Flack gets busted by 2 outer at Aruba. - Page 3

kmvenne · #21 10-01-2004, 08:32 PM

Ahh, the PH hands of the week, always good for reading excitement.

Quite possibly the greatest quote ever from the series in my estimation is "Did you know that penguins are indigenous to the Southern Hemisphere and polar bears are indigenous to the Northern Hemisphere? Thus, a polar bear has never met a penguin in the wild!"

Phil is more then just the greatest poker player ever, he is also a source of invaluable education. Thank you for sharing your University of Wisconsin knowledge with the world, Oh Great Hellmuth [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

And back on topic, brutal loss for Flack...

Prevaricator · #22 10-01-2004, 08:34 PM

What did Hellmuth major in before he dropped out?

Rushmore · #23 10-01-2004, 09:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Not a true guarantee, though. 22 can be a 2:1 favorite against A2, K2, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence the word virtually, as there's no reason in the world to assume one is up against any of this type of hand.

The only remotely acceptable answer is that the 22 pushed in on the flop either first to act, or after a smallish bet from Flack.

A call of a push is a bad play, and cannot be justified, if the stacks were even-ish.

Hirez · #24 10-01-2004, 10:23 PM

could it be possible that there might have been a deal? and thats why it happened? Not sure if any of them are high enough stake players where 250k extra wouldn't influence that decision

Malone Brown · #25 10-01-2004, 10:35 PM

anyone know Eric's Ub name?

Neil Stevens · #26 10-01-2004, 10:44 PM

Saying "Do you see why?" is not a substitute for making your point. If you have something to say, say it, don't play games.

Paul Phillips · #27 10-01-2004, 11:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
could it be possible that there might have been a deal? and thats why it happened?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I was given the power to wish away just one category of tournament poker commentary, it'd be this one. Anytime people have trouble understanding why someone might make a certain play the speculation runs rampant. Lots of times I've seen people skip right past the speculation and pose it as fact: "if he called there they must have made a deal!" Here's one example among many, which also may go a small way to explain why this response is a notch more intense than the innocent question that precipitated it.

What makes it so absurd (besides the fact that deals are imagined way more often than they actually take place) is that even after all the money is dealt away people still want to win. Don't you think after playing for several days straight and fighting through hundreds of people, sitting under the WPT lights, knowing this is going to be seen by millions of viewers, having a WPT title on the line: that the last two guys might be able to suck it up and play to win for a few minutes? Do they have planes to catch?

People do what they do at big money final tables because they think it is the right play. All else is fantasy(*).

(*) This can be nitpicked but it won't change the point.

Smasharoo · #28 10-02-2004, 12:21 AM

Saying "Do you see why?" is not a substitute for making your point. If you have something to say, say it, don't play games.

Sure it is!

Do you see why?

sdplayerb · #29 10-02-2004, 12:42 AM

Paul,

First I do agree with what you say.
Actually you are probably the best person to speak about such a situation as I believe you were in the deal that caused the WPT to create the No Deals rule.

So, would you have been any more likely to throw away the low straight against Mel Judah had there been no deal made?
On the flip side, maybe you thought he was more likely to pull a bluff there since there was a deal made.
Additionally since the money doesn't effect you, it shouldn't effect your decision while it may make some rest easy. I have just wondered how, if at all, it effected your call, especially as it appeared you knew he very likely had you beat.

Thanks

Paul Phillips · #30 10-02-2004, 01:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Actually you are probably the best person to speak about such a situation as I believe you were in the deal that caused the WPT to create the No Deals rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is correct.

[ QUOTE ]
So, would you have been any more likely to throw away the low straight against Mel Judah had there been no deal made?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is always difficult to be 100% sure of what one might do in a parallel universe, but I promise I wanted to win. Just as much, as far as I know. So I know of no reason why my decision making process would have been any different.

In hindsight I might have had a better chance at winning if I hadn't made that deal because I removed any money pressure mel may have felt, but hindsight's 20/20 like that. No guarantee money pressure wouldn't have made him play BETTER, anyway. Money pressure on others is almost certainly an asset when there are 3+ people left, but once you're heads-up it's irrelevant because there's no moving up the ladder. Only winning and losing.

[ QUOTE ]
I have just wondered how, if at all, it effected your call, especially as it appeared you knew he very likely had you beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've said this before, but just because I said things like "ok, you got me" doesn't mean I actually knew I was beaten and called just for the heck of it. If I called I must have had some reason to think I had a high enough chance of having the best hand to warrant a call. Granted, perhaps that assessment was way off, but I didn't call knowing I had the worst hand. I may suck but I'm not suicidal.