Matusow hand analysis @ Final Table - 2nd hand - Page 2

rheaume · #11 07-17-2005, 01:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If they were still on the river, Mike would fold with 4 hearts out there

[/ QUOTE ]

which is a moot point if you ask me, because all the money is going to be in before the river, no matter how it is played.

obviously on the second hand of the final table, mike is not putting his opponent on AA when he has KK. it's just ridiculous to think so.

the only way this could have played out differently (obviously not resulted differently) is if, for some reason, perhaps slowplaying KK (i have no idea why he would) - if matusow just called the 1.5m. - or he reraises, but not all in as he did. then lazar smoothcalls. whatever.

anyway it *really* doesnt matter because on that flop, no matter what, all the money is going in. lazar could try to put him on KK QQ or KQ on that flop, but he's still not folding aces. would you? and even if matusow could put lazar on AA or QQ obviously mike has the nuts. no matter what, all the money goes in. lazar would either lead out with a bet or checkraise on that flop, and all the money goes in. from there - nothing in the world could possibly change how that hand ended.

Trainwreck · #12 07-17-2005, 06:31 AM

AA vs KK?

This is just a common, 'someone's gonna get hurt hand' and rarely ever, is it avoided.

We need never ever ever discuss it again. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

>TW<

einbert · #13 07-17-2005, 06:57 AM

This hand is very uninteresting.

Bulldog · #14 07-17-2005, 10:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
AA vs KK?

This is just a common, 'someone's gonna get hurt hand' and rarely ever, is it avoided.

We need never ever ever discuss it again. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

>TW<

[/ QUOTE ]

durron597 · #15 07-17-2005, 12:38 PM

Remember Greg Raymer thought it was correct to set Mike McClain allin with TT last year in the first hand when Mike had AA. If that's correct, then Matusow's play is certainly correct.

Vincent Lepore · #16 07-17-2005, 01:51 PM

Raise - Reraise - what hands do you put Lazaar on? Aces! muck the kings.

Vince

Vincent Lepore · #17 07-17-2005, 01:57 PM

oops - Raise - reraise an amount that doesnt mind a call. In fact looks like he wants a call. If he had a lesser hand than aces or Kings he moves in. Matusow had to muck at this point.

Vince

Howard Treesong · #18 07-17-2005, 02:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
oops - Raise - reraise an amount that doesnt mind a call. In fact looks like he wants a call. If he had a lesser hand than aces or Kings he moves in. Matusow had to muck at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Welcome back, Vince. Have you been reading no-limit books in your absence? Apparently, they haven't stuck.

There's no way Matusow can or should get away from this hand with this betting. Blinds are 50K-100-10, which puts 240K in the pot. Dannenman raises 250, putting 500 in. Lazar raises a million more (to 1,250) which is fairly typical for a reraise. There's absolutely no reason to restrict Lazar to AA here; AKs, QQ and perhaps more are also possibilities.

If Lazar had more than three million in his stack, Mike can raise 2 million more than stacking off in order to get information. If Lazar's response is to stack off for any significant money, then Lazar very likely has AA, and then it's just a pot odds question for Mike. But Lazar's stack isn't that deep.

You're just trolling, Vince.

3rdEye · #19 07-17-2005, 03:42 PM

No one is folding KK preflop. All the money is getting in on the flop anyway if it doesn't get in preflop.

TheJackal · #20 07-17-2005, 04:46 PM

No way Mike gets away from his hand here. Only thing he could have done was flat call preflop, move in on the flop, and hope Lazar mucks (if he knew the outcome, but he aint David Blaine). I mean what was he suppose to do? Make it 2.5 million preflop and than muck for 1 million more? I also believe from what Mike said, having played with Lazar for the amount of time he did, that aces were not his sole holding. I think its just a case of a cold deck, neither player did anything wrong.