Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how calling w/33 is a no-no whereas 77 isn't. The chances of getting set vs. set are only slightly higher w/33 and you have to assume UTG is raising w/44-66 to make you prefer calling with 77 over 33. So the very slight possibility of set over set only comes into play more with 33 than other pps in very few situations (loose UTG raiser).


[/ QUOTE ]

black 7s are 7.3% more likely to beat red aces than black 3s are.

i don't think it changes much in the hand analysis, but it does mean that 77 is marginally better than 33 (or 22, 44, 55, for that matter).

obviously the reason is that a 3 helps AA make a straight whereas spiking a 7 has no impact.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure the bigger reason is that you can make more straights with 77 than with 33, which is more important than blocking a wheel draw.

Either way, this only matters if you're planning on playing back at your opponent if you flop an oesd so the 7.3% only makes 77 more playable if you're going to put a move on. Obviously, in the Farha case as he was looking just to flop a set 33 is almost identical to 77.

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

or 'rust away', heard neil's new album is just out...............b

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sammy's plays may seem amazing, but honestly, he's a fish in the "big game". Unless it's Omaha, he usually is pissed off and tries to weasel out of playing Holdem or get them to add more Omaha to the lineup, lol. Not to mention, he's one of the biggest stuck on himself a$$holes I've ever met.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this the general feeling about him? He's seemed cool to me on television for the times he has been on.

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

They might have said Curtis is an amateur but he aint no freaking amateur id call him a b list pro considering his extensive gambling career i also thought he had a plan to play his hands to the extreme considering u do need 56 million chips in front of u by the end

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

I really don't think Sam played anything better than Daniel.
Sam just got lucky.
Daniel played great but just got terribly unlucky.

If luck tilted a little to Daniel's side, the story will be different.
Both Sam and Daniel are great players.

Like Fossilman said: do you need luck to win, yes 100%.

You cannot win any sizable tourney without being lucky.

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

BELIEVE ME. Seen people call with Ax crap high all ins, King high, bottom pair, called reraises with 33, reraise an obvious made hand to the table with nothing but an obvious bluff. call all ins with just a draw..no odds or overs of course.

Its there man. But in these tournaments there are probably 15% pretty good players. I actually feek nore relaxed at a table with good players (as strange as it sounds) because I can read them better. I have never gone broke to a good player. I always get busted by "your bluffing I call" and they hit their 3-5 outer, lol. Just a run of bad luck, but still annoying.

Hard Rock Casino Tuesday and Saturday 4000 chips 25/50 blinds go up every 30 mins. You can fold for 90 mins and still have plenty of chips to win the tournament. $150 and $200 buy ins.

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

More than Poker Brat? Wow

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

I know that for sure. I placed top 3 in my 1st live $200 tournament winning $5k and I was lucky to double up on the 3rd hand. It allowed me to play....a little more loose. I also won every important all in and folded every important fold.

Compared to the next 6 tournemnts where I go in with the best hand and come out with a beat stick for the other player.

I would really love to know how often some of these pros place in the money, 10%, 20%, 30%? 5%?

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure the bigger reason is that you can make more straights with 77 than with 33, which is more important than blocking a wheel draw.

Either way, this only matters if you're planning on playing back at your opponent if you flop an oesd so the 7.3% only makes 77 more playable if you're going to put a move on. Obviously, in the Farha case as he was looking just to flop a set 33 is almost identical to 77.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah you are right. I just tried running 77 v 33 when you strip the deck of eights and sixes and they perform basically identically.

Re: WSOP last night and Sam Farha
 

[ QUOTE ]
black 7s are 7.3% more likely to beat red aces than black 3s are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh?

cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
7s 7c 343300 20.05 1364608 79.69 4396 0.26 0.202
Ad Ah 1364608 79.69 343300 20.05 4396 0.26 0.798

cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
3s 3c 319884 18.68 1384984 80.88 7436 0.43 0.189
Ad Ah 1384984 80.88 319884 18.68 7436 0.43 0.811


Anyway, it's very simple: Farha is playing to flop a set because the implied odds are so huge. (Not as huge as they could be with that donk open-raise to 20BB, but still.) With very deep stacks early in tournaments, making loose preflop calls based on implied odds, if you feel you can outplay the other players on later streets, is a very good strategy.