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

[Yuv]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a bit patronizing, but so be it.

Most posters would have bet the same on the flop (unless you can prove that there's a serious difference between betting 2/3 pot or pot there). The only major difference between giga's point of view and ours (including Che and MLG), is the turn call.

I'll think about it, maybe i'm missing something subtle here, but to me there's little difference there.

Again, I love this concept and I love reading the experts and forum members thoughts. After the turn bet, I think every line takes us to the same point the vast majority of times (regardless of this specific hand), but as I said, i'll give it another thought.

[fnurt]

I think this was a valuable discussion in that we learned a good player doesn't always magically sense when his opponent has the nuts. Sometimes the other guy will have a hand much better than you expect, and that's just life. Any "name pro" goes broke here or does about the same as Giga, unless this was a live hand and they picked up a read somehow.

It does bother me that because the result was something surprising, the minority of posters who actually wanted to fold this hand are going to walk away thinking they played it right. That is results-oriented thinking, and it is no different from saying that we should have folded preflop because the other guy ended up flopping a straight.

One issue you can't get away from is the Quiz Factor, which is to say, people are going to think about a hand differently because it's a "Hand with the Masters." People start hunting for tiny little hints that the villain might have the nuts, they engage in super-elaborate thought processes, they look for a reason to go against the 2+2 consensus in hopes that they might distinguish themselves. In the real world, hands like this come up all the time, and you don't get a big warning sign that says "this is a Hand with the Masters, so something interesting is going to happen." The issue is not just whether we can think deep thoughts about a particular hand on the forums, but whether we have the discipline to apply the correct thought process to every hand we come across in a tournament.

[Lloyd]

Very well said and I couldn't agree with you more. I'm sure that Gigabet would say that at no time did he consider folding this hand and in fact got "lucky" to get away from it with a few chips left over.

[AJo Go All In]

[ QUOTE ]
I for one was thrilled that I agreed with giga on almost all streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

yikes

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
One issue you can't get away from is the Quiz Factor, which is to say, people are going to think about a hand differently because it's a "Hand with the Masters." People start hunting for tiny little hints that the villain might have the nuts, they engage in super-elaborate thought processes, they look for a reason to go against the 2+2 consensus in hopes that they might distinguish themselves. In the real world, hands like this come up all the time, and you don't get a big warning sign that says "this is a Hand with the Masters, so something interesting is going to happen." The issue is not just whether we can think deep thoughts about a particular hand on the forums, but whether we have the discipline to apply the correct thought process to every hand we come across in a tournament.


[/ QUOTE ]

bingo

[KneeCo]

Thanks to Lloyd and the 'masters' for the work they put in. I hope the series continues for a long while.

I still don't like the way the Hero played the hand, even though I would have gone bust while he still has chips, like I said on the river thread, I feel as though he failed to take control of the hand.

Happy to see the panel agrees about the check on the river at least.

Anyway, good work all.

As a small piece of advice to Lloyd, I think it might be best not to divulge the identity of the Hero in future Masters threads. Just putting "Hero is a very accomplished pro, who may or may not be recognized by the villain" until the results thread would have given everyone sufficient info to post responses and I think would have made the exercise more productive and slightly more honest.

[MLG]

oh please. there's nothing wrong with thinking about a hand and being encouraged that your opinion jives with other good players.

[CardSharpCook]

AJo is a poster that I'd ignore if I didn't derive some pleasure from reading the idiocy that spews from his keyboard.

[schwza]

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. thanks to all involved.

and now i'll be the ungrateful bastard who requests lloyd sink a little more time into it:

when you're posting the hand, would it be possible to post how many chips each player has (or at least the shorter stack)? i must've done the arithmetic in my head 10 times and i'm sure others did as well. i actually always wished bisonbison did this too...

but again, thanks.

[locutus2002]

Getting a little caustic today?
[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]