Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

I just got around to reading Dan Harrington's book (which is excellent). He kicks off his book with a sample hand from the wsop when Moneymaker won. The hand was when he held AK off. I just cant seem to agree with his reasoning to call rather than reraise preflop. I just wanted to know what others think.

The hand went as follows for those that didnt see it on tv or read it in his book. Playing seven handed at the final table with blinds at 10K/20K, Sam Farha raises 3xBB ($60,000) with 99 utg. Two folds to Dan Harrington in the cutoff with AK off. Harrington called as did moneymaker on the button with T9 off, and so did Amir Vahedi in the big blind with T8 off. The flop came 9 6 4 rainbow. Farha won a decent pot when Moneymaker and Vahedi both called his 80K bet on the flop and Vahedi tried to bluff the turn by leading out on a 6 for 300K.

The only part of the hand that I wanted to discuss was Harrington calling with AK instead or raising. Harrington said he called due to the fact 1.)He had position and didnt need to play the hand as strongly before the flop due to it 2.)He wanted to reduce the volatility (money swing) on the hand.

He then went on to "brag" in some senses about how his call saved him a lot of chips. Saying how if he raised to 150K preflop and made a move on the flop (heads-up with Farha after Moneymaker and Vahedi both fold preflop) that he would have lost an extra 250K making a move for the pot and running into Farha coming over the top with his trip nines. Instead he points out that he only lost 60K in chips.

I think Harrington is simply using the results to back up his preflop call. From my point of view it would be a must raise preflop to approximately 150K for several reasons. The fact that Farha is loose means it is more likely he holds two lower cards instead of a pocket pair. If I was Harrington I would be anxious to get more money in there as a 2-1 favorite if thats the case. But the main reason would be to ensure that I got the hand heads-up.

I have no doubt Harrington would have rethought his stance big time if the flop came something like 8 K T, giving him tptk and Vahedi two pair. Then he simply would have lost a ton of chips due to not ensuring it was heads up. I mean were talking about a loose player raising 3xBB, seven handed, with players behind us, and we have a premium holding of AK. I just cant understand how he's backing up his call as being so correct. What do others think?

Mike Emery

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

I think both calling and raising are valid in this case. However I think what it comes down to is that Harrington back himself post flop with position enough that he'd rather not put aload of money in PF without being sure he was ahead. Maybe he also thought that at least one of the blinds would fold because the raise had been called and therefore they weren't simply folding to a potential steal.

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

I would almost always reraise with AK as well - especially in position. BUT, I think Dan played this hand correct for a few reasons:

1) Sammy was under the gun and MOST of the time that raise needs to be given a lot of respect.

2) It was Sammy... Not that Dan should be afraid of Sammy, but Sammy is a loose player who will call a reraise with A LOT of hands - making him dangerous. Therefore, if Dan were to miss his AK and Sammy figured it out, then Dan would have lost a lot more chips.

3) If he hit his King - he might extract more chips from Sammy. Sammy might not put Dan on AK because he only called. (the Ace is more of a scare card because Dan could just call with a holding like AJ or A10)

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

Keep in mind that Harrington is a very tight player. If he puts Sammy on any pocket pair, he knows it's a coin flip at best. Neither one was short stacked. Harrington didn't need to take a stand and knocking out a player wasn't an issue either. From myself, I tend to play AK much less aggressively than I used to. A few reasons for that.
1) I'd prefer being on a better end of a coin flip situation if my opponent goes all in pre flop.
2) Smooth calling makes it possible to trap my opponent on the flop if I hit something good. Conversely, it's easy to release if I completely miss.
3) Because most people reraise with AK, not reraising makes it a little more difficult for my opponent to put me on AK even if I do the flop.

Having said that, I think you're right about Harrington using the outcome to justify why he played the hand that way.

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

I don't see why flat calling is a bad play at all. if sammy is raising with a dominated hand like KQ and they both pair then dan will extract the max from him. plus he is in position and that will give him a big advantage on later streets with plenty of money left to bet.

--turnipmonster

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

dan's line works for me. with medium and small stacks in the late stages of a tourney, stack preservation is very important. to me that is the critical issue against a good LAG. if he raises he knocks out most of the hands that will pay him off some. if he calls and misses, he is in good bluff position. if he calls and hits he's got a good hidden hand. also if he misses he can fold and no biggie. no follow-through bluff needed.

matt

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

I don't know if Dan mentions it as a reason for flat calling, but the prize money jumps are massive at that point. If their were some short stacks, all the more reason to reduce the money swing.

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

Danny wouldn't maintain that his play was correct or incorrect, only that there were two different ways to play the hand and on this occasion he picked the call for the reasons he gave. Throughout Volume 1 we tried to emphasize that you can vary your play in many situations (especially pre-flop) on a semi-random basis to throw off your opponents.

The point of the "what if ..." section was not to gloat about how the play turned out, but to give readers a feel for the enormous swings incurred by different, but basically equivalent, plays.

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

Hi Bill. Welcome to the forums. Nice job on the book.

Matt

Re: Dan Harrington\'s AK wsop hand
 

[ QUOTE ]

Danny wouldn't maintain that his play was correct or incorrect, only that there were two different ways to play the hand and on this occasion he picked the call for the reasons he gave. Throughout Volume 1 we tried to emphasize that you can vary your play in many situations (especially pre-flop) on a semi-random basis to throw off your opponents.

The point of the "what if ..." section was not to gloat about how the play turned out, but to give readers a feel for the enormous swings incurred by different, but basically equivalent, plays.



[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the input Bill. Like I said it was an excellent book you two wrote, the best I've ever read on no-limit.

Mike Emery