have any idea w hat my strategy is they would just think Gus must bbe getting super trash. by the time they know dewey will have been long gone or doubled up. And if he doubles up he can play again now cause the chips are evening up now.

3)The math question if you have proven you side to be correct then why did Sklansky say Vince was right. And at first said it was very close decision. but you make it sound like its not even close let alone right to not move in. See its not a huge loss to paul to give up a little positive ev. but its a huge loss to put him in a position where he wins a somewhat small pot in relation to the pot he will lose more than he will win if he gets called as he can't be a favorite. To let a guy get 2nd that low without even forcing him to play a hand and forcing him to double up is just bad tournament poker period. And both Paul and Gus are gulity of this mistake. While Gus's is worse though.

4)The talk of other 2 not getting involved is absolutely ridiculous. paul will attack and dewey cant afford to wait anything that resemmles a hand he's going.

5)I don't know what your trying say in last paragraph. please explain. All i know is Dewey showed the most positive ev when the 2 big stacks tangled. He must have thought it was christmas.

Let me know answer on why gus has a dilema calling with 1010's if the money between 2nd and 3rd is irrelevant.

[Smoothcall]

So you are trying to tell me prize money never crossed Gus mind in this decision. If that was the case they he would call immediately as we know headup Gus would call without much thought. If you agree then the money is rellivent. i agree means less then it would to me or you but is still rellivent especially to gus. He doesn't have paul money. i did prove this you admitted it in your first line then contradicted yourself.

[lastchance]

Ok, one at a time.

1. Yeah, it's that hard to follow. Yes, I'm not reading you clearly.

2. I'm not saying PP and DT wouldn't play against each other anymore.

3. Go back and please read that thread you were mentioning. David Sklansky not only mentioned a different prize strucutre, but making a point that Paul Phillips and Gus Hansen are both not even thinking about because they have such a huge bankroll right now. I replied to this point already.

4. Dewey Tomko still has 8x BB. That's more than enough to stage a comeback, if you ever play SnGs. An 8x BB stack a third of yours is still pretty dangerous.

5. I'm saying here that Paul Phillips and Gus Hansen lose $200k if you offer them automatic second prize money for their stack. I'm saying Dewey Tomko only gains $50k.

Now, I will just make one point. We have proven moving-in is better than calling, and MUCH better than folding, mathematically. Your qualitative explanation of "the jump from 3rd to 2nd is not worth the risk" is quite weak compared to our math. Please come back with your own.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
So you are trying to tell me prize money never crossed Gus mind in this decision. If that was the case they he would call immediately as we know headup Gus would call without much thought. If you agree then the money is rellivent. i agree means less then it would to me or you but is still rellivent especially to gus. He doesn't have paul money. i did prove this you admitted it in your first line then contradicted yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you're the one misquoting me. I never said you proved that the money mattered. But WINNING does matter and Gus is NOT in a good spot calling for all his chips with TT.

Quit setting up straw men.

[Smoothcall]

Your first line is "while what you say is true". What were you referring to if not what i said. And if that's true that you were referinng to that then the money IS relevent. The decision is harder and or if he would call headsup means i'm right and the money mattered into decisions.

You didn't answer my question you dodged it nicely. Would he call headup. Why is the decision so complicated as you put it if not for money difference. We know he's calling headup so why is he saying how can i call when there 3 handed here. Has to be the money.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Your first line is "while what you say is true". What were you referring to if not what i said. And if that's true that you were referinng to that then the money IS relevent. The decision is harder and or if he would call headsup means i'm right and the money mattered into decisions.

You didn't answer my question you dodged it nicely. Would he call headup. Why is the decision so complicated as you put it if not for money difference. We know he's calling headup so why is he saying how can i call when there 3 handed here. Has to be the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take the money out of the equation entirely, and realize that Gus still has a hard decision. You obviously can't understand this. I was referring to busting out in 3rd place. You can't win the tournament if you bust out and Gus was CALLING for all his chips in that spot. There's a huge difference between Gus' situation and Paul's situation.

The question has never been about Gus' call. Why is Paul's call wrong, and it's certainly NOT because there's 300K at stake for moving up to 2nd place.

Why are you the only person here to hold such a weak-tight view of the situation? You can argue with everyone else on this one. I see your ignorance is too much armor for my logic to penetrate.

