Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions / Old Hand Analysis Section /

Daniel Negreanu vs Vanessa Rousso - Great Hand

 
Old
Default
Daniel Negreanu vs Vanessa Rousso - Great Hand - Thu May 26, 2011, 02:19 PM
(#1)
PSO Admin's Avatar
Since: May 2010
Posts: 301
(Administrator)
WhiteStar
Watch the video of this great hand between Daniel Negreanu and Vanessa Rousso.

Watch Video Here.

Would you have acted the same way? What would you have done differently? Share your thoughts and feedback via this forum discussion about this hand.

Regards


Team PokerSchoolOnline - Administration


Last edited by PSO Admin; Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 02:12 PM..
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 02:52 PM
(#2)
joker41673's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,850
he should have called on the first re-raise
he raised weak because he knew that those 9's could be beat and when he was re-raised over top the first time he should have either called it or folded but not re-raise again which left him open to call her all in

if he had called he would have got to see the flop and could have made trips but now he'll never know

 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 02:55 PM
(#3)
joery1's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 5
Calling the raise from Vanessa was the best way to see the flop ( my opinion ) with pocket 9's.
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 02:55 PM
(#4)
topthecat's Avatar
Since: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,962
Interesting. I was actually going to post about something quite similar.

I have been in the same position as Negreanu quite a few times, but with Js, Qs and Kings and every time the three bet came I had the feeling of Aces.

You either have to fold or reraise and Negreanu went for the four bet, just as I would. He is put all in, and he knows he is beat, but the correct play is to call (I am not sure why that is the case LOL). In my hands when I was raised all in I made the calls because it was the "right" play but I knew I was beat.

I am not sure of the logic behind this, but maybe Dave or some of the others could explain why folding after you have 4 bet is not the correct play even if you know you are most likely crushed.

Thanks

TC


Edit:

I just saw the other two guys suggesting he call the three bet after his raise, rather than reraise. That could put him in an even more awkward spot I feel after the flop and Rouso would know he is weak. I think his problems stemmed from the min raise to be honest.

TC

Last edited by topthecat; Thu May 26, 2011 at 02:59 PM..
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 03:55 PM
(#5)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,836
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
What I didn't like was the min raise in the beginning.

I'd either raise more to open if you want to get in the hand.... or.... if you want to play small-ball, then just call, instead of min-raising. Instead of a min raise, if he 3-bet originally, she may not have 4-bet him back, which can get him to see the flop. Or, if he just called, then it's less to call her first raise to see the flop to try and spike a set.

If she did anything but call if he 3-bet initially, then he knows that he's behind in the hand or in a race and still would have enough chips to fold, if he thinks she has the over pair. She could also easily just call it and see the flop. If he hits the flop, then he's golden... and if misses with overs, then he can still fold and have over 10BB.

If he just calls to open (not normally what I'd do or recommend, but might throw that option in every so often, less than 1 of 10 times you're in that situation, to change things up)... then if she 4-bets, he can get out cheap, call to see the flop and try to hit it, or push back.
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 04:04 PM
(#6)
topthecat's Avatar
Since: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,962
What about the folding your four bet being a bad play from the commentator JWK?

TC
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 04:19 PM
(#7)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,836
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by topthecat View Post
What about the folding your four bet being a bad play from the commentator JWK?

TC
I don't like folding 4-bets at all. If you're willing to 4-bet, then you should be willing to shove. If you 4-bet/fold, then you're really going to get very little table respect afterwards on any steal attempts and everyone's going to want to take advantage of it...... however..... if you're someone like Daniel, that already has the table respect, then as the (every once in awhile to throw someone off)... if you've got chips left, then you can do it. BUT only do it once, do not ever make it a pattern.
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 10:17 PM
(#8)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
I'm not used to 3-dimensional poker ...

So it's 5-handed and Blinds are 500/1000, with 100 ante, so the pot started out with 2,000? Then ...

Daniel (UTG): bets 2,200 (pot 4,200)
Vanessa (MP): 3bets to 6,500 (pot 10,700)
Woodward (Button): folds
Shaw (SB): folds
Kenney (BB): folds

Daniel: 4,300 to call ... 4bets to 11,500 (pot 20,000)
Vanessa: 5,000 to call (announcer: Vanessa's getting 4:1 to call) ... goes all-in to 40,500 (pot 54,000)

Daniel: 29,000 to call (Daniel: says he's getting almost 2:1 to call) ... folds

Card odds:
82%
18%
 
Old
Default
Thu May 26, 2011, 10:59 PM
(#9)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
I have watched some of Russo's play, and a bit more of Negreanu's, but that isn't really much use in deciphering a hand like this. Obviously both are perfectly capable of adjusting their games for conditions, and a TV edited viewing session hardly tells the whole story.

