WPT #6 San Fran's Lucky Chances tournament- random thoughts

[Easy E]

Forget the player's name (Paul?), but he folds TT and AQ to raises from the Mad Magician (MM), then talks in his exit interview and says something about taking a lot of chances???

Phil H- what the HELL was that 32off button steal raise, of such a large amount, all about? Was he tilting THAT much? THIS is one of the best tournament poker players? No WONDER all of the ring players say that tournament pros are fresh meat in the side games.......
Seemed like Phil caught Phil G's ego disease- "I'm gonna outplay you with crap, rookie!" (...okay, maybe i'm not).
Anyone notice how Mike and Vince were downgrading Phil, talking about how emotional he gets after people go over the top of him, as if he has an....ego...... problem? (never mind)

Shaina, you got a lot more pieces. Nothing thrilling, but pretty professional, it seemed. But girlfriend, that multi-colored sweater HAS to go! It may have been figure-flattering, but that design and those sleeves??? WAY too Eighties!!! Burn that thing right away!

Vince going all in with 98off in the cutoff, after getting that beat the previous hand..... another tilter? I didn't note the blinds compared to his stack, but I think I would have waited for a high card or something before going all-in there, especially with the stacks sitting behind him.
Also, was anyone else disappointed in Vince's professionalism when he slinked off without talking to anyone at the table?

Maybe it's just me, but I'm starting to get bored with the show as a concept. Even though the play is somewhat different, and I of course enjoy the poker play, I'm starting to get an "it's the same ole same old" feeling about the show each week. Maybe the same set every week WASN'T such a great idea?

Someone (Phil?) went all in preflop with KJoff. Woudn't it make more sense to make a smaller raise, then see the flop, with the big stacks behind you?
I think it WAS Phil, because he then opened his yap and starting begging for a call. Seems pretty transparent watching (but I know his cards and such)- how does that sort of thing seem live? Mike Caro could comment, since he supposedly is the king of such comments....

Random silly Vince van Patten quote- "Phil wants to win so bad (ED NOTE: Grammar here, VvP) he can taste it" Well, THERE'S a shocking comment! C'mon Vince, we're gonna vote you off as the Weakest Link if you keep it up!

I kind of liked the Lucky Chances/history segment. Was too short though- maybe more extensive segments down the road, to help with the 2 hour shows?
Speaking of side segments, there seemed to be a lot more of them this episode (not sure about length of each possibly being shorter). Was that because there were less "televisable" hands to choose from in the editing room?

I was ready to KILL Mike Sexton, or whatever idiot was responsible for the "Dead Money" pop-up definition!!! Yeah, let's get poker out there in a big way and then SCARE OFF the new customers! Mike, I KNOW you know better than this!

I thought Paul made a good read of MM's smaller raise preflop, allowing him to bluff MM out with his 43c. VINCE, take a note here- Paul didn't have a tell on MM (i don't think), I think he just interpreted his betting a actions correctly!
And Chris Bigler sure seemed to have some read or idea of Paul's play, the way he went after him with raises and all-ins during some of the later play....

If I heard correctly, VvP said something about the players playing for 2 days. Did the final 6 players play two whole days?

The amount of commercials is starting to get out of hand. It's approaching American Idol levels (40 minutes of commercials, 20 minutes of show). I'm going to have to start taping the show and using my VCR to save myself an hour's worth of time!

Stray thought- with the winners taking cash for their prizes, and with the tradition of dumping the money on the table for the finales in various tournaments, has anyone ever been mugged coming out of a tourney?

Another hand comment- Chris Bigler's checkraise of Paul with 63off on a flop of 996. That was a good anticipation of Paul's betting tendencies. Maybe that, along with other middle hands, is what seemed to give Chirs a false sense of overconfidence

Random MS commentary- said Chris (I think) was "really feeling his Wheaties" ??? I hope that was a paid plug, Mike, because it struck me as a weird comment! Is that a signature comment of yours?
Another thing, Mike- I was kind of turned off by your commercial plugging Party Poker.com. I understand it, but I wonder if that will give you and the show the wrong image (for most of the public), especially given the current Internet environment... which seques me into:

Did Bush sign that STUPID law? Guess I can be an outlaw now.... do they really think it will accomplish anything, except make it go more underground than it already is?

Suggestion- edit the show differently? When there is 17 minutes left before 11 and there are only two people, I know I can skip 15 minutes worth of show..... NOT something we want non-players to do, maybe? Of course, I have no good suggestion on HOW to do something different here.. maybe have the winner at 10;50, then do a longer segment on some captivating poker topic, or history piece, or something?

Paul D's AKs reraise of Chris B's 54: anyone else think that, given Chris' attacking aggressive moves, Paul should have raised a smaller amount, or preferably just called, then go after him on the flop? Or is that too risky heads-up for the final spots?

Also, Paul's calling of Chris' bet with 84off on a flop of 873: wasn't that a little weak? Don't you get yourself in trouble here, just calling?
If Chris had followed through when the K turned, would Paul have been out of there? After checking the King, Chris had no chance on the river IMO.

