no MIKES OUT!
 

fricken suck out inside straight

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

[ QUOTE ]
fricken suck out inside straight

[/ QUOTE ]

the winner had ten outs on the flop, plus a possible winning running flush, wasnt that crazy

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

booya, I just made some good dough (not as much as Matusow), but I'm very happy.

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

Mike was only a 3:2 favorite. Not huge, but still brutal because of the situation.

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

Eh... Standard in a tournament. Sometimes, you got to get your chips in as a 60-40 favorite, and a bunch of the time, you're going to win, but some of the time, you're going to lose.

I don't think the Dannenman play was that bad... Matusow could easily have AK or AQ here, and Dannenman would easily move him off the pot if so. Matusow maybe should have check-raised all-in, but if Dannenman doesn't autobet like most 2+2ers do here, it's fine.

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
Not huge, but still brutal because of the situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. All respect to Matusow for great play, too bad it ended like this.

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

[ QUOTE ]
booya, I just made some good dough (not as much as Matusow), but I'm very happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

huh? how?

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

it wasn't that bad of a beat. He had 2 overs, inside straight draw, and running flush. Phil Hellmuth is making it out to be a lot worse than it is in actuallity. Mike is a 60/40 favorite on that flop. I wanted Mike to pull this off, but that's just the way it goes. It sucks to lose half your stack on the 2nd hand with KK vs AA. I guess it just wasn't his year.

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

actually it was probably the best year of his life!

Re: no MIKES OUT!
 

did his "once again i lose with the best hand" sound a little hellmuthian?