I know Daniel "likes" small raises with a wide range, but he does tend to do that with position.
The table is not full ring.
Blinds are 500/1000, and Daniel starts with a bit over 40BB.

OOP, he (Daniel) makes a pretty small raise, and with him this can be a WIDE range (although I suspect not as wide as if he had position). Im pretty sure he is aware that Vanessa would know this too.

Vanessa (with about 40BB as well) re-raises to 6500, leaving Daniel a decision to call 4300 into a 10K pot (a bit over).

A raise like Vanessa's can mean "I got a monster, please call with what you think are good odds", or "I've got nothing, but I think you raised out of line, so please fold" because of Daniels small ball tendencies, and his position. I say this because Her raise puts a non-committing amount of her stack in with what seems like strength; in reality she can still fold. Overall, I REALLY like her raise amount.

Daniel is put into the spot where he has a difficult decision.

Sure, he could have easily folded here, but my guess is Daniel really does not WANT to fold away even a small 2200 investment if there is a good chance he holds the best hand. This thought may be somewhat "foreign" to many PSO players, simply because PSO concentrates so heavily upon discipline and "picking your spots". I cannot dis-agree with a desire to NOT fold though, especially if you have enough confidence in your ability to out-play opponents (Which Daniel is certainly entitled to have!). Oftentimes MTT events are won by looking for reasons to stay in the pot, not by looking for reasons to fold. Since Daniel does not fold his tiny raise, I don't think it is un-reasonable to assume he is looking for reasons to stay.

My guess is there is something about Vanessa's play which Daniel has seen telling him she is reasonably polarized here. Perhaps it is since she has laid a bit over 2 to 1 to a caller and did not pot commit herself, or perhaps it is because he has seen her raise to lay LESS than 2 to 1 when on a solid hand that might be "racing" (like AQ/AK/KQ). Without more info on the entire event this is hard to say. Of course he COULD have simply had a "brain fart" too, but a player of his caliber tends to GET to that caliber by not having those sorts of episodes...

So the actions Daniel COULD take to stay in are:

FLAT CALL.
The problem with this is he is putting about 15% of his chips in with only about a 1 in 8.5 chance of winning the hand. I say this because from what I've seen, Vanessa definately appears to have the "heart" to barrel Daniel on the flop. He is going to have an over pair to the board well under 45% of the flops, and out of position this puts him in a tricky spot versus a stack which can cripple him held by an aggressive player. A Flat to set mine is often the "default setting" for a middle level player who is un-sure of what to do. The problem with this is that is goes against the mantra that "aggressive poker is winning poker" since you tend to only win when you make the best hand. Daniel definately does NOT strike me as a "passive" player, who relies on fortune for his ability to win at poker.

RAISE ALL-IN (or some other committing amount).
One problem with this is if he "believes" Vanessa is either on a semi-weak hand or a very strong one, this leaves him with no post-flop options:
He is either well behind to a bigger pair, and MUST flop a set to win, OR...
Vanessa folds and he wins "just" the 6500 she put in.
winning the 6500 aint a BAD result, but without a ecent amount of surety that you will take it down, this is a bit TOO much risk.

RAISE AS HE DID (small ball).
One of the strong points of the small ball game style is that the frequent raises with a wide range tends to induce additional action for your truly big hands.
Daniel appears to "see" this fact, and elects to try representing his 99 as AA/KK.
His 4Bet to 11.5k (just under 30% of his stack), if made by a "normal" player, especially one with "stack discipline", would almost certainly appear as a committing amount. Since it is about as SMALL a committing amount as possible, and since it does lay such large odds for a call, it is either real WEAKNESS or is BEGGING for a call/shove.

Daniel's raise amount has pretty much turned his 99 into a bluff catcher pre-flop, and he invests the 11.5k (total) to leverage that. I'll be honest, if we assume that he did NOT have a brain fart, then I am pretty sure he knew exactly what he was going to do if Vanessa jammed him, regardless of his coffee-housing in the video. I think daniel knew that Vanessa is good enough to not stack off to him if he flopped a set, and if she is on "just" AK and he hits, he would not get anything more than her 6500 raise anyway. With all that in mind, I think his goal was to win the pot without needing to flop a set, or FORCE Vanessa to jam so he could continue on with 29k. As such, his raise might seem "weak", but in reality it is a very aggressive play made by a supremely confident player who KNOWS he can still win after losing 25%+ of his stack at the final table. Daniel gives himself maximum chance to win, and is willing to put in the chips that are necessary to do that. BRAVO to him...

...or it could still be just a brain fart!