[Smoothcall]

2) You did say they wouldn't play against each other cause its safer to attack mr.weak tight chip leader. Why would you say you didn't say it.

3)Do you also remember him saying it was close. And he said Vince is correct. And just because it doesn't matter as much to paul doesn't mean his play was right. So if it was me or you then Sklansky's saying not moving in is right. Ok so then your saying i'm right as long as a multimillionaire isn't in the sb lol. That's fine with me as there are a few peoeple in the world that dont care about money. At least it proves my point to most people not moving in is the right play. I don't play for the thrill o f victory i try play to make money.

4)only dangerous if your the one tangling with him with marginal hands. Thats why i advocating staying out o f the way unless you get good hand. I already tried to teach you this but you refuse to listen. You will never get better if you refuse good advice.

5)What does that have to do with anything. There not making some kinnd of chip count deal. And i didn't say quit once you 2nd you can easily get back what you gave up in playing little weaker 3 handed ornot point is you still have plenty to win with and what u gave up 3 handed was miniscule in comparison to what you could have lost had you tangled 3 handed end of story. You are afraid to play the correct way cause someone who probably can't play there way out of a paper bag might call you weak tight on a poker forum one day. i don't worry about this i worry about what goes in my pocket. look at dewey by your own admission was weak tight and he was a raceoff away of being a serious factor headup playing weak tight until he got headup. Perfectly played by Dewey. Want learn watch him he was the best player at the table imo.

[Smoothcall]

Lol you are so cute. My ignorannce in these threads lol. There are mistakes, lack of comprehension, misquotes, all over this and other threads from you. You cannot find one from me. This is not even close if you can't agree on this. Your dislike for me is causinng you to, lie, misquote, and just flat out not admit when your wrong. If i said the sky is blue you would somehow put a twist on it and weasel out of agreeing.

back to the poker although futile as i'm starting think i'm arguing with a little child. Who cares if he goes out third if there wasn't a money issue besides winning in his mind. So if 2nd not an issue why wouldn't he call fast. If i ts winner take all tourney does he call here. Or headup 2 handed game would he say how can i call. I'LL SAY IT AGAIN AND GIVE ME STRAIGHT ANSWER. iF THEY WERE DOWN TO ONLY 2 HEADUP DO YOU THINK HE WOULD SAY HOW CAN I CALL AND HAVE THIS LON DILEMA. IF YOU SAY GUS WOULD HAVE TOUGHTIME CALLING YOU F LAT OUT LYING OR OUT OF YOUR MIND. SO IF ANSWER IS DIFFERENT 3 HANDED AND MORE DIFFICULT DECISIONN IT COULD ONLY BE CAUSE OF THE MONEY. WHAT OTHER COULD THERE BE.

[mattpackage]

There are so many posts on this topic that I would be here all day reading them. So, forgive me if this has been said and refuted already. None of us were playing in the tournament with Gus, Dewey, and Paul. Only those 3 players could truly have a feel for what was going on at the table. Had Gus raised 99 times in a row on the button, had Gus unpredictably start folding on the button due to carpal tunnel? From what I know, which is very limited, Gus likes to raise on the button with a wide variety of hands. I just don't see how anyone doesn't move all-in there with AQ. Ironically, I think it's Gus' unpredictable nature which makes this an easy move all-in but also what makes it an automatic call for Hansen when Paul moved all-in. I think Gus' aggresive play makes decent hands look like monsters in the hands of his opponents. If his opponents will re-raise Gus with slightly weaker hands (and, importantly more hands), than I believe that Gus' TT looks better and better. I liked this play by both players but I think the important thing to remember is that we weren't there. We didn't see the subtle intricacies inherent in big-time tournament poker. Sure, you won't see Teddy KGB eating cookies a certain way in big tournaments but there are various things one picks up on during a tournament that can come into play during a big hand. Maybe Paul will tell me that his all-in with AQ three-handed is automatic against Hansen in any situation and that's fine also. But let's give Paul and Gus the benefit of the doubt, I think they both deserve it.

[lastchance]

2. Of course I said that. But if Paul Phillips plays STRONG, like he is now, and so do Gus Hansen, they have nothing to attack, so they have to attack each other. Again, a weak-tight, not matter how large it is, stack is a target. A strong player is rarely a target, unless every other player is also strong.

