Paul Phillips WSOP Hand

[Voltron87]

I'm not saying this is a simple or easy hand. But 75% of the replies are just crap.

[pokergripes]

Oh, in that case I agree with you, although I'm not sure that really distinguishes this thread in particular... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
button is not minraising (its actually not a minraise, technically) with AA-77

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it is, technically. In real-life poker we have long used the term "mini-raise" to mean "very small raise". It doesn't mean "minimum raise", and if that's a common usage it's from online poker.

[ QUOTE ]
paul even included AJ and KQ at .5.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I didn't, that was someone else.

[ QUOTE ]
And if youre calling, you should be pushing.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not self-apparent. Well, I guess it is in the same way that everything is self-apparent to everyone when it comes to poker, but it isn't self-apparent to me.

If the button has a hand range that includes hands that dominate me and hands I'm 50-55% against, then it may be better to check-call and get the good ones in there than to push and narrow it down to the bad ones. And regardless of how those numbers pan out, if the check-raise has any chance of getting a fold then it has to be considered because it's much more profitable when it works.

Let's say he's AA-TT/AK/AQ. If I push he calls only with the pairs and if I check he pushes with all of them.

Me vs. AA-TT/AK/AQ: 43.5%.
Me vs. AA-TT: 33.4%.

Turns out there are 24 ways to make AA-TT and 24 ways to make AQ so it's 50/50 which he has. [Edit: duh, I mean AK/AQ, and duh, it's 32 ways. So these numbers are wrong but the point is still the point. I'd fix it properly but I have to leave.]

Push: 50% of the time he folds and we have 16000, and 50% of the time we have 33.4% * 26000 = 8700. Net = 12350.

Check-call: 43.5% of 26000 = 11300.

So far we're losing by 1000 by checking (with increased risk of busting to boot.) But what if sometimes he bets 3K with AK/AQ and folds to a check-raise? With a 19K result each time it works the check-raise doesn't have to work that often to have higher EV.

Maybe the check-raise will succeed, maybe it won't, maybe this hand range is way off, maybe it's dead-on; all I know is that all this acting like everything is so obvious and self-apparent and unworthy of discussion is ultra-lame.

[bugstud]

that was the point that I was trying to get across, albeit unsuccessfully

[Johnny Chan]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying this is a simple or easy hand. But 75% of the replies are just crap.

[/ QUOTE ]


No, what you did say was that this was a bad play and Paul's reasoning was a joke. I'm with Paul, as to not be ultra-lame.

[JasonP530]

Paul-

Wouldnt you think the button was unlikely to play a marginal hand TT/JJ/AQ in that manner. Wouldnt he try to blow you out of the pot instead of giving you odds preflop? Obviously, you know the player better than we do. Was it worth hanging on to your stack and trying to double through one of the bad players as opposed to taking a 50/50 shot basically at that point?

Jason

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it is, technically. In real-life poker we have long used the term "mini-raise" to mean "very small raise". It doesn't mean "minimum raise", and if that's a common usage it's from online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a min raise. A min raise would be to 2000. blinds 400, you raise 800 more to 1200, 800 more is 2000. but that doesnt really matter.


[ QUOTE ]
No I didn't, that was someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was reading your journal and you posted up the percentages and EV for your hand against a range, and AJ and KQ were in it. I might have been wrong and you didn't post it, but my point is that virtually everyone here gave the villain a larger hand range then they should. I could have been wrong that it was you who posted it, but my point still stands about the general debate.



As for call/pushing/cr'ing, what is he going to fold to a check raise? What hand that he minraises pf is he folding to a CR after betting 3-4K? For his sake, I hope very little. I dont think this an "obvious" hand but I do think not checkraising here is very obvious.


btw what did he end up having?

[TomCollins]

Man you are dumb.

Paul says "mini-raised to 2400".

mini means - Something that is distinctively smaller than other members of its type or class.

The raise is pretty damn small, therefore is a miniraise. Paul clearly explains this, then you tell him he is wrong.

[Voltron87]

read my posts, i was never talking to paul about it, it was to everyone in general. i was just pointing it out as a detail. and then i said it doesnt really matter. a bunch of people were referring to it as a minraise, i pointed that out, no big deal.

[2005]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For your own sake I hope you're just hating on me as opposed to believing your own words.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course I believe superior players can engineer better situations than 50-50. If you believe your superiority is based on your willingness to make 50-50 calls that others wouldnt then great. One day you will win 8 coin-flips in a row and win the tournament. Is that really good poker?

In any case I like you - although your mindless camp-followers get me down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, superior players can engineer spots that they're getting better than a 50/50 shot at winning the pot, this is true. The rub is this. There is 16k in the pot and Paul has to call 10k(numbers estimated) Taking a coin flip when getting 8-5 on your money is an edge that nobody in the world should pass up in this event when the stacks aren't super deep. If Paul had 150 BB and so did the other guy and he was getting the same odds, this becomes a fold. Since they both have around 30BB when the hand started, and Paul will only have 25BB if he folds, this is a ridiculously easy call.