 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 01:01 AM
(#10)
oriholic's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 751
BronzeStar
I think limp-call or limp-raise might have worked a bit better than raise/4-bet. Calling raises out of position, especially against good players sucks. If he calls the flop will contain overcards most of time and unless he hits his set he won't know where he stands. Plus, even if he hits his set he may not even be able to get much out of Vanessa if there are overcards to her pair or if she misses. So on a QT6 flop she can get him off 9s with AK, and on a QT9 flop he probably doesn't get anything out of her. She can be raising a wide range in position, so rather than calling her raise out of position he 4-bets to end the hand pre. He's turned his nines into a bluff. But he could easily be bluffing with the better hand!

The reason he can't fold is that Vanessa can have either a monster or a bluff here. However, Daniel is somewhat of a calling station so it's far more likely she has a very strong hand. In fact I'd want to narrow her down to almost an entirely value range here. I think JJ is about the bottom of her value range. If her value range is JJ+, AK, 99 is way behind. Actually, he's only about a 2 to 1 dog against this range. If we take AK out of her range though, he's basically screwed (4 to 1 dog). Since she can also have bluffs (especially Ax) it would be mathematically correct for Daniel to call. The question is whether she can have bluffs often here. If yes I think it's a call. If not, because you know that she knows that you like to call, she should have a monster here too frequently for you to call with 99. With AK you're at least kind of flipping against JJ-QQ and you have an overcard to KK if it turns out she's not bluffing.

Say 50% of the time she's bluffing (let's just say you're a 3 to 1 favorite on average to keep my math easy), and 50% of the time you're a 3 to 1 dog on average. The pot is now 54000 and it's 29000 to call. Then 50% of the time you win 54k 75% of the time and lose 29k 25% of the time and 50% of the time you lose 29k 75% of the time and win 54k 25% of the time. So:

.5(.75*54k-.25*29k)+.5(.25*54k-.75*29k) = 12.5k. Clearly if this is the case this is a very +EV call. The question is how often is she bluffing here? Honestly against someone who wants to call as much as Daniel..I might not put her bluffs at over 10% here.

.1(.75*54k-.25*29k)+.9(.25*54k-.75*29k)=-4.1k So it would be -EV to call since she's not bluffing enough.

Of course I kind of just made up these ranges and range matchups, but I think that her bluff frequency in this spot is not high enough to make calling with 99 a good idea. Also, Daniel should know when he 4-bets that he's turned his hand into a bluff and be ready to fold to a shove.

Also just because you're getting 2 to 1 doesn't make it the right call all the time. If you're worse than a 2 to 1 underdog to the other person's range and/or a loss would hurt you much more than a win would help, and you have enough to fold and not be crippled, you can definitely fold with 2 to 1 odds. To hell with the weak image. No reason to stack off in a spot where you're almost certainly behind.

The way Daniel has sized his bet he absolutely can fold to a shove. If he had aces this would be an excellent bet as she may sense fold equity / she has the best hand and shove into him.
 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 11:54 AM
(#11)
NauseaX's Avatar
Since: Mar 2011
Posts: 1
JDean's analysis is bang on according to me.
 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 12:28 PM
(#12)
Bill Curran's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,508
Why has everyone concentrated on Daniels play? Good, Bad or indifferent ?

No one has analysed Vanessa's play, Did she play well ? was her bet sizing right ? etc. etc.

I'm just sayin'

 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 03:44 PM
(#13)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDean View Post
if we assume that he did NOT have a brain fart, then I am pretty sure he knew exactly what he was going to do if Vanessa jammed him, regardless of his coffee-housing in the video ... As such, his raise might seem "weak", but in reality it is a very aggressive play made by a supremely confident player who KNOWS he can still win after losing 25%+ of his stack at the final table.
Interesting comments!! Especially about the bet sizing, and how it might have been sized to give the other person particular pot odds to call or not call. I guess that's another aspect of the game that comes more into play the deeper the stacks - the three-betting and the sizing? Are there any deep stack tourneys on PokerStars with a low buy in (like $1 or less )?

I've seen videos of Daniel when he had the worst hand, but had almost like a chess approach where with his great reads he almost seemed to know what the other person was going to do before they did. Like here's a video where he had QTo against AA:

Daniel in WSOP making the person with AA really nervous

It almost felt like he was letting Vanessa know with his 4bet that was small that he had a pocket pair but that it was middling, knowing that if she had a better one like JJ she'd shove and if she had AK or whatever she'd probably just call? Like with his bet, was he basically being straight-forward saying that he had a hand like 99, what do you have Vanessa? And if she shoved he was going to fold, because yeah like oriholic said, is 2:1 odds getting the right odds for a call? I guess maybe the 'coffee-housing' ( ), might that have been some sort of image control measure, because I guess a lot of people like topthecat/JWK noted might think it really bad to fold after 4betting?

And then, even if she knew that's what he was asking, I guess going all-in was the right move - anybody who would have chosen to 6-bet instead?

