Black's 2 donkey plays

[teddyFBI]

Now I was generally impressed with Andrew Black's play (from what i saw on TV and read on Cardplayer), but I just can't even wrap my head around what the F he was thinking:
a) going 4 bets all-in with Phil Ivey w/ A2s, and
b) calling a re-raise all-in in m/w pot with KJo

Sure, it looks great to bluff Phil Ivey out of a pot on TV (although Phil actually had the worse hand, but there's no way Black knew that), but jeeeezus that was an awful awful play -- the only thing he did right in that hand was show the A2s, which might have done something for his meta-game

The KJ call was just chip-spewing...what on earth is an otherwise solid-seeming player doing making these plays -- just showing off?? If that's what qualifies as good late tournament play, then i am very very far off from ever going far in a large MTT.

[ QUOTE ]
The KJ call was just chip-spewing...what on earth is an otherwise solid-seeming player doing making these plays -- just showing off?? If that's what qualifies as good late tournament play, then i am very very far off from ever going far in a large MTT.

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't a call with KJ, it was a raise to put Tex all-in. Huge difference. You think Black was showing off? He was the chip leader, and the play had reached a kind of bubble with a dozen or so left. Black understood very well that the remaining players were concerned about

1) making the guaranteed million from the top ten
2) cracking the final table at the main event.

He could have figured Barch to be making a move to steal a nice multi-way pot in which only Matusow showed any strength. If Barch holds QQ-AA / AK, he calls, but with JJ there's still a chance to lay it down, and he lays down AQ and worse. Factoring folding equity, it's probably a marginal play, but it's clearly one that Black made by employing a read on Tex -- and one that Black made in the context of the bubble. Just didn't work out.

[pindawg]

Looks like he was just being aggressive versus a tight table. There's no way he wanted calls on either of those hands, so I have to assume he was trying to run over the table.

He looked pretty weak with the KJ hand, that combined with his aggressiveness probably prompted the call. Sometimes people will lay down JJ in that same spot to the same move, you just don't see it on TV.

[A_Junglen]

Both of these "bad plays" black put his opponent to a decision. We do not know all of the factors leading up to the A-2s hand vs. Ivey, but I personally don't see a problem with it. Phil is known to be very aggressive, and it's safe to assume this wasn't the first time he raised Black's blind.

The KJo hand was a bubble play, pure and simple. Black was obviously playing to win, and we don't know any reads he had on Barch.

Saying either of these plays were bad is ignorant. Black played very very well imo. The KJ hand wasn't a shining moment, but you surely can't blame him for trying to abuse the final table bubble at the WSOP ME.

[hurley412]

if barch folds JJ everyone would be saying it was a great play but because barch calls its a donkey play.

That was one heck of a move in. I really liked it. He put Barch to a monster test with just two jacks. Even if he thought black didn't have much he could have had a hand like KQ and he'd be racing with a lot on the line. He wasn't at risk of going out even if he folded so it was a heck of a call even though I think he had to since the way that was played he had to have had the best hand. He also knew that even if he got called he had a decent shot of winning the hand.

Would you call with JJ in that spot risking your whole tourney life when you're not a short stack against what is probably at best a flip? With a $400,000 difference in payout on the line?

That definitely was not a donkey play. It was a professional move and one that people playing to win make.

The other one--maybe black did know he had ivey beat. Ever thought of that? He had to know Ivey was capable of reraising him with not much so maybe he read him right. I'm sure somebody has read Ivey right on a hand in his lifetime before...

They were two great plays and even though one didn't work that was why he made the final table. You can't make it there without playing great and making people lay down hands when there's a lot of chips in the pot.

[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]
if barch folds JJ everyone would be saying it was a great play but because barch calls its a donkey play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, there was a UTG raise, 1 call, and then Black called. He does not make that play w/ QQ-AA. Easy call by Tex. (says someone who has never played for that much money

[private joker]

I have a tournament rules question here. During this hand, Matusow says to Black, "Come on, we know you're not calling so hurry up and get it over with" or something like that.

Black responds, "I'm not calling. I'm raising or nothing!"

Could Barch (or anyone else at the table) have called over the TD at that point and made Black's "I'm raising" statement binding? Sure, he followed it up with "or nothing," but I can see a real nit arguing that Black was shooting an angle.

Like, let's say 3 seconds go between the words "raising" and "or" in that sentence. He says, "I'm not calling, I'm raising..." and gets a read on Barch, and then says, "... or nothing."

Or let's say the pause is 10 seconds. When do the words "I'm raising" become binding? What if he looked at the dealer when he said it? Would this just be a judgment call on the part of the tournament director? Clearly Black did not intend to definitely raise, because he was just telling Matusow that it was a raise/fold situation, not a call. But you never know...

Also, I think he gave away too much info there. When he said it's either raise or fold, that made Barch's call a lot easier. Since Black wouldn't consider folding KK/AA in that spot, and would probably at least call with QQ, Barch knew with more certainty that his JJ was best and quickly called Black's push.

[pindawg]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a tournament rules question here. During this hand, Matusow says to Black, "Come on, we know you're not calling so hurry up and get it over with" or something like that.

Black responds, "I'm not calling. I'm raising or nothing!"

Could Barch (or anyone else at the table) have called over the TD at that point and made Black's "I'm raising" statement binding? Sure, he followed it up with "or nothing," but I can see a real nit arguing that Black was shooting an angle.

Like, let's say 3 seconds go between the words "raising" and "or" in that sentence. He says, "I'm not calling, I'm raising..." and gets a read on Barch, and then says, "... or nothing."

Or let's say the pause is 10 seconds. When do the words "I'm raising" become binding? What if he looked at the dealer when he said it? Would this just be a judgment call on the part of the tournament director? Clearly Black did not intend to definitely raise, because he was just telling Matusow that it was a raise/fold situation, not a call. But you never know...

Also, I think he gave away too much info there. When he said it's either raise or fold, that made Barch's call a lot easier. Since Black wouldn't consider folding KK/AA in that spot, and would probably at least call with QQ, Barch knew with more certainty that his JJ was best and quickly called Black's push.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tex could probably even force a call if he wanted to be an angleshooter, since Black said "calling" first. I wondered the same thing myself. These guys should have enough sense not to use the words "calling" or "raising" when its their turn to act when it's clearly not their intended action.

[siccjay]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I think he gave away too much info there. When he said it's either raise or fold, that made Barch's call a lot easier. Since Black wouldn't consider folding KK/AA in that spot, and would probably at least call with QQ, Barch knew with more certainty that his JJ was best and quickly called Black's push.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I hadn't thought of him saying that, but it makes the call a lot easier.