Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

Why did he bet if he was going to call anyway?makes no sense..

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

Your board has to be wrong because if it weren't then the pot would have been split, which it wasn't.

A7 and A3 both have AQJ98 on your board.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

One person said it, but everyone else has ignored this fact- this isn't online! In live play, opponents sometimes reveal the strength of their hand through something known as a "tell". Clearly Cassidy thought his opponent had nothing, and he was right. You can't, like online, only consider what % of the time this action has him beat.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

[ QUOTE ]
One person said it, but everyone else has ignored this fact- this isn't online! In live play, opponents sometimes reveal the strength of their hand through something known as a "tell". Clearly Cassidy thought his opponent had nothing, and he was right. You can't, like online, only consider what % of the time this action has him beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

tell me more about these so called "tells" of yours.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

[ QUOTE ]
One person said it, but everyone else has ignored this fact- this isn't online! In live play, opponents sometimes reveal the strength of their hand through something known as a "tell". Clearly Cassidy thought his opponent had nothing, and he was right. You can't, like online, only consider what % of the time this action has him beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still dont get it. If he thought his opponent has nothing, why didnt he check and call any bluff bet?

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

He obviously didn't put his opponent on "nothing" if/when he bet. It's more likely that he put his opponent first on "something" and then changed his read after the raise.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

Joe Cassidy described this hand on CardPlayer.com's streaming audio called "The circuit". It went something like this:

Patrick Antonius opened from cut-off position, and Cassidy called from the BB with A-7.

Flop came 5-6-9, two diamonds.

Cassidy checked, and Antonius bet about 80% of the pot.

Since Antonius had been playing very aggresively, Cassidy thought there was a good chance he had the best hand, and if he didn't he still had outs, so he called.

Turn came an offsuit Queen.

Cassidy checked, and Antonius checked behind.

At this point Cassidy didn't think Antonius had much of a hand.

River was a Jack, completing a possible diamond flush.

Cassidy bet out 140K to represent a hand, because he didn't want a small pair or a bigger ace-high to beat him in a free showdown.

Antonius raised to 340K, and Cassidy went into to tank.

Cassidy had the Ace of Diamonds, so he knew Antonius couldn't have the nuts. In the end he decided to call with the A-7 high because he didn't think Antonius would raise for value on the river since Cassidy called him on the flop and then led the river after the possible flush got there. He figured if Antonius had a strong hand there (flush, straight) he would just call and not risk getting re-raised by another big stack who could possibly have the nut flush. He figured the most likely reason Antonius raised was that he had a bluffing hand himself.

Sure enough, Antonius showed A-3, and Cassidy's 7 kicker barely beat the board to win the huge pot. A brilliant read on Cassidy's part.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How often do you bluff and call on the same street in NL with no cards to come?

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you say that he was really bluffing? You could argue he was making a value bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't limit hold'em. When you bet on the river in no-limit with ace-high you are bluffing.

Cassidy bluffed, but recognized that Antonius was bluff-raising.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

[ QUOTE ]
I still dont get it. If he thought his opponent has nothing, why didnt he check and call any bluff bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

According the the audio interview on cardplayer, he led at the pot on the river because he didn't want Antonius to get a free showdown with a hand like 33 or 44. So when Antonius raises, Joe just went through every possible hand and decided that since he had the ace of diamonds (which is very important because he didn't think Antonius could raise with a small flush) that Antonius simply had to be bluffing. It's not crazy, just a good solid read.

So to answer your question, he can't just check/call with ace high because it was essentially Antonius's river raise that gave Joe the information that he was bluffing.

Re: Joe cassidy\'s A high call on the river
 

If Joe isn't holding the Ace of diamonds there, he folds in a heartbeat.