Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Without the context, this looks like some amazing read and world class laydown...and I do have to admit that not losing a dime w/ AK postflop when you flop an ace on a rainbow board isn't the easiest thing in the world, but in context, this really is pretty easy.

Blinds 250-500 (prob w/ antes of 50, i'm guessing).

Hellmuth opens from what looks like EP w/ AK.

Seemingly tight 150 year old Italian guy perks up and min-reraises to 3k total. I'm just guessing, but I'm sure that this is the first time since the carter administration that this guy has reraised preflop. AND HE'S RERAISING PHIL FREAKING HELLMUTH!!

Hellmuth calls.

Pot is 6k plus antes. Call it 6500.

Phil checks in the dark.
Flop is A44.
Corpse coffeehouses and checks behind.

Turn is the Q (saving hellmuth's tournament)

Phil checks and folds to the guy's 10k bet.

So, if he puts him on a relatively wide preflop raising range of AA-JJ, AK, AQ, he is now beating exactly two of these hands (KK/JJ). I'm sure that the guy's check behind on the flop, overbet the turn line doesn't really jive well with KK/JJ, so he either is tied or well behind.

That's about as standard as it gets as far as laying down TPTK w/ deep stacks. That also indicates why you should be reraising with more hands than the nuts when deep.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

I agree. Thought after his dark check, and the Q turn, this was easy.

I wonder what happens if Italian guy bets flop...

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

what does everyone think of his "check in the dark" was a deliberate strategy to play "small ball" on day 1?

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

I think the guy's shrug and kind of oh I may as well bet attitude had a big part to do with it.

He bets the flop he wins a huge pot there.


Edit : still a tough laydown.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Given he didn't re-raise with QQ, and his SOOOO obvious physical tells, it seems so easy.

I'm a little behind (on Tivo) but I can't believe they haven't talked about Paul Magriel yet.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

This should probably be a WPT forum discussion, but . . .

I can't believe that guy didn't beat the **** out of Helmuth after his flopped Broadway got outdrawn and Helmuth starts talking about it not being a bad beat.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does everyone think of his "check in the dark" was a deliberate strategy to play "small ball" on day 1?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess he wants to play the player more then the cards, though I dont like checking in the dark after the flop.

Bad check: You check in the dark on the flop, guy hits a flush draw, and you give the guy a card (if you were to bet).

i think it was more of intimidation or just for show

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Interesting explanation. I couldn't figure out why he would check in the dark as much as he did. It seemed like he was giving up massive amounts of "Phil FE" (9 bracelet holder betting--look out), and putting himself in positions where he had to make really good reads, like in that AT hand where he made a bit of a mistake.

As for the TPTK vs. set read, I think it looked pretty easy, but I think a lot of 2+2er's go broke there. That is entirely read dependant, (Corpse (heh) did seem extremely tight, or at least had big hands in both hands we saw) and online there's very little chance of most of us getting away from that AK hand. I guess I shouldn't speak for the zoo, but I went broke there with AA on a K high board against an opponent who I thought could only reasonably have KK, but who I decided possibly could have AK and called anyway. I don't think I'm significantly worse than the average 2+2er.

If the octagenarian leads the flop, I think Phil goes broke if he has less than 25K. If the octagenarian is a little quieter, I think Phil goes broke.

-D,

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little behind (on Tivo) but I can't believe they haven't talked about Paul Magriel yet.

[/ QUOTE ]
Spoke too soon. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Yes upon watching this I as shouting to my friends that Phil is amazing but now this makes alot of obvious sense. Some questions...


SossMan: Why is that a good example of why you should reraise when deep stacked? I also don't know who you meant to raise, and why? Please clarify.

KingDan: How is it a tough lay down?

Lloyd: What do you mean WPT discussion forum? Is that a joke because their boards suck? I've never been to them.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
This should probably be a WPT forum discussion, but . . .

I can't believe that guy didn't beat the **** out of Helmuth after his flopped Broadway got outdrawn and Helmuth starts talking about it not being a bad beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lord knows he was big enough to do so.

-D.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Lloyd: What do you mean WPT discussion forum? Is that a joke because their boards suck? I've never been to them.

[/ QUOTE ]
MTT is a strategy board. Posts should be along those lines. Soss posted a somewhat strategy-related question. I helped it go off into gossip which rightfully belongs in the WPT forum.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
SossMan: Why is that a good example of why you should reraise when deep stacked? I also don't know who you meant to raise, and why? Please clarify.

[/ QUOTE ]

two ways to approach this:

- corpse could have reraised with 75s and moved hellmuth off a lot of boards (such as A44Q)

- if hellmuth did not read corpse as a corpse - the kind of guy who might reraise 75s - then corpse gets paid off on times when he does have AA against AK and an A flops (and a lot more).

