Play a Hand With the Masters #2 Results and Panel Comments

[ QUOTE ]
I commented on the turn and river- I folded the turn and checked the river because I knew I was behind. Therefore, played the hand better than the masters. However, on the river, I narrowed the hands too far- didn't include a straight. But in any event, I knew I was behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

You were lucky that Giga got unlucky.

Seeing the hand I feel somewhat vindicated for my postflop #1 recommendation against those who replied I was weak tight.

[Yuv]

Weren't we going broke on the majority of river cards there?
I mean, if one of the 3 J's doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose. If one of our 4 outs doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose.

Basically, I don't see much of a different between the way Giga played it and the way most of us would (pushing the flop or turn). We got "lucky" that basically one of the 3 scare card for him came.

It's VERY interesting to read Gig'as, MLG's and Che's review of the hand, but I still don't see how interesting this specific hand was. We would have gone broke even with that line the vast majority of times.

[ QUOTE ]
Weren't we going broke on the majority of river cards there?
I mean, if one of the 3 J's doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose. If one of our 4 outs doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose.

Basically, I don't see much of a different between the way Giga played it and the way most of us would (pushing the flop or turn). We got "lucky" that basically one of the 3 scare card for him came.

It's VERY interesting to read Gig'as, MLG's and Che's review of the hand, but I still don't see how interesting this specific hand was. We would have gone broke even with that line the vast majority of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all play hands like this frequently. Discussing them is very +EV.

[Yuv]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weren't we going broke on the majority of river cards there?
I mean, if one of the 3 J's doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose. If one of our 4 outs doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose.

Basically, I don't see much of a different between the way Giga played it and the way most of us would (pushing the flop or turn). We got "lucky" that basically one of the 3 scare card for him came.

It's VERY interesting to read Gig'as, MLG's and Che's review of the hand, but I still don't see how interesting this specific hand was. We would have gone broke even with that line the vast majority of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all play hands like this frequently. Discussing them is very +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong, "Hand with the masters" is a brilliant idea and is preformed extremely well by Lloyd and friends. I love it.

The only "problem" I have is that I don't see any difference between the possible lines here. We were "suppose" to go broke on pretty much every possible line suggested.

If you disregard the 4 aces and kings that would have won us the pot anyhow (either with all the money in on the flop/turn or on the river), there were 2 possible cards for villian to check the river (other two J's) and one near certain card (Jd). I don't think we can say that Giga's line was better, just because that one certain card dropped and saved us the reamining of our stack.

[bennies]

You are right that Hero got lucky, c'mon, of course flopped two pair should go broke against a straight.

The value of playing the Hand like Hero did becomes more clear if villain had been bluffing (like Gigabet thought he was). Had Hero reraised (pushed) the flop he would have won less.

I'm not saying Hero's line is better, just that the two lines are different.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weren't we going broke on the majority of river cards there?
I mean, if one of the 3 J's doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose. If one of our 4 outs doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose.

Basically, I don't see much of a different between the way Giga played it and the way most of us would (pushing the flop or turn). We got "lucky" that basically one of the 3 scare card for him came.

It's VERY interesting to read Gig'as, MLG's and Che's review of the hand, but I still don't see how interesting this specific hand was. We would have gone broke even with that line the vast majority of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all play hands like this frequently. Discussing them is very +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong, "Hand with the masters" is a brilliant idea and is preformed extremely well by Lloyd and friends. I love it.

The only "problem" I have is that I don't see any difference between the possible lines here. We were "suppose" to go broke on pretty much every possible line suggested.

If you disregard the 4 aces and kings that would have won us the pot anyhow (either with all the money in on the flop/turn or on the river), there were 2 possible cards for villian to check the river (other two J's) and one near certain card (Jd). I don't think we can say that Giga's line was better, just because that one certain card dropped and saved us the reamining of our stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain doesn't always have QT here, in which case how you play the hand matters a lot. Reread Giga's comments on the flop and turn--it's important to learn how to extract money from someone on a bluff when you have a monster hand.

[Yuv]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weren't we going broke on the majority of river cards there?
I mean, if one of the 3 J's doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose. If one of our 4 outs doesn't hit, villian pushes, we call and lose.

Basically, I don't see much of a different between the way Giga played it and the way most of us would (pushing the flop or turn). We got "lucky" that basically one of the 3 scare card for him came.

It's VERY interesting to read Gig'as, MLG's and Che's review of the hand, but I still don't see how interesting this specific hand was. We would have gone broke even with that line the vast majority of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all play hands like this frequently. Discussing them is very +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong, "Hand with the masters" is a brilliant idea and is preformed extremely well by Lloyd and friends. I love it.

The only "problem" I have is that I don't see any difference between the possible lines here. We were "suppose" to go broke on pretty much every possible line suggested.

If you disregard the 4 aces and kings that would have won us the pot anyhow (either with all the money in on the flop/turn or on the river), there were 2 possible cards for villian to check the river (other two J's) and one near certain card (Jd). I don't think we can say that Giga's line was better, just because that one certain card dropped and saved us the reamining of our stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain doesn't always have QT here, in which case how you play the hand matters a lot. Reread Giga's comments on the flop and turn--it's important to learn how to extract money from someone on a bluff when you have a monster hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, wouldn't it be more educational to post a similar hand that worked (i.e., giga got opponent to bluff away his stack with that line)? I'm not saying that specific line doesn't work and obviously every time Giga shares his train of thought is very valuable. This specific line on this specific hand is what I don't especially like.

The comments, obviously, are something we all need to read and try to understand.

And almost every discussion is +ev, nothing wrong in talking about our game.

[Lloyd]

Which also gets to Gigabet's initial flop bet which I don't recall has been discussed in this thread yet. How many of us would just go ahead and make a 2/3 to pot size bet to protect our hand on that kind of a board? Every decision made in this hand was to extract the maximum number of chips from a worse hand/bluff until the river when it shifted to the gambler's ruin concept - it was more valuable to leave with 900 chips if behind then win another 900 chips if ahead.

[Lloyd]

Things don't always turn out the way we expect. Very few people thought the villain had QT. Another lesson learned (at least for me) that complete bluffs are often played just like the nuts. Think back to some hands when you just *knew* you were way ahead only to see the pot go the wrong direction when your opponent had a monster.

Like I said originally, I don't think there is anything earth shattering here. I think there are a few subtle points that can help make the difference between a good and great player. And when people cannot recognize the lessons to be learned, it's usually because they have already become a great player or are not quite ready to do so.