|
|
#1
06-02-2005, 11:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
The Actor\'s Set of Threes
Wow, that was about as bad as it gets.
Not to just beat up on the poor guy, but: He open-limps on the button with 33. Blinds come with A8 and TJs. Then, the flop comes down 3KT rainbow, it's checked to him, and he bets $100K into a $33K pot. Both opponents insta-fold. Then he shows his set. Then he explains that he is an amateur and that this is why he just played the hand so poorly, as opposed to implying that his Master Overbet Plan has failed. The look on Storakers' face was priceless. He actually looked momentarily shocked. Insert verbal translation here:__________________. Like I say, I'm not trying to be a hater just for the sake of it, but that was an abysmal play. As in, so monstrously terrible, it's nearly impossible to believe you made the final table, sir. Anyone disagree? P.S. He very likely could have gotten some action from Johan here, as he had second pair, and would have rivered two pair. Urgh. P.P.S. My verbal translation is "You DO understand that a set of threes is a GOOD hand there, right?" 
|
|
#2
06-02-2005, 11:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
Then he explains that he is an amateur and that this is why he just played the hand so poorly... [/ QUOTE ] He made such a point of the amateur thing that I thought maybe, just maybe, he was pulling a level 4 or level 5-type move, and was trying to set each of the other two to think that he really was clueless, afraid, rock-tight and didn't know how to bet his hands. But if he was, his play following the trip 3's hand, for the most part, didn't really take advantage of the clueless image he'd tried to cultivate.
|
|
#3
06-02-2005, 11:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
Um, did you also notice the actor bluffed out Johann of a few pots after that play? Don't be so quick to assume that he didn't do that first overbet with a set on purpose, as advertisement. The other two kept laying down hands in the face of ANY show of strength from the actor.
|
|
#4
06-02-2005, 11:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
Um, did you also notice the actor bluffed out Johann of a few pots after that play? Don't be so quick to assume that he didn't do that first overbet with a set on purpose, as advertisement. The other two kept laying down hands in the face of ANY show of strength from the actor. [/ QUOTE ] Um, ok, let me take some time and reassess. Ok, I still don't believe it was part of any metagame strategy. Thanks for keeping me in check. Btw, the bluff you mention was ABC, and essentially just fell into his lap. He would have been making a huge mistake NOT to bluff there. EDIT: You might also have noticed his failure to follow through on the headsup hand with Johan, when he reraised from the big blind with Q5s. Checked to on the flop, he failed to bet a hand that had no showdown value. Checked to on the turn, he failed to bet again. Then he catches a 5, one of the only non-bettable cards in the deck for him, and he bets. Blecch.
|
|
#6
06-02-2005, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't we be castigating the pro players who let him get as far as he did, rather than the amateur? [/ QUOTE ] Easy, I put two disclaimers into my OP. I am not "castigating" anyone, merely making a point on that one hand in particular. That said, I agree with you that Johan was playing a very choppy game. I was not impresed at all, at least based upon what was shown on the telecast. Lastly, just for the record, anyone who ponies up the $10K and enters is ostensibly open to some scrutiny at least, I would think.
|
|
#7
06-02-2005, 12:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, just for the record, anyone who ponies up the $10K and enters is ostensibly open to some scrutiny at least, I would think. [/ QUOTE ] FWIW, this was an invitational freeroll. But yes, I wasn't impressed with what I saw, either. I ended up changing the channel with about 30 minutes left.
|
|
#8
06-02-2005, 12:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, this was an invitational freeroll. [/ QUOTE ] I'd say this little fact is worth quite a bit, seeing as my original point made mention of the buyin. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] That said, well, I guess I just expect people to play just a little better than what was shown, regardless of the buyin (or lack thereof).
|
|
#9
06-02-2005, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
Easy, I put two disclaimers into my OP. I am not "castigating" anyone, merely making a point on that one hand in particular. That said, I agree with you that Johan was playing a very choppy game. I was not impresed at all, at least based upon what was shown on the telecast. Lastly, just for the record, anyone who ponies up the $10K and enters is ostensibly open to some scrutiny at least, I would think. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with all of this, except to point out that we should be castigating the pros. They are supposed to be pros for a reason. My expectations/standards for actors is a lot lower, so Tom deserves less abuse.
|
|
#10
06-02-2005, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Actor\'s Set of Threes
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with all of this, except to point out that we should be castigating the pros. They are supposed to be pros for a reason. My expectations/standards for actors is a lot lower, so Tom deserves less abuse. [/ QUOTE ] Like the civilized humans that we are, we have reached agreement without any unpleasantness. Outstanding!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
