Daniel Negreanu JdQd - all in?

Tom22 · #1 10-05-2004, 09:16 PM

I was watching the tournament of champion last night and was puzzled by why Daniel Negreanu called an all in bet with Jd Qd. Doyle had raised all in with Ax. I'm not quite sure if Daniel was in the blind or not but he was short stacked.

He must understand that his opponent has either a pair of at least Ace high. In both conditions, he would be underdog. Why did he call this all in bet?

Usually when I'm short stacked in a tournament, I would still wait for a pair or at least Ace high to go all-in. Hoping someone would call with something like KQ which I would still be the favorite.

Could someone explain to me why Daniel called in this situation?

pzhon · #2 10-06-2004, 05:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was watching the tournament of champion last night and was puzzled by why Daniel Negreanu called an all in bet with Jd Qd. Doyle had raised all in with Ax. I'm not quite sure if Daniel was in the blind or not but he was short stacked.

He must understand that his opponent has either a pair of at least Ace high. In both conditions, he would be underdog. Why did he call this all in bet?

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps someone told him it was a rebuy tournament.

The goal is roughly to accumulate chips, not to get your chips in as a favorite. It is ok to call all-in as an underdog if there are a lot of chips in the pot. You mentioned that Negreanu had a short stack. That means the blinds were significant, and the dead money may justify calling all-in as an underdog.

Running into a dominating hand or overpair would be a disaster, but many of the other possibilities are not so bad.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=222322
Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 0.470
A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 0.530

It would not take much dead money to make it right to call all-in as a 53:47 underdog.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=544926
Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 0.521
3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 0.479

QJs is a favorite over pocket pairs up to 77. Everyone remembers that 22 is a favorite over AKo, but AKo does particularly badly against 22. 85s and J9o are favorites over 22.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=544949
Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 0.676
T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 0.324

Before you see his cards, you can't be sure Doyle Brunson had Ax or a pocket pair.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=544979
Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 0.380
8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 0.317
A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 0.303

Suppose someone else called all-in afterwards. Even though QJs is an underdog to 88 and ATo individually, it is a clear favorite over the two in a 3-way pot.

Tom22 · #3 10-06-2004, 09:32 PM

But there weren't any chips in the pot. I think you should in most cases make the postive EV play (except in bubble situation and etc.). Calling with QdJd does not seem to be a +EV move. I can see going all-in with that hand but calling an all-in is a weak move. Any other opinions??

And who would go all-in with T2, certainly not Doyle.

DonkeyKong · #4 10-06-2004, 09:50 PM

I think Daniel was frustrated and figured he needed chips anyway so just go all-in. QJ can so easily be dominated by KQ/AQ/AJ/QQ/JJ -- not to mention Aces & Kings that I think it is a very bad calling hand... I think it was a poor play. He was at best a coin flip -- and very easily dominated... But Daniel didn't seem to care too much anyway... get chips or go back to some cash games... Daniel might be the best player in the world though so maybe there is some kind of logic to it that I just don't understand... someone please help.

ddubois · #5 10-07-2004, 01:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
He must understand that his opponent has either a pair or at least Ace high.

[/ QUOTE ]
What positions? What stacks? What blinds? Depending on these variables, Doyle might not need an ace or a pair to make this play. He could be making a move with 87s, JTo, T2s, whatever. As you saw later (in an admittedly very different situation) he tried to steal from the SB from Lederer's BB with 83o - he didn't even look at his cards.

Also, there might be enough overlay to make a coinflip attractive to DN. It is true that DN is a 43:57 dog against the range of "any ace, any pair" however. Maybe he just felt like he desparately needed any coinflip to double up to even compete and that QJs was a good hand to try it with.

pzhon · #6 10-07-2004, 07:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But there weren't any chips in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
There were blinds posted. There are always chips in the pot.

[ QUOTE ]

And who would go all-in with T2, certainly not Doyle.

[/ QUOTE ]
I mention T2 because Doyle has put a lot of chips in preflop with that hand. He won the WSOP twice with T2, and has played it on other occasions, which is why T2 is called a Doyle Brunson. "...when I play a hand for the sole reason of trying to steal it. Then, it doesn't make any difference what I have. I mean, I could be playing the hand without even looking at my hole cards. At such a time, I'd be playing my money, my position, and a particular player. My hand wouldn't matter. If I was forced to look at it (because I got played with), I might find two Aces, Ace-King...or trash." -- Doyle Brunson in Super System.

If you think Doyle would never raise with something as weak as T2, if you think he would have to wait for Ax or a pair, you are wrong.

BugSplatt · #7 10-09-2004, 11:12 AM

Why is 88 favored against QJ suited vs 22 against QJ suited?
While I am sure there must be some mathematical explanation, I would have a hard time figuring that out without the math formulation. Both the 8's and 2's need help to improve, and the QJ suited is under the same constraints.

My only thought for the 88's being a slight favorite over the 22 would be that the 8's could fill the bottom end of a str8 to the Q? Is that the correct thinking?

Bug

well · #8 10-09-2004, 12:43 PM

With two pair on the board, 22 will lose (unless one of the pairs is 22), whereas 88 will
have a decent chance to have a better 2 pair here.

cornell2005 · #9 10-09-2004, 04:42 PM

ok. everyone listen. hands can not be talked about without listing the blinds, stacks, position, payout structure, ect. i can make up a million situations where you would want to call with jq, or even 10,4. someone makes this post in every one of these threads, so i figured this time i would take care of it

Red_Eye_Jedi · #10 10-09-2004, 05:49 PM

Another thing to think about is the fact that this was a freeroll for all the players. Obviously they were all trying to win, but when faced with a coin-flip type situation, its a lot easier to gamble with someone elses money. DN even said it himself that this was a win it all or win nothing play.