3. I point you to this (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1201089&page=3&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1) thread, the thread you were referring to, started by David Sklansky. Yeah, Sklansky said it was close (in this thread, not that one), and it is, cause Paul has pretty damn nice implied odds against the LAG, Gus Hansen, and if he can make a good read, he can take down the pot when a K falls. Calling isn't amazing here, but I suppose if you're either A. Weak-tight, or B. confident playing AQ out of position against Gus, you can call.

It's a tough spot, but you're right, calling isn't horrid if you have a plan post-flop, and probably the right move against anyone not named "Gus Hansen."

However, you don't have a read against this guy cause he raises with so many hands, you don't know what flops hit him.
You also get shown AA, KK, QQ, AK, the 4 hands you really don't want to see much less often than against most other players. You have a better shot of taking the pot down right here than against most other players.

4. AQ and TT are good hands. I sure as hell wouldn't raise with the crap Gus Hansen raises with, but you've got to play back against the guy, and sometimes, I feel you really have to draw a line in the sand and resteal. PP made a gutsy move, and a smart one. I sure as hell hope I could put all my chips in the middle in this exact same spot. I have thought about this hand a lot, and I think it has made me a better poker player. I wouldn't have come over the top of Gus Hansen before. I will now. And again, I probably smoothcall against players like Lederer and Harrington, whose preflop standards are a lot tighter than Gus Hansen's. I might not have done that before. The more I talk and think about Paul Phillips play here, the more I like it. I want to do the exact same thing here, 100% of the time. At the same time, I never want to move-in against anyone who is not a LAG. Maybe fold to a Vince raise. Call against most TAGs.

4. Even if you don't tangle with him, 3-handed, one can steal a lot of blinds in a hurry. Of course, he won't, because the other players he's playing are very STRONG, and not weak-tight. It's a shortstack, but it's nowhere near as bad as "B" was in that very interesting Chip Reese and Lederer hand. An 800k stack is very dangerous as is, because that 800k can survive for a long time by stealing blinds, by getting lucky in coinflips. You should also be trying to maintain your stack. Interesting points here, but not relevant to this hand.

5. You're right. Moot point.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
SO IF ANSWER IS DIFFERENT 3 HANDED AND MORE DIFFICULT DECISIONN IT COULD ONLY BE CAUSE OF THE MONEY. WHAT OTHER COULD THERE BE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Geez, I'll fire one last shot and go away, for everyone's sake.

You do know what the Gap Concept is, right?

[Sqred]

Gus made the bigger mistake, if you can call Paul's all in a mistake at all. Seriously, I'm not going broke with tens in this spot ever, especially calling it all off.

I love Paul's idea that Gus could have limp reraised from the button. Much stronger way to play the hand and also less risky. I think Gus just figured that he was going to raise and hopefully Phil would muck and give him a chance for dewey to go all in with a smaller pair or a hand like Paul's.

I also don't mind a call here from Paul in an attempt to lure an all in from Dewey that he could respond to in turn.

But then again I'm broke and gus and Paul are millionaires. I would have just called with Paul's hand and mucked Gus's hand in a 200$ S&G on Party, let alone a WPT event. The difference between 2nd and 3rd would be enough to shoot craps for at least a couple of days before dipping into the white meat.

Summary: Paul's play, shocking, non standard, but not a huge mistake.

Gus's Play: Pure Gambling, not one a lot of tournament players would make, but then again, there's nothing wrong with gambling as a slight fav. if you don't care about second.

FJM

[Smoothcall]

Yes i do. So would you say Gus would have a dilema caling with 1010's if there were only 2 players left. Realize its GUS HANSEN and if he threw it away he would be lowered to 2 million puting PP to 3.1 million. If you think gus wouldn't call and wuld of had as tough a decision your either lying or lost. If you agree with me here then the fact that theother 300k is still on the line looms as a factor.

[Smoothcall]

At least you admitted you said the fisrt statement and agreed i was right about alot of things that is enough for me. I don't want to argue anymore. And in the long run you won't be that off playing it the way pp did. Just not the best way imo. Good debate although it degennerated abit and took up a little too much of my time. Lets move on and and discuss new threads without hopefully get into a fight. Truce. That goes for the other guys too although they may all be same person. Except Husker i'd like to make a little money and make him look like the fool that he is cause he called me an idiot so i have no mercy for the weak in his situation.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes i do. So would you say Gus would have a dilema caling with 1010's if there were only 2 players left. Realize its GUS HANSEN and if he threw it away he would be lowered to 2 million puting PP to 3.1 million. If you think gus wouldn't call and wuld of had as tough a decision your either lying or lost. If you agree with me here then the fact that theother 300k is still on the line looms as a factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, let's just assume that the 300K is still a factor. Then this makes Paul's push even more correct if he knows Gus will be folding some better hands that he won't like to see. If we go with your conclusion that the 300K means more to them than winning, then Paul is VERY correct to push and not fold here, so that he can put Gus to a decision.