I think the graphic on the final hand showed Chris as a slight dog when 2 diamonds fell but with the King overcard (to Paul's hand). Does the four-flush gain THAT much equity, even when being dominated by a higher unmatched card?

[CreamPuff]

Phil H- what the HELL was that 32off button steal raise
I thought Phil played this tournament very bad.
(I liked his reads/play in the Aruba tournament..He
really surprised me)

First off, a true world-class player would have known
to play tighter regardless of being on the button,
due to the Magic Man's high calling/reraising threshold ("Gap Concept")...

It was obvious right from the start this guy had a hard-on
for Phil..

But Phil just kept on playing his cards..not his opponents.
T7s on buttton:raise...23 off raise...With the exception of the 23, all were raising hands under
normal conditions..(cant recall the rest)

I actually like his limp with JT off on the button...Ironically he would have
won the blinds had he raised that one.

And although not as bad, I dont like his raise
all in vs the Magic Man with KJ.
I can envision that guy calling with :
Any pair, any Ace, maybe down to KJ himself
(turned out he had KQ and busted Phil).

In one of Phils past articles he mentioned dealing
with a player that kept coming over the top of him,
and forcing him to fold...But he wasn't worried
because he knew he would bust the guy when he finally
got a real hand...Should have taken his own advice here.

Now who wouldn't mind showing Shaina their skills?

[bernie]

"But girlfriend, that multi-colored sweater HAS to go! It may have been figure-flattering, but that design and those sleeves??? WAY too Eighties!!! Burn that thing right away!"

she was wearing a sweater?

we'll leave you with the sweater to ponder it and see ya in the morning. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif


"I'm starting to get an "it's the same ole same old" feeling about the show each week. Maybe the same set every week WASN'T such a great idea?"

ive seen only a couple and i agree. i think at least a little different set each week would help. by sight alone, it's tough to see the difference one week to the next...

"I was ready to KILL Mike Sexton, or whatever idiot was responsible for the "Dead Money" pop-up definition!!! Yeah, let's get poker out there in a big way and then SCARE OFF the new customers! Mike, I KNOW you know better than this!"

as far as i know, that definition was wrong. that's not how i know dead money. that was a definition for a fish.

overall, i thought it was fine though. added bonus for watching phil act like a baby again. he looked like he was about to cry. and the little segment about him was all about how great he thinks he is. he had a vision though...of him losing this one.

on this night, i think the best at the table won. paul played great and never got rattled. he also had a nice segment. i think he's a cool guy. it'd also be nice if they showed a little more highlights of how they got to the final 6 players. i think that would add a little more to the feel of how far the players had to go in the tourney.

b

[BruceZ]

I think the graphic on the final hand showed Chris as a slight dog when 2 diamonds fell but with the King overcard (to Paul's hand). Does the four-flush gain THAT much equity, even when being dominated by a higher unmatched card?

Yes. When neither player flops a pair, the flush draw has 15 outs to make a flush or a pair, which will happen 1 - (30/45)(29/44) = 56% of the time. The fact that he is dominated by the king subtracts only 1% from this 56%, because it only matters when he hits one of his pair outs AND one of the 2 kings falls which doesn't make him a flush. This happens (6/45)(2/44)*2 = 1.2%. So the flush draw is a 54.8% favorite. This ignores any straights, and assumes that only the king dominates the other cards, and that the other player doesn't have any of the flush cards.

BTW, I haven't seen any of the statistics I computed for the show used yet, though I haven't seen all the shows. Someone please let me know if you see any of them. They have to do with someone else having a better hand when you hold JJ-KK or AK or AQ.

[mike l.]

"THIS is one of the best tournament poker players?"

he's awful in so many ways. listening to them interview him and saying how he isnt satisfied with just making a final table, he expects to win, he's so used to it. what was the last major tournament the guy won?? it's not like he dominates tournament poker or something, he's just a complete joke. i really wish the whole poker tourney retard community would ease off using him as their poster boy because he's got a terrible attitude and frankly his face is really white and ugly to look at and his voice is very whiny. dump him.

"But girlfriend, that multi-colored sweater HAS to go!"

i thought it was a really cool looking sweater and it showed off her chest nicely.

"I think it WAS Phil, because he then opened his yap and starting begging for a call."

this was a big tell he was letting off.


"Did the final 6 players play two whole days?"

no the whole tourney was probably two days.

all in all i think this was the best one yet. the way that magic guy beat phil and the way there was plenty of bluffing and both chris b and paul d played pretty well overall all things said.

the only thing i started to notice that was of interest was that it seemed like chirs bigler may have been using (or trying to use) sklansky's system. he was going all-in frequently.

[Porcupine]

Nice comments E!

Noticed a few more errors in the hand graphics last night. They really need to cut down on those mistakes.

