Interesting Hand from WPT Aruba

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
I predict he called w/ 88 and you hit a 9.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that makes it a good play if he knows he likely has an underpair and may or may not call doesn't it? He's not much of a dog to underpairs and the pot is giving him a signifigant overlay.

cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Js 9s 822347 48.03 882398 51.53 7559 0.44 0.482
8c 8h 882398 51.53 822347 48.03 7559 0.44 0.518

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest problem I have with this play is that you were only in the pot for T150 and now your tournament life is on the line with J9. I hope it worked out for you.


[/ QUOTE ]

why is this a problem if he's going to increase his stack by 40% around 50-60% of the time w/ zero risk? It's about recognizing profitable situations, and when all factors are added up, this certainly qualifies.

[drewjustdrew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I predict he called w/ 88 and you hit a 9.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that makes it a good play if he knows he likely has an underpair and may or may not call doesn't it? He's not much of a dog to underpairs and the pot is giving him a signifigant overlay.

cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Js 9s 822347 48.03 882398 51.53 7559 0.44 0.482
8c 8h 882398 51.53 822347 48.03 7559 0.44 0.518

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot a key stat in your monday morning analysis. He hit the 9 in the prediction. That makes this a no-brainer. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[KramerTM]

[ QUOTE ]
why is this a problem if he's going to increase his stack by 40% around 50-60% of the time w/ zero risk? It's about recognizing profitable situations, and when all factors are added up, this certainly qualifies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please explain how you can do something with zero risk that is successful less than 100% of the time. This makes no sense.

[illegit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is this a problem if he's going to increase his stack by 40% around 50-60% of the time w/ zero risk? It's about recognizing profitable situations, and when all factors are added up, this certainly qualifies.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe he's saying there's zero risk those times he doesn't get called and increases his stack significantly uncontested, which is an odd way to phrase it seeing as the pay itself has an element of risk obviously.

[KramerTM]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe he's saying there's zero risk those times he doesn't get called and increases his stack significantly uncontested, which is an odd way to phrase it seeing as the pay itself has an element of risk obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understood what he was trying to say. I still, however, stand by my "this makes no sense."

Unless of course he considered this tournament a freeroll, as long as he payed his $10K.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe he's saying there's zero risk those times he doesn't get called and increases his stack significantly uncontested, which is an odd way to phrase it seeing as the pay itself has an element of risk obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understood what he was trying to say. I still, however, stand by my "this makes no sense."

Unless of course he considered this tournament a freeroll, as long as he payed his $10K.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i realized after i wrote it that it was poorly phrased. However, the fact remains that his EV in this situation is not negligable and the 'why risk your tournament life' argument never seems to take this into consideration.

[psyduck]

<font color="blue"> Results donkey! </font> <font color="red"> Results donkey! </font> <font color="green"> Results donkey! </font>

[ZeeJustin]

Ok, sorry for all the anticipation.

The results I'm about to share absolutely flabbergasted me. SB instantly folded. MP1 thought for about 5-10 seconds and put his chips in w/ an expression on his face saying "I have to". MP3 asked for a count. I said I started the hand w/ 10,000 chips, but he wanted the dealer to count the chips anyway. The dealer counted out about 7800 in MP1's stack, and then MP3 mucked his cards before the dealer even counted my stack. IMHO, I don't think he ever was actually considering calling. I think he was just acting to make it look like he didn't ahve complete [censored].

Then MP1 did the unthinkable. He flipped over Ace-Jack not-suited. I lost leaving me crippled.

I played at the table for another 90 minutes, and even after all that time, my read on MP1 didn't change. He was definately loose passive, and almost definately an internet qualifier. I am still in disbelief as to how he of all people could put in his entire stack with AJo.

I know some people here are going to defend his call and say, "great read", but against my range of hands that I merely call the original 150 w/, AJo is even money (this range includes, any pair, any suited ace, AKo, AQo, suited connectors down to 54s, suited one gaps down to 64s, and a couple of unsuited broadway hands). If he's even money vs the range of hands I put in 150 chips with, his call for 8,000 more chips during 25/50 blinds is just abysmal.

My overall analysis of this play:
My read on how willing MP1 was to put his tournament life at stake was clearly off.
Given my reads however (that were otherwise correct), I think this play has a significant positive chip equity.
Despite that, there is just too much risk of me going broke during this hand, and I should have given up this edge to avoid missing out on bigger edges later on.
-Thanks for all the insight
-ZJ

[Ulysses]

This is why we like you Internet kids in the cash games (the read, not the play).