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Easy lay down, sure cause I can see both hands.

I think this post is along the lines of the main reason you don't post results in a normal hand thread, it DEFINITELY biases the replys.

Just my thought...

Also, Phil's response to the fact that it isn't an outdraw was that the nines were winning preflop, so it was an outrdraw to get outdrawn again, which happens a lot. So it's a "terrible way to lose" not an outdraw, as Phil put it.

I have no big thoughts on the hand being discussed except I think it was awful for the guy to show his aces, he should have lied and said it was jacks or tens, that'll get phil's heart pumping [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

JMB

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Like someone else said, this hand was all about the situation/being there/playing the player. Though I still give Phil a lot of credit for laying down here.

The only thing I thought of was the corpse's bet was really big. 10k is a huge overbet there, I guess that would look a little funny, but then again a good player would use the reverse, reverse psychology there and figure out what's up.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Like someone else said, this hand was all about the situation/being there/playing the player. Though I still give Phil a lot of credit for laying down here.

The only thing I thought of was the corpse's bet was really big. 10k is a huge overbet there, I guess that would look a little funny, but then again a good player would use the reverse, reverse psychology there and figure out what's up.

[/ QUOTE ]

i totally give phil credit for figuring it out...he's just very lucky that:

A) he checked in the dark
B) the flop was such that the other guy could check behind
(i.e. it wasn't As8c9c with about 9 billion draws for both of them to 'protect')
C) the Q came on the turn to eliminate about half of the hands that phil was beating on the flop
D) this particular player got the AA, not someone who had shown more aggression vs. him

Still a very nice appraisal of the situation, but it wasn't the laydown that one would think it would be if given out of context and certainly one that an educated player would be able to figure out if they took their time.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
SossMan: Why is that a good example of why you should reraise when deep stacked? I also don't know who you meant to raise, and why? Please clarify.

[/ QUOTE ]

if I reraise one time in four hours, what are the chances that I have AJ?
You become especially easy to play against, especially if you are the type of player that plays AA on a 589 board like it's the nuts.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Bingo I get the reraise deal now. Very wise.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does everyone think of his "check in the dark" was a deliberate strategy to play "small ball" on day 1?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've occasionally used the check in the dark strategy against weaker players when I'm OOP. I think it allows you to neutralize some part of the penalty for being OOP and often does lead to more cautious and passive play by the weaker players.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Whenever a 150 year old guy bets 10K into a 6K pot with a board of A A 4 Q after a 3 bet pre flop and DOESN'T DIE IN THE PROCESS, I fold.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Still a very nice appraisal of the situation, but it wasn't the laydown that one would think it would be if given out of context and certainly one that an educated player would be able to figure out if they took their time.


[/ QUOTE ]

You really think most educated players are checking the turn so they can figure out the situation?

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever a 150 year old guy bets 10K into a 6K pot with a board of A A 4 Q after a 3 bet pre flop and DOESN'T DIE IN THE PROCESS, I fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was A 4 4 Q .......

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
This should probably be a WPT forum discussion, but . . .

I can't believe that guy didn't beat the **** out of Helmuth after his flopped Broadway got outdrawn and Helmuth starts talking about it not being a bad beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

why? the money went in preflop, JTs vs. 99. flopped broadway, turn 9, river Q. some guy not in the hand starts talking about it being a bad beat, hellmuth correctly points out that it is not a bad beat because they were basically even money when the money went in, and then the dude who lost w/ JTs starts arguing with phil and calling it a bad beat. phil was right.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Yeah Phil was right but when Magriel's 77 knocked his AQ out he wasn't about to point out that Magriel went in with the best hand.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Still a very nice appraisal of the situation, but it wasn't the laydown that one would think it would be if given out of context and certainly one that an educated player would be able to figure out if they took their time.


[/ QUOTE ]

You really think most educated players are checking the turn so they can figure out the situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, i would guess that most good players bet out the turn and fold to the raise. If the Q doesn't come, I don't think that there is any way Phil doesn't lose a bundle of chips. The Q made his hand shrink up quite a bit.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

How about the turn bet by the Italian guy? I thought that was horrible. Maybe your opponent puts you on a bluff and calls but you've gotta be thinking you can suck out more chips with a reasonable bet.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
How about the turn bet by the Italian guy? I thought that was horrible. Maybe your opponent puts you on a bluff and calls but you've gotta be thinking you can suck out more chips with a reasonable bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

i do that sometimes if I want it to look like a steal after checking behind on the flop. Of course, I usually bet the flop when I flop a monster, too. It wasn't that much of an overbet. It was 10k into about a 6.5k pot.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah Phil was right but when Magriel's 77 knocked his AQ out he wasn't about to point out that Magriel went in with the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought Magriel's call here was pretty awful actually. The only thing is I couldn't quite tell what the stack sizes were, and how much he already has committed. There's no way I feel confident there calling with 7s against a push from a good player. You're basically hoping for a coinflip, seemed pretty bad all around to me.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Try as we might, it is impossible to ignore the fact that all of us KNEW the old dude had aces. Decisions inevitably look oh-so-clear when you can see other guy's cards.

