Black's 2 donkey plays

[bogey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tex could probably even force a call if he wanted to be an angleshooter, since Black said "calling" first.

[/ QUOTE ]

Black said "I'm not calling."

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not positive of this, but I think the "angle" MAY have been his sentence formulation, which was, (IIRC)

"I'm not calling, I'm raising or nothing"

I've heard there was a bit of pause between the raising and or, so the angle would then be saying he has to raise, but I don't remember for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't remember thinking there was any room for misinterpretation in what he said. fwiw, i dont think this crossed anyone's mind at the time either.

[jomatty]

if i have JJ in that spot i call. before i call i get a very very sick feeling. if i get that sick a feeling i have to be close to folding so in my opinion it was a very powerful play and if he has TT or 99 he prolly wins the pot.
matty

[Toro]

Re-raising all-in with KJ may qualify as a donk play but my take on it was this. Black was very very good with his reads. If he picked up that someone was weak and couldn't call a raise, he raised.

I believe Barch said "I think I have you dominated". Why did he say this? Imo he said this because he did not want any action with JJ. He really wanted a fold here and Black picked up on this as weakness which in a sense was a correct read. So he followed through on his read and made his play.

[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe Barch said "I think I have you dominated". Why did he say this? Imo he said this because he did not want any action with JJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all -- he said this to suggest to Black that he had an Ace with a K or Q kicker in the hopes that Black would believe his underpair (which Tex believed him to hold, since he correctly reasoned that QQ - AA were not possibilities) was ahead. Of course Tex knew that an underpair would be 20/80 against his Jacks, but wanted to give Black the impression that it was actually slightly ahead of 2 overcards.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I believe Barch said "I think I have you dominated". Why did he say this? Imo he said this because he did not want any action with JJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all -- he said this to suggest to Black that he had an Ace with a K or Q kicker in the hopes that Black would believe his underpair (which Tex believed him to hold, since he correctly reasoned that QQ - AA were not possibilities) was ahead. Of course Tex knew that an underpair would be 20/80 against his Jacks, but wanted to give Black the impression that it was actually slightly ahead of 2 overcards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hadn't thought of that. Excellent insight, and if that is how Tex meant it, well done by him too.

Here's an interview done with Black by an Irish poker info site after tenth place got knocked out. He explains his reasoning behind the KJ hand.

http://devore.typepad.com/wsop_lates...s/EXMIC008.MP3

I'll have to agree that the KJ play was just silly in context only of that hand, and especially in the context of Tex playing a tight game so far.

If I have JJ in Tex's position, I don't even think about folding. That's just silly. A guy limps after a Matusow raise (4X a round) and 3 callers, you raise, and then you think its possible he has your JJ beat? No way. Black would NEVER play AA/KK/QQ that way. Then, combine that with the fact that when it got back to him, he spent all that time thinking about what to do before going all in...it was more time than he would use to try to fake someone out when it was an obvious decision with an overpair. My hand range would be Black has some AA/KK/QQ/AKs/AKo about 1% of the time, another 2 broadway or single overcard hand (like A9/K9s) 60% of the time, and medium pair (JJ-77) the rest.

As soon as he said all in, I woulda looked like Helmuth springing the trap he's been setting up for 4000 hands, pushing my chips in with one hand, flipping JJ over, standing up and yelling, "I gotcha".

[MLG]

thats a pretty damn cool interview.