Huck Seed Bluffs Into Dry Side Pot, Etc.

[Rushmore]

1.) A third player (Greenstein?) is allin preflop for less than the big blind, Sklansky (Kx off) and Seed (73 off) on the side, dry side pot, not one thin chip in it.

Flop come Kxx, rainbow.

Seed bets into Sklansky.

Huh????!! Can someone explain this bet to me, please? I'd hate to think that I have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, but a good explanation for this play would certainly have me re-thinking my supposed poker accumen.

2.) Headsup with Sklansky. Blinds $30/60K. Sklansky limps sb. Seed (450K) has A6, and...limps???! Then goes into check mode when the flop misses him.

Huh??!

3.) Shortly after hand #2, blinds still 30/60K, Seed, with 400K, pushes allin with T7 off.

I suppose you could make an argument for #2 and/or #3, but there's certainly something debatable about #2, if you know that at this point, Sklansky will be calling an allin bet with a LOT of hands weaker than A6.

#1 is mystifying to me. If that one is rationally explainable, I'd be surprised.

[midget23]

i dont see how he can be all in for less than the Big blind and the sidepot still be dry

[Beavis68]

[ QUOTE ]
1.) A third player (Greenstein?) is allin preflop for less than the big blind, Sklansky (Kx off) and Seed (73 off) on the side, dry side pot, not one thin chip in it.

Flop come Kxx, rainbow.

Seed bets into Sklansky.

Huh????!! Can someone explain this bet to me, please? I'd hate to think that I have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, but a good explanation for this play would certainly have me re-thinking my supposed poker accumen.

2.) Headsup with Sklansky. Blinds $30/60K. Sklansky limps sb. Seed (450K) has A6, and...limps???! Then goes into check mode when the flop misses him.

Huh??!

3.) Shortly after hand #2, blinds still 30/60K, Seed, with 400K, pushes allin with T7 off.

I suppose you could make an argument for #2 and/or #3, but there's certainly something debatable about #2, if you know that at this point, Sklansky will be calling an allin bet with a LOT of hands weaker than A6.

#1 is mystifying to me. If that one is rationally explainable, I'd be surprised.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the guy was all-in for LESS than the big blind, then there had to be a side pot.

His A6 move, Daniel has discussed limping with A-crap too, because he says it is hard to play post flop.

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]


2.) Headsup with Sklansky. Blinds $30/60K. Sklansky limps sb. Seed (450K) has A6, and...limps???! Then goes into check mode when the flop misses him.

Huh??!

3.) Shortly after hand #2, blinds still 30/60K, Seed, with 400K, pushes allin with T7 off.

I suppose you could make an argument for #2 and/or #3, but there's certainly something debatable about #2, if you know that at this point, Sklansky will be calling an allin bet with a LOT of hands weaker than A6.



[/ QUOTE ]

What range of hands does he call a bet almost 7x the BB, with only 1 BB in the pot already?

a reasonable range would be: with Mid- High Pocket Pairs, A10+, and KJs+??

So from that range, Seed is either barely ahead, or way behind. Since David just called, why not see the flop? and if you don't hit, no need to bluff cause you didn't put any extra money in.

For the 10-7 off, he pushed to try and pick up the blinds, I didn't see the hand, but if he got called, that's poker.

Many players would rather push on a bluff with 10-7, than A-6

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Huh????!! Can someone explain this bet to me, please? I'd hate to think that I have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, but a good explanation for this play would certainly have me re-thinking my supposed poker accumen.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the issue here isn't that the side pot isn't really dry; I doubt there was so much in there that that was the reason for the play. I can think of two good reasons to consider making the play:

1) You have a large enough stack that you're not really losing significant $EV by increasing the chances that the short stack stays in, but are perhaps increasing your $EV by reducing the chances that a particular opponent gets the short stack. It seems difficult for me to think of a place where these events are all going to come to a head, so I think a more likely explanation is . . .

2) . . . if it's known that you will completely bluff at dry sides, this also means that you can expect to get called at least sometimes with legitimate hands here as a result of your advertising. In other words, it's an image play.

[Smoothcall]

No offense but this anlaysis is way off. Almost every one you went through you go ti it wrong. Don't mean to attack but say it like you know what your talking about and its way off. He should definately move with A6 off! there's 90k in there, not sure if there was antes too also, but either way with only having 450k he had to be aggressive here. And Sklansky woulda raised with any of the holding that beats him. Of course once in a blue moon he could have the monster. But being shortstacked he needs to take a chance here and move it in. The chances of a monster are remote. And the statement that many players would rather push with 107 off rather than A6 is silly.

[Smoothcall]

I agree on everything you said except the part about the dry side pot. As others have said there must be something in there if greenstein was in for less. But even if it was for less, unless the side pot was very significant, which it didn't seem to be. There is no way he should be betting there. It is much more important to eliminate greenstein and pick up more points than to give greenstein a good chance to win, as he only has a 7 high to show down agianst him. All the other plays you point out are bad too. You got this post on the money. Only thing Huck did well was not play in the beginning. And if he's gonna play like he did later, maybe that is his best play, to never play!

[Smoothcall]

The fact that is hard to play postflop is just anotherreason to move in. Huck played that hand awful. He checks it down giving David every chance to win then value bets the river when he probably wont get called unless he's beat. Yuck!

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
No offense but this anlaysis is way off. Almost every one you went through you go ti it wrong. Don't mean to attack but say it like you know what your talking about and its way off. He should definately move with A6 off! there's 90k in there, not sure if there was antes too also, but either way with only having 450k he had to be aggressive here. And Sklansky woulda raised with any of the holding that beats him. Of course once in a blue moon he could have the monster. But being shortstacked he needs to take a chance here and move it in. The chances of a monster are remote. And the statement that many players would rather push with 107 off rather than A6 is silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay - on the A6 hand, there are a few things we are missing here.

How often has each player been pushing? what have then been limping with etc?

I agree that A6 is a pushable hand, but we don't know the text around the push so much. How long ago was it that he just double up anyways? Was he agressive so that David's limp smelled like a trap?

and yes I know that A6 is a better hand than 10-7, but if your sole point of pushing is to steal blinds, I guess it doesn't matter what hands you have. one would be a true steal, the other more of a value push. But I don't tink you really wanna get called in either case.

[Smoothcall]

On the first point about wheter he should puch the A6. Granted its possible there may have been factors that brought him to that decision. But the standard play is to move in and is sounded like you were defending his play. So when you aswered you must have been thinking of the standard play as well. I'm not looking at your reply right now so can't say for sure. But in general you better be pushing most of the time in that spot. The factors must be pretty severe not to move in. And knowing a littel about how sklansky play i doubt he was rasiing every hand up to that point. But can't say for sure.

On the 2nd point you are changing your statement now. The argument was you said many players would RATHER move in with 107 off than A6. So instead of saying ok maybe i was wrong there. You instead divert from that and say. Well you dont want to get called with either. That wasn't the point or statement you were making. The point was which would you RATHER have. Do you see this? But then you say the A6 would be a value push and the other a pure bluff. So if the A6 is a value push and the other is a pure blure which do you think players would rather have? Anyway not meaning to attack but your statement was wrong and trying to discuss that.