I like that idea too of JWK/Joker/Joery's (the three J's )to just call the 3bet to see the flop as an alternative, with the intent of check-folding unless there was a 9 on the flop. But maybe that's not really Daniel's style of play or something?

PS I don't know anything about the other three at the table, but thought maybe if the initial bets out of Daniel and Vanessa seemed on the small side that it could possibly have something to do with the other players at the table? But maybe not who knows

Last edited by TrustySam; Fri May 27, 2011 at 04:07 PM..
 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 04:15 PM
(#14)
ssuglia's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,393
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustySam View Post
Are there any deep stack tourneys on PokerStars with a low buy in (like $1 or less )?
There's a few low buy in tournies ($1-3) with guaranteed money that have 3000 starting chips and 10-15 minute blinds.

The $2.75 buy in $10k guarantee has 3000 chips and 15 minute blind levels; I always enjoyed that one.

Those aren't really "deep" stack tournaments, but that's about as close as it gets at the low buy in levels.
 
Old
Default
Fri May 27, 2011, 04:29 PM
(#15)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssuglia View Post
There's a few low buy in tournies ($1-3) with guaranteed money that have 3000 starting chips and 10-15 minute blinds.

The $2.75 buy in $10k guarantee has 3000 chips and 15 minute blind levels; I always enjoyed that one.

Those aren't really "deep" stack tournaments, but that's about as close as it gets at the low buy in levels.
Oh, thx ssuglia!!!

That's perfect - that's twice as many chips as I'm used to. I'll have to give it a try ... suspect there's going to be something of a learning curve, so I was hoping to not blow through too much money too fast

zzzzz
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 05:27 PM
(#16)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,512
(Head Trainer)
Nice hand, looking forward to more of these.

Here's my take:

Daniel opens standard to 2.. We don't have the context of recent image and table dynamic looking at a single hand in a vacuum like this, but it's probably safe to say he's opening a wide range. And I like his open with 9's.

Vanessa 3b's with JJ to 6500. I like this as well. She knows Daniel's range is wide, she has position on him, and she knows he's prone to calling too loose in these spots to see a flop so she's punishing that to extract value. If she does get called, the spr will be just over 2, which will make her hand easier to play post flop. (If she flats, the spr will be just over 6 if no one else calls, or lower but multi-way if others come along, neither are particularly attractive spots for JJ).

Daniel's small 4b is interesting. He can't really call, as he'll never be able to play this well out of position on these stacks, and he doesn't have a favorable price to set mine. That leaves folding or raising. Folding is a reasonable option actually, except for 2 things:

1) Vanessa is capable of 3-betting him light, which he is a good target for.
2) Depending on dynamic, raise/folding may not be an option (for instance if he's raise/folded a couple times recently doing so again would be pretty bad for his image).

So folding, while not bad, isn't terribly attractive either. That leaves raising. Any large 4b (up to and including all in) commits everything and would be pretty terrible as it's likely to only get called by a range 99 does not fair well against, and fold out all worse.

Ruling everything else out, he makes a small 4b. It looks really strong, like he wants action. The reality is, he doesn't, but Vanessa doesn't know that. I actually like this play. He's figuring Vanessa won't be likely to call this bet, she'll either fold if she's stealing or has a marginal value hand, or she'll commit with a strong hand. This bet is likely to fold out worse and only get action from better, which is generally not a great idea, but at the same time it will remove the difficulty of playing this hand out of position as well as prevent him from being bluffed (although I think Vanessa is capable of 5b bluffing if she perceives he can fold). Essentially this bet is testing Vanessa for her whole stack without actually putting it all at risk, since he can still fold.

She 5b ships. I do agree with Daniel's fold, as he's basically not beating anything except AK and she's not even playing AK this way all the time, so he's mostly looking at overpairs. At first, I was not a fan of Vanessa's shove on the surface, as it's the type of bet where she's folding out worse and stacking off to QQ+. However, there's some deeper meta-game going on I think. She knows that:

-Daniel understands she's capable of 5b bluffing
-Daniel would not likely make a small 4b with a premium hand, he likes to call and play those trappy and this depth of money is ripe for him to call the 3b with QQ+.
-Daniel may suspect she would flat his small 4b with a premium hand herself, planning to get it in over his pending c-bet.
-Daniel is notorious for talking himself into tough calls when he reads the situation as a possible move.

She even comments after the hand is over that she thought he might talk himself into the call.

All in all, I thought they both played their hands well, a very enjoyable hand to analyze. The one thing I definitely didn't like was Vanessa showing her hand. Don't give the whole table free info. Would love to hear her rationale for this but not expecting I'd be swayed. Possibly just a brain cramp on her part.
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 05:41 PM
(#17)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLangolier View Post
Would love to hear her rationale for this but not expecting I'd be swayed.
I wouldn't expect you to be