Did Matusow realize that he was behind?

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No Raymer was favored but on a draw. Being on a draw doesn't mean you're necessarily behind, it just means you need to catch a card to win.

[/ QUOTE ]
They were both on draws, and they both needed to catch cards to win. Raymer needed to catch an ace, jack, or diamond. Mike needed to catch runner-runner blanks.

Two more cards were coming out no matter what; some combinations of cards gave Greg the win, and some combinations of cards gave Mike the win.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Say I have AA and you have two small hearts. Flop comes Ah, Qh, 7s. Am I also on a draw because I need blank blank to come up for me to win? If thats the case, then everyone is always on a draw because we are drawing to not help our opponent and the entire usage of the word 'draw' is useless because everyone is always on a draw.

P.S.I'm getting your tapes back in the mail sometime this weekend. Thanks a lot, I'll write you a pm on FBG.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

They were both on draws, and they both needed to catch cards to win. Raymer needed to catch an ace, jack, or diamond. Mike needed to catch runner-runner blanks.


[/ QUOTE ]

This argument is hysterically silly, but I will continue it anyway. You don't use the term "drawing hand" when you are looking for the other guy not to improve. You draw to make a better hand -- Raymer was drawing to improve his hand. Matusow was hoping (not drawing) for blanks.

So, when you have AcAs and your opponent has KdQd and the flop is 7d5d2c -- do you say that your AA is a drawing hand? If the answer is yes, the term "drawing hand" is meaningless.

[/ QUOTE ]

guess you beat me to it [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No Raymer was favored but on a draw. Being on a draw doesn't mean you're necessarily behind, it just means you need to catch a card to win.

[/ QUOTE ]
They were both on draws, and they both needed to catch cards to win. Raymer needed to catch an ace, jack, or diamond. Mike needed to catch runner-runner blanks.

Two more cards were coming out no matter what; some combinations of cards gave Greg the win, and some combinations of cards gave Mike the win.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Say I have AA and you have two small hearts. Flop comes Ah, Qh, 7s. Am I also on a draw because I need blank blank to come up for me to win? If thats the case, then everyone is always on a draw because we are drawing to not help our opponent and the entire usage of the word 'draw' is useless because everyone is always on a draw.

P.S.I'm getting your tapes back in the mail sometime this weekend. Thanks a lot, I'll write you a pm on FBG.

[/ QUOTE ]


Your example is a poor one, given AAA vs 2 small hearts on AhQh7s is not only about a 4-1 favorite to win the hand, if the turn pairs, it doesn't matter WHAT the river is.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No Raymer was favored but on a draw. Being on a draw doesn't mean you're necessarily behind, it just means you need to catch a card to win.

[/ QUOTE ]
They were both on draws, and they both needed to catch cards to win. Raymer needed to catch an ace, jack, or diamond. Mike needed to catch runner-runner blanks.

Two more cards were coming out no matter what; some combinations of cards gave Greg the win, and some combinations of cards gave Mike the win.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Say I have AA and you have two small hearts. Flop comes Ah, Qh, 7s. Am I also on a draw because I need blank blank to come up for me to win? If thats the case, then everyone is always on a draw because we are drawing to not help our opponent and the entire usage of the word 'draw' is useless because everyone is always on a draw.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is the concept of a "draw" versus a "made hand" normally useful?

It's normally useful because the draw is an underdog to the made hand, and the made hand therefore wants to bet or raise in order to protect itself against the draw, or at least to charge the draw as much as possible. Giving a free card to a draw is bad.

This all makes sense, and it's good to know.

But when contemplating whether to go all in, none of those concepts matter any more. The made hand isn't trying to prevent giving a free card or whatever. That whole dynamic is gone. Especially in deciding whether to call an all-in bet, "made hand" versus "draw" matters not one bit: it's all about pot equity. Who's the favorite, and by how much?

In that hand, Greg was the favorite.

To suggest that he drew out on Mike because he was on a "draw" while Mike had a "made hand" misses the point. At best, it's irrelevant. At worst, it leads to erroneous thinking (like never call a big bet with a mere "draw").

Greg was ahead the whole time because he had the greater pot equity. He needed to get slightly lucky (in the sense of not getting unlucky) to win the hand; but not as lucky as Mike would have needed to get. So Greg didn't "outdraw" Mike in the sense of getting lucky and putting a beat on Mike. If anything, Mike would have been the one putting a beat on Greg if he had hit his runner-runner blanks to come from behind and win.

[david050173]

Odds shouldn't have anything to do with the definition of drawing. If the hand ended without any more cards being delt, the hand that loses is drawing. They could even be drawing dead. If you use drawing to refer to whos ahead it gets confusing since if the turn misses the the player with the draws, the player that is drawing will shift.

And now lets clarify some more things. When is something a suckout? If I have 2 overs, opened straight draw, and a flush draw and I beat you on the river is it a suck out? How many outs are required for drawout, suck out, a bad beat, or thats poker comment?

[durron597]

... about a draw vs. a made hand is that a draw wants to get allin on the flop so they can see both cards cheaply with maximum folding equity by the opponent. A made hand, even if behind, wants to see the cards one at a time so they can hopefully get a drawing hand to fold on the turn. As far as who is ahead and who is behind, however, it really doesn't matter once the chips are in.

[CrisBrown]

Hi durron,

Exactly. That's why Raymer was correct to push all-in with what he had to suspect was a favored drawing hand. It's also a good example of the importance of position. Once Matusow bets at that pot, Greg is clearly correct to push it in; he either wins a substantial pot if Matusow folds, or he is a favorite to double through if Matusow calls. If their table positions were reversed, Greg's decision is a bit more difficult. If he leads out by pushing, Matusow will probably only call with a hand that is both ahead and a favorite to take the pot (e.g.: a set). Otherwise, he'll fold and Raymer wins only the pre-flop money.

Also, I think it's worth noting that if their situations were reversed, I'm pretty sure Raymer would've played that flop the same way Matusow did: betting with top pair, and calling the all-in bet, even if he knew Matusow had the big flush draw. Matusow had the pot odds to cover his call, and from what I've read in Greg's posts, that would've been enough to justify the call, even in the WSOP for 2/3 of his chips.

I don't Matusow misplayed this flop. I do question the pre-flop call, but if I were at a table with Raymer, and he were bullying the table with raise after raise after raise, I might well call (or even reraise!) him with 98s in the hope of out-flopping him ... if not to bust him, at least to quiet him down.

Cris

[SmittyTheKid]

I was sitting in the bleachers for this hand......Matusow is a whiny b*tch....it was great when he got knocked out...was crying like a baby...and now seeing how he treated Greg I'm glad I was there to see his demise....I saw him walking into Binions the next day looking like he had been hit by a truck...From cocky bastard to Little railbird.....

[Jurollo]

Whoever didnt have a made hand at the time of the bet is drawing. You could be a huge favorite and be drawing because if the hand were to end at that point your opponent would win it. Made hand vs Better flush/straight/overcards draw = flush/over/str8 drawing

[freakazoid]

but he also said later he'd make the same play again -- suggesting he didn't realize even afterwords that he had been the underdog. In any case, you only had to watch, and especially listen to him, to realize his brain was scrambled. The guy needs psychiatric treatment -- his constant threat to kill himself if he didn't win the tournament creeped me out big time (he's like Stu Ungar minus the card-playing ability)