There. Even IF you're right, you're wrong.

[Smoothcall]

I'm gonna agree that makes pp play a little better because of that(good point) but not enough to make the play right imo. Maybe if your pp who money isn't an issue its ok. but for people that play to make the most they can i still like not moving in.
And thanks for finally admitting i'm right about something only took a million replies. Truce.

[Smoothcall]

Excellent points. best reply i've heard to this thread in lonng time. A this person isn't me or Vinnce lol. The guy makes very good sense.

[riverboatking]

[ QUOTE ]
That goes for the other guys too although they may all be same person.

[/ QUOTE ]

that has got to be the funniest thing i have ever read in my life coming from you vince.
talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

[Smoothcall]

you keep saying that but don't have the guts to back it up and bet. so close it unless you have the guts to back it up.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm gonna agree that makes pp play a little better because of that(good point) but not enough to make the play right imo. Maybe if your pp who money isn't an issue its ok. but for people that play to make the most they can i still like not moving in.
And thanks for finally admitting i'm right about something only took a million replies. Truce.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well first of all, you're still not right.

Second of all, IF the money does matter (like it would for ME) I'm pushing in. Does 300K mean a lot to me? Hell yes. But pushing in is clearly the right move here.

Sorry Vince. If you're not going to listen to me, at least listen to everyone else here.

[Smoothcall]

well making this statement proves your wrong. Sklansky says if you don't have alot of money and or 300k is life changing to you, you should not move in. will you now admit i'm right.

You just couldn't let this go i tried to be the bigger man but your just a bratty child and keep the argument going. don't worry about this discussion cause you will never be 3 handed in a multi tournament judging by your little knowledge of poker. I was even trying to be nice when i said you made some good points cause in reality your clueless.

And stop callinng me Vince, Paul's sock puppet. If you had any kind of intelligence at all you would be able to tell i'm not him. You never answered me before are these other guys that have kept this thread going you too. Cause you all comprehend the same.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]

You just couldn't let this go i tried to be the bigger man but your just a bratty child and keep the argument going. don't worry about this discussion cause you will never be 3 handed in a multi tournament judging by your little knowledge of poker. I was even trying to be nice when i said you made some good points cause in reality your clueless.


[/ QUOTE ]

Geez, if you're trying to be the bigger man, then why the hell are you resorting to ad-hominem attacks now? I'm not worried about my poker skill. That's why I'm here.

As for you, I'm going to hit a little button that you're very familiar with and you'll just go away.

[Smoothcall]

PLEASE DO THANK YOU!

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
well making this statement proves your wrong. Sklansky says if you don't have alot of money and or 300k is life changing to you, you should not move in. will you now admit i'm right.

[/ QUOTE ]
What does this have to do with anything? Paul Phillips has a LOT of money, so he is not thinking about this.

Against Gus Hansen, Paul Phillips' play has become standard. Howard Lederer did it with much worse than AQ, he's gotten his chips in with the best of it.

Gus Hansen must be played back against. Everyone has picked this up now. Trying to get away from AQ against the biggest preflop LAG in the world is a major mistake. Play back and win.

[Desdia72]

beginning to spat and sputter in the middle of a six lane highway?

[Smoothcall]

It has to do with the fact tht you said YOU would move in there. It is close for PP but if the money is life changing the correct play is to not move in according to sklansky. So you are incorrect in saying you would move in. how come you have so much trouble following.

[lastchance]

The money moving up to second isn't life-changing to me. A dollar is pretty much the same as any other dollar. I have the time and patience to let my small +EV plays come up over and over again so I can abuse 'em. $125k isn't life-changing, while first prize money would be. I really am not considering how the money will affect my life when I play against Gus Hansen and Dewey Tomko.

[Smoothcall]

difference between 2nd and 3rd was 325k not 125k.