"Official" ESPN Coverage of WSOP Main Event: Final Table

[PITTM]

wow, i didnt notice that hachem had 87 when kanter floped trips with A7 vs barchs aq. even luckier than previously thought? sweet.

rj

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think Hachem's flop check is bad merely because any AKQ on the turn or river could easily hit Danneman, and a bet will get rid of him. Too simplified?

[/ QUOTE ]

What if you make Dannenman fold AK and then an Ace comes on the turn or river causing Barch to get tripled up instead of being eliminated?

[/ QUOTE ]\

Yea, Hachem is folding to a bet. You only bet here if you represent that you have improved and can knock out Tex. 3rd pays 2.5(?) and 2nd pays 4.25(?) or thereabouts. That means that by checking down this pot, Danneman and Hachem, if they can eliminate Tex, make a minimum of nearly 2 million more.

When the 28th person was eliminated it went like this: someone moved in early, Black reraised, and Matusow called in late position. The flop was ten high and Black checked. Matusow bet, Black folded pocket queens face up, and Matusow showed a set of tens. Black made a good read, but given the situation, that is the norm, especially amongst good players which Matusow and Black are, and especially for these stakes.

If you push and Tex wins the hand then he tripples up putting them almost equal. You gotta check this one down. Had this been Matusow, he probably goes for the braclet, but any other average joe is playing for the two million. You dont wanna dry bluff this side pot letting the third guy tripple up on you.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
anyone like how Black played that set?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, it's hard to say because I haven't played with Kanter, but I don't like the way he played it. The board has no apparent threatening draws and, from what the coverage has shown, Kanter is an aggressive player who's likely to bet again on the turn. I think if Black just calls on the flop he doubles up.

[/ QUOTE ]

no apparent threatening draws? you do notices there's a flush/str8 draw out there right and kantor's the guy who busted raymer raising w/ a flush draw. against a shorter stack, you can gamble a little bit and possibly give him a free card but not against a big stack who can cripple you. IMO black played the hand perfect.

[ QUOTE ]
**'grunching'**

Why didn't Hachem bet with his pair of Jacks on the flop of 10 high against Dannenman with Barch all in?

I understand the concept of checking down to knock the other guy out but with JJ on taht flop, Hachem needs to fire a small bet out to let Dannenman know he's got SOMETHING. Hachem can't let Dannenman see a free card there, and I'm not just saying that b/c I knew Dannenman had a pocket pair (7's).

If Dannenman hits a third 7 on the turn Joe is in a very tough spot...

[/ QUOTE ]

the answer is 2 million more dollars and heads-up WSOP ME. i can understand someone check/calling even w/ aces just to make sure barch is goin for good. if i got sucked out on, the extra 2 million and tv coverage i made will ease my pain. that being said, i would of bet. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Barch said afterward that he would have been the chip leader if he had won that hand. I question the call by Dannenmann with 77 with Hachem to act still behind him, unless he knew Hachem would just call and check it down all the way.

[/ QUOTE ]

so what if hachem was behind him. hachem hasn't indicated any strength and is the first to act postflop.

Couldn't agree more. I will say that while the poker on the laughable celebrity poker showdown is not so stellar, but at least you get to see more hands. Overall I think the commentary is better on that show from Phil Gordon.... I really don't learn much from the world series, it is more entertainment than lesson.

[ QUOTE ]
From what I saw, I liked Danneman's and Hachem's play throughout the table. Sure you could say that Steve got lucky against Black, but what is Steve supposed to do on that board?

The only 2 plays I didn't like were Hachem's call with bottom pair when heads-up. Why not just check-raise and end the hand?

Also, the JJ hand. I totally disliked his call. Seriously, I know there is a $1.75 million difference in money, but you have to consider the # of times that Steve is calling Barch's all-in with AJ/AT/KQ, do you really want him in?

Look at it this way:

Hachem pushes over the top, and Steve folds any hand that's not KK/AA (assuming he folds AK/QQ) and wins, He has a 2 to 1 on Steve going to HU. Gain in money = 1.75 million

Hachem pushes over the top, Steve folds, and Barch wins. Barch/Hachem/Steve practically have the same # of chips between them. Gain in money = 0

Hachem calls with JJ. Checks it down with steve. Steve hits a set and wins the hand. You go to HU with a 2 to 1 deficit. Gain in money = 1.75 million

Hachem calls with JJ. Checks down with Steve. Barch spikes an ace and wins the hand. Now they have about the same number of chips. Gain in money = 0



The difference between all 4 scenarios is basically, if you want the bracelet, you need to push it all-in pre-flop.

[/ QUOTE ]


i've never seen a braclet worth 1.7 million. even if i did, it wouldn't be worth 1.7 million dollars to me.

[ QUOTE ]
2 questions:

Why didn't Black just call the raise by Kanter with his set of 5's?

Why in the world did Lazar call that all in with K9? He was definately not getting the right price.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. str8/flush possibly.

2. you can tell by his decreasing stack size that they were beating the crap outta him. everyone has a tilt button, guess his got pushed.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This is where you guys are making your mistake. If Dannenman bets, Hachem is going to read that he is behind. In these checkdown situations, you don't call bets unless you've got a very big hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are mistaken, Hachem could easily put Dannenman on AT or A7 by the turn if Dannenman bets. Or some other high pocket pair (that hadn't made trips, I don't remember the board), that is lower than T.

A turn bet by Dannenman would not allow Hachem to automatically assume his overpair is no good.

Let's put it this way, by Hachem not betting the flop he is potentially putting himself in a situation or two where he would have no idea how far ahead/behind he is on either the turn/river.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Hachem bets, he might also force an overcard hand to fold. If Dannenmann has AK and Barch has Ax, the checkdown takes away some of Barch's outs. That's the whole purpose of the checkdown.

Matusow folded an overpair (QQ, I believe) earlier in the WSOP on a flop where one person was all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, before we argue any further I think that we would need to know the exact chip counts for each player at the beginning of the hand.

Theoretically I would see your point if say Hachem started with $28M, Dannenman with $26M, and Barch with $.5M. That would mean the pot was only $1.5M, and not extremely necessary for Hachem to win. In that case Hachem knocking out Barch would be more +EV, than taking down a 1.5M pot and keeping Barch in, especially if SD was so close to Hachem in chip count and could bust Hachem within 2 hands.

But I hardly doubt the chipcounts looked anything like this. I believe Hachem would have wanted that pot on the flop, regardless of whether or not Barch busted, but I could be wrong. BTW, does anyone at least know how many chips Barch had coming into this hand?

Would you feel differently if Barch was all in for $8M, and thus the pot was $24M on the flop? At what point would you require Hachem to *try to* win the pot (by betting the flop), as opposed to *trying* to ensure that Barch goes out, by checking down a $24M pot with SD, and possibly allowing SD to spike an ace on the river and take a large chiplead?