<font color="#666666"> The amount of commercials is starting to get out of hand. It's approaching American Idol levels (40 minutes of commercials, 20 minutes of show). I'm going to have to start taping the show and using my VCR to save myself an hour's worth of time! </font color>

FYI: While taping the show for my non-cable friends, I cut out 28 minutes of the 2 hours just by not recording some of commercial breaks - I'm sure there were more than 28 minutes worth.

<font color="#666666"> Shaina, you got a lot more pieces. Nothing thrilling, but pretty professional, it seemed. But girlfriend, that multi-colored sweater HAS to go! </font color>

I liked the sweater (and Shaina in the sweater), but engineers aren't known for fashion sense. We need to hear PokerBabe's opinion on the sweater.

[jasonHoldEm]

First, STOP breaking for commecials in the middle of a hand...you're trying to build cliffhanger-like suspense, but by the time everyone gets back from the commercial break they've forgotten what's going on and you're showing the end of a hand (that should be exciting) to a disintristed auidence.

Second, I liked the extra Shania segments, I'm a big fan of seeing more of the casino/area they are playing in. I thought the graveyard thing with dead money, dead hand, drawing dead was cheesy, but other than that I say good job.

Third, I'm beginning to think I can beat Phil Helmuth...Ok, that's a stretch, but he really seems to be playing like crap. Anyone else think he needs to take some time off and get his focus back? Then again, maybe his recent poor play is somehow related to his new book coming out? (Not that he's doing it on purpose to increase book sales, but rather the added pressure of wanting to win the tournaments to be in the spotlight, and having that work against him?)

I liked Shania's sweater...

jHE

[Porcupine]

<font color="#666666"> it'd also be nice if they showed a little more highlights of how they got to the final 6 players. i think that would add a little more to the feel of how far the players had to go in the tourney. </font color>

I think this would make the show a lot more interesting. This last show seemed to have the least "pre final table" highlights of any show yet. It is a 2 hour program, something like 10 minutes of highlights and some details/stats about the tourney would be great.

If only the Lakers/T'Wolves would hurry up and score 203 points, some of us east coasters need to be at work early in the morning /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Jason:

You wrote:

Third, I'm beginning to think I can beat Phil Helmuth...Ok, that's a stretch, but he really seems to be playing like crap. Anyone else think he needs to take some time off and get his focus back? Then again, maybe his recent poor play is somehow related to his new book coming out? (Not that he's doing it on purpose to increase book sales, but rather the added pressure of wanting to win the tournaments to be in the spotlight, and having that work against him?)

I've now read about 50 pages of Hellmuth's book. I'm in the chapter on beginner hold 'em strategy. What's interesting is that he constantly advocates maniacal play, and some of his advice is simnply bizzare in my opinon. Sort of like the way he played in the WPT event shown on TV last night.

Now the way I see it, and something that both David and I have written, is that the best tournament players are stealing many pots. Far more than you would in a side game. (I originally wrote this in my Gambling Theory book many years ago and David has a good discussion of it in Tournament Poker for Advanced Players.)

What we get to see in the WPT are the hands that are being played, and Hellmuth is clearly stealing constantly. (Whether this is a well thought out strategy on his part or something that he happened to stumble into I'm not going to address here.) But now that he has been around awhile, he just can't steal constantly and get away with it. The other players have learned to play back at him. Of course this takes some courage, because if you do catch him with a hand, you can be put out of the tournament. But my guess is that his ultra aggressive strategy won't ever be successful again for him like it once was. That's exactly what happened last night, and I suspect it's happening every time he now plays a tournament.

Best wishes,
Mason

[mikelow]

That's why I think he's had to turn to writing books and columns. He's not the player he was back in the first Bush administration.

[jasonHoldEm]

Mason,

Thanks for the comments, I see what you're getting at. I know that big tournament poker is more about playing your opponents than cards, but when he saw his raises were getting such little respect do you think he should have switched gears and starting playing (at least somewhat) more conservative? I don't expect Phil would ever play like Chris Bigler (although even Chris seemed to be ramming and jamming a bit this tournament), but now that people are starting to play back at him do you think he should reel in his aggressiveness a bit to compensate?

Also, any chance you'd be willing to post your review of Phil's book when completed? I think it's only going to cost something like $15 when it is released, but if it turns out to be poor advice I'd rather not waste my money.

Thanks,
jHE

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Jason:

Yes to all questions.

Best wishes,
Mason

[AceHigh]

"and Hellmuth is clearly stealing constantly."

Don't a lot of the big name players play this style?

I was under the impression that some of the most successfull tournament players play a super-aggressive style, Phil Ivey, Layne Flack, John Juanda, John Bonneti, Huck Seed, etc. Am I correct?

I don't play in these tournaments and don't get the WPT on TV, so I'm just going off what I read in tournament reports and on RGP, etc.

[ohkanada]

"But my guess is that his ultra aggressive strategy won't ever be successful again for him like it once was. That's exactly what happened last night, and I suspect it's happening every time he now plays a tournament."

Seems everyone has given up on Phil. And then he goes out and wins another WSOP bracelet. This time a Limit Hold'em event!

Ken Poklitar