#1
|
|||
|
|||
Final hand wpt last night
Just a thought and want to see if I am thinking along the correct lines.
From Mel's perspective, why go all-in? Do you really hope to be called? I think most people would fold facing that bet with the wrong end of the straight? Wouldn't you rather bet much smaller hoping for a raise so you could re-raise? Or even better yet, check-raise? From what I understand now, is that a split between the two was already agreed on. Maybe that was the biggest influence dictating how the hand played out. Paul must have thought what the heck, it's not costing me anything. Would Mel have played it differently had there been no deal? Thoughts? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Final hand wpt last night
It was my understanding that no deals were to be made in WPT events. If you know otherwise, please elucidate!
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Final hand wpt last night
This is the deal that apparently gave life to the no deal rule. It came out afterwards that a deal had been made between Paul and Mel and the wpt responded with the no deals rule.
|
|
|