Black v. Matusow Hand ... Good laydown?? - Page 2

BlackAces · #11 07-14-2005, 12:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You figure he has to have something because the side pot was empty or close to it wasn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

while this may be true, the something could easily by ATs (pretty marginal call preflop, but chipleaders do funny things sometimes). Not to mention that Matusow could have JJ or 99 and was trying to isolate against an AK or something similar, to increase his chances of winning the pot. I think this is a very tough laydown, and one that I would probably not be able to make.

[/ QUOTE ]
The betting doesn't really support this though.

Before the flop, with an all-in bet and a small reraise, I don't see anyone calling cold with AT, chip leader or not. He probably has a medium-large pair or AK-AQ.

After the flop, a $450K bet into a million-dollar pot isn't trying to chase someone out. If Mike wanted the other guy to leave, he would have bet closer to $700K-$800K, and probably laid down if the other guy came over the top. Mike was trying to build a bigger side pot and see if he could bust 2 at the same time, figuring the other guy might have a huge hand that he couldn't get away from.

I don't think it's a terribly hard laydown to make...it'd require some thought, but it could be done.

mlagoo · #12 07-14-2005, 12:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
(but would violate the semi-etiquette of checking down for the best chances to knock out the all-in player).

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not sure this really applies so far from the FT and any big money "leaps." but i've never played in the WSOP ME, so who knows.

fnurt · #13 07-14-2005, 12:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was surprised by this, too. Howeveer, the internet reports are not always to be relied upon for accuracy. They also don't mention chip counts for either of the side pot players so its hard to say anything of substance about it.

Maybe the guy who reraised the all-in guy thought he was behind the moment Matusow flat called (calling an all-in + reraise must be a pretty strong hand). If Matusow's calling range there is AA-TT/AK (maybe that's a terrible range to assume-- some MTT expert correct me if I'm way off) then when the flop comes, the only reasonable hand his queens can beat now is JJ (because Matusow isn't going to lead into him with an unimproved AK here).

[/ QUOTE ]

The difficulty in assuming this range for Matusow is that Black doesn't have to have a big hand, just a hand good enough to make an isolation raise. I guess the two questions to ask are:

1) How much does the UTG player have compared to the blinds? In other words, whether he's in desperation territory affects what you give him credit for.

2) What position is Black seated in? Whether his reraise comes from UTG+1 or late position also makes a difference.

Still, I think you have it basically right. You don't want to risk most or all of your chips in this situation on the proposition that your unimproved overpair is good; and if Matusow called with some weird hand, this flop creates a lot of ways that you might not be very far ahead of him.

I'm not sure that Matusow isn't allowed to bet unimproved AK though. Is it so clear that AK is behind the all-in player? If he's ahead of the all-in player, and he can get a better hand to fold by betting out, that's a million chips. It's not worth giving up a million chips just to increase the chance that you'll eliminate someone.

SpeakEasy · #14 07-14-2005, 12:56 PM

Knowing the general preference for the check-down, I would assume any bet here by MM means "Step aside, I've got this one well in hand." Which he did. Good laydown.

mlagoo · #15 07-14-2005, 12:57 PM

Also, I agree -- I can't believe Mike doesn't check the flop here, ESPECIALLY if he puts the reraiser on two high cards. Maybe he figured there was no way he was getting action unless the reraiser made an even bigger hand, but I don't know that he won't get paid off, at least a little bit, if AK spikes TPTK (assuming Mike thought there was a chance the guy had AK).

USGrant · #16 07-14-2005, 12:59 PM

I was thinking about this hand last night. My guess is that Black's estimation of Matusow's range of hands, based on MM's cold call of 350K PF, was something like 77, 88, 99, 10-10, JJ, KK, AA, or AK. If that indeed was what he was thinking, then Black's in real bad shape with 5 out of those 8 hands; he is ahead, but not dominating, on two others (88 and AK); and is dominating the last (JJ). I think it's a fairly brilliant fold, based on how much money is at stake for making it to the final 27 and beyond, and I doubt I would have made it.

fnurt · #17 07-14-2005, 01:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(but would violate the semi-etiquette of checking down for the best chances to knock out the all-in player).

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not sure this really applies so far from the FT and any big money "leaps." but i've never played in the WSOP ME, so who knows.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no semi-etiquette to it. A good player is not going to hesitate from betting for a second if it's an advantageous situation. The only reason there's a "semi-etiquette" in your local game, or on PartyPoker, is because people aren't skilled enough to weigh the potential gains from betting against the potential gains from knocking out the all-in player. Every day on the internet you'll see someone getting yelled at for violating this "rule," so I'm not denying that a semi-etiquette exists there. It's just that the person doing the yelling is usually a donk, and this is the one thing they think they know about poker.

danzasmack · #18 07-14-2005, 01:03 PM

+ if i read correctly matusow cold called a raise and a reraise. Im scared with QQ here every time.

fnurt · #19 07-14-2005, 01:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I agree -- I can't believe Mike doesn't check the flop here, ESPECIALLY if he puts the reraiser on two high cards. Maybe he figured there was no way he was getting action unless the reraiser made an even bigger hand, but I don't know that he won't get paid off, at least a little bit, if AK spikes TPTK (assuming Mike thought there was a chance the guy had AK).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an awfully coordinated flop to slowplay just for the chance he has AK, the chance he makes top pair, and the chance you'll make some real money off him if that happens. Plus, when you look at all the people saying they'd find it a tough laydown, it's by no means obvious that betting half the pot is going to result in an automatic fold.

johnegolfer · #20 07-14-2005, 01:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(but would violate the semi-etiquette of checking down for the best chances to knock out the all-in player).

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not sure this really applies so far from the FT and any big money "leaps." but i've never played in the WSOP ME, so who knows.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no semi-etiquette to it. A good player is not going to hesitate from betting for a second if it's an advantageous situation. The only reason there's a "semi-etiquette" in your local game, or on PartyPoker, is because people aren't skilled enough to weigh the potential gains from betting against the potential gains from knocking out the all-in player. Every day on the internet you'll see someone getting yelled at for violating this "rule," so I'm not denying that a semi-etiquette exists there. It's just that the person doing the yelling is usually a donk, and this is the one thing they think they know about poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

But as someone mentioned earlier, doing it with a chance to beat the all-in player is much different than those that do it on PP or PS with almost nothing...

JE