Understanding that, there were many signs that pointed to a monster from the old man. Would I have noticed these in the heat of battle (when I didn't know the other guy's cards)? Unknown and unknowable. But, man, they seemed clear while sitting on my couch:

1. The mini-reraise. Usually a sign of a monster, especially when up against a world class player and have many players still to act behind. If you have a hand like TT, the last thing you want to do is play post flop and provide opportunities for the better player to outplay you. The miniraise says "I'm not afraid of playing every street, and I don't care if others join the pot."

2. The coffeehousing. The old man was way too comfortable, looking like he didn't have a care in the world. Again, he's on the ESPN TV table, playing for $7M, heads up against a great tourney player, and he's making jokes! Jeez old man, shut up already!

3. The shrug. When Phil checks to him, he (effectively) says, "OK, I guess I'll bet." Perhaps the most obvious weak-when-strong tell of the day.

4. The massive overbet. When he finally decides to bet, he bets way too much (2x pot). No wonder phil thought he had Queens full.

Laying down AK on a A44Q board is a great laydown. But if there was ever a situation that made it easy...this was it.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

The dark-check strategy seems like a really strong one for A) a player that is capable of making great reads B) When everyone has deep stacks C) Most your opponents are bad and/or highly inferior players.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Magriel made it 6600 to go, Phil pushed and they said it was 6700, and I assume that meant 6700 MORE. So at that point he's getting more than 3-1 with the 7s so it's not bad. I don't like his massive re-raise with 7s in the first place though. I think Phil made it 1200 to go or something and Magriel made it 6600.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Magriel made it 6600 to go, Phil pushed and they said it was 6700, and I assume that meant 6700 MORE. So at that point he's getting more than 3-1 with the 7s so it's not bad. I don't like his massive re-raise with 7s in the first place though. I think Phil made it 1200 to go or something and Magriel made it 6600.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh the beauty of X-22. In almost all cases, he bets in increments of 22. So in this case he could have made it 2200, 4400, 6600, etc. While 4400 probably would have been a more normal raise, 6600 won't necessarily be taken as some huge overbet "I'm re-stealing from Phil" kind of bet. It's Magriel being Magriel. And it's a clear call when it's folded back to him because of the pot odds he was getting.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Magriel made it 6600 to go, Phil pushed and they said it was 6700, and I assume that meant 6700 MORE. So at that point he's getting more than 3-1 with the 7s so it's not bad. I don't like his massive re-raise with 7s in the first place though. I think Phil made it 1200 to go or something and Magriel made it 6600.

[/ QUOTE ]

triple quack quack

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Magriel and I were on the same table twice at this year's WSOP. He definitely uses his (unusual) image to his advantage. He absolutely knows that people think he's nuts and exploits that like you've never seen. He's absolutely brilliant and definitely has skills.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have no big thoughts on the hand being discussed except I think it was awful for the guy to show his aces, he should have lied and said it was jacks or tens, that'll get phil's heart pumping

[/ QUOTE ]

. . . or just show one A

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

This seems like a routine preflop fold to me.

-Jason

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Magriel made it 6600 to go, Phil pushed and they said it was 6700, and I assume that meant 6700 MORE. So at that point he's getting more than 3-1 with the 7s so it's not bad. I don't like his massive re-raise with 7s in the first place though. I think Phil made it 1200 to go or something and Magriel made it 6600.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I can't remember is, did phil raise, then Magriel raise, then phil push? or was Magriel first in?

I guess if Magriel was first, getting 3 to 1 it's a call for him. I'd want to know Magriel's stack tho.

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like a routine preflop fold to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't tell if you are kidding or not.

I'm not sure how deep they are, but with the guy essentially showing you his hand how deep do you need to be to make this call?

Especially if you can almost count on a free turn card.

If you each have 25K behind are you still folding?

If you know he has AA and will go to the felt, how much do you need behind to make this call?

Is this the same guy who said (I'm paraphrasing) "early in a tourney I take all the implied odds every dishes out and go for blood"

I realize that with him having AA you will need to flop huge, but if you can *almost* count on a free turn, getting almost 2:1 to call.....

Regards,
Woodguy

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Wasn't that about what Phill had left?

Re: Hellmuth\'s AK hand
 

Hellmuth raised, Magriel re-raised, folded to Hellmuth who pushed. Magriel had excellent odds and called. Not sure how many chips he had there but it didn't seem like losing was going to hurt him too much - he had a big stack, just not sure the denominations.