Last hand in Aruba. Did Brenes play right?

[SossMan]

I can't believe this thread has gotten this long without anyone putting Layne on a range of both opening and calling hands. On the face of it, it looks like the chip stacks were a little deep to be making this move, but it's probably fairly close if there is a big difference in skill level postflop.

What is layne calling with? Is he laying down AQ or AJs there? He instacalled with 99, does he lay down 55 or even 66? Probably. We should attempt to answer these questions before simply writing off Brenes' play as fishy.

-sossman

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
out of position with 22.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, his play pretty much negated his positional disadvantage, huh?

[Dynasty]

The real mistake in this hand was Flack's call with 99. Why the hell would Flack want to put his whole tournament on the line with a pocket pair that could be up against any of five overcards. Flack should know better than to risk his tournamnent in a possible 50/50 situation when he's so much a better player than his opponent.

What we saw of Flack's play heads-up was very poor. He should have known not to pay off Brenes' trip Aces. And, then he was putting in significant pre-flop raises with one junky hand (86o?) and 99 when he couldn't withstand a big reraise.


As far as Brenes goes, his all-in reraise with 22 is just as good as the one he made with KQs. Flack is going to fold in a pot Flack made big unless Flack's got a big hand or decideds to gamble against a weaker oppponent.

[SossMan]

If you put Brenes' range of pushing hands at something like:
AA-22, AK-AT, A9s-A6s, KQ, KJs
then the call is a no brainer.
5*6 = 30 combos of overpairs (80% dog)
8*6 = 48 combos of underpairs (80% fav)
5*16 + 4 (KJs) = 84 combos of overcards (55% fav)
A9s = 1 (70% fav)
3*4 = 12 combos of suited aces w/ kicker < 9. (70% fav)

175 total combos
17% of the time he is a 20% fav = 3.4% equity
27% of the time he is a 80% fav = 21.6% equity
48% of the time he is a 55% fav = 26.4% equity
7% of the time he is a 70% fav = 4.9% equity

that's a total of 56.3% equity vs. that relatively tight range of hands.

if the stacks are t4m each and the blinds were 50k/100k and LF made it t460k to go and AB pushed for 4m total, layne was getting 4,460,000:3,540,000 about 1.26 meaning he only needed about 44% equity to make calling correct from a chip EV perspective.

Now, there may very well be some other factors that could push it one way or another:
how many hands Alex was pushing that we didn't see
how much control layne felt that he had postflop over alex
how often layne was raising on the button heads up (this would widen the range of hands that alex would push with)

it's my gut feeling that Layne was likely raising nearly every hand on the button, so he needed to loosen up his calling if alex had been pushing back. The way that he instacalled made me think that he thought that alex put him on two cards.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
If you put Brenes' range of pushing hands at something like:
AA-22, AK-AT, A9s-A6s, KQ, KJs
then the call is a no brainer.

that's a total of 56.3% equity vs. that relatively tight range of hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a no-brainer simply because your equity is > 50%. If Flack avoided these confrontations completely, don't you think he would win this heads-up match more than 56.3% of the time?

Flack's call is a mistake becasue even if he stumbles into a 4:1 advantage like he did, it still may not be an improvement for him.

With even and deep stacks, if Flack doesn't get into pre-flop all-in situations, do you think he can beat Brenes more than 81% of the time? I think he just might be able to do it.

So, why is he taking any big risks at all?

[Beavis68]

Erick and Brennes are the same person.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last hand on the Aruba tournament. Blinds were 50-100k i believe. Layne raised with 99's up to something like 460k. Brenes moves in with pocket 22's. Is Eric's play good or bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

Eric's play here is great nothing wrong at all. Now Brenes pushing with pocket 2's.. thats another question.
At Best Brenes is a coin flip againist 2 overs at worst he is a huge dog to another pair I think wait for another spot. IF he was short stacked and the blinds were pushing him yeah it would be a good play but from what I have read in this thread that wasn't case.


[/ QUOTE ]

[J.Brown]

Dynasty,

Normally I agree with you, but you are a touch off on this one. I talked to Layne in length about this play and this hand and especially the hands that weren't shown.

Did you forget about all of those, they are the ones that really show the flow of play. Layne felt like he set this play up and "knew" that he was a big fave in this hand, not flipping a coin, of course he could of been wrong, but he wasn't, was he??

No one, as Fossilman and Paul Phillips have repeatedly pointed out, can turn down 4.5 to 1 and hope to win a tournament. I don't think that Layne is that big of favorite heads up to be turning down the spot he got his money in, but I didn't ask him that.

A small aside that adds some validity to my point, did you see how he turned his hand over after he instantly called the all in? He even looked a 100% sure that he was in a dominating position..........and he was. Just my 2 cents.

cheers. J.Brown

[Vince Lepore]

I haven't read anyone elses post. Brenes's play was his typical play. He played like this during the entire final table. I personally think that he wagered his chips on what was at best a coin toss and at worse a 4 to 1 dog (as it turned outhe was a 4 to 1 dog). The blinds were not very high considereing his stack size so I think he should have waited for a better situation to move all of his chips in. The bottom line, however, is this "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Playing very (overly in some instances) aggressive got him heads uo so why should he change now. If he had tried to spar with Flack I believe Flack would have eaten him up.. It is usually to the weker players advantage to take the play away from the more experienced and stronger player. Brenes's move-in did just that.

Vince

[Sluss]

[ QUOTE ]
The real mistake in this hand was Flack's call with 99. Why the hell would Flack want to put his whole tournament on the line with a pocket pair that could be up against any of five overcards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say the 5 out of the last seven times Layne opened up on the button Brenes pushed. Would that change your opinion?

[Vince Lepore]

Dynasty,

Your position is right in line with the way I viewed Flack's play when I first saw the hand. The problem is that somewhere Flack has to make a call like this, else he will find himself in a move in contest with no or little edge. Brene's through his play said to Flack " Hey if you want to beat me come and get me. And this is how I'm playing the rest of the tournament." If Brenes tries to Spar with Flack, I believe Flack will destroy him. So it is to his Brenes' advantage to move in on close situations. Flack found himself in a situation with what figured to be the best hand and could very well be a huge favorite. Consequently, even though I don't think it's a slam dunk call, I believe that Flack made the correct play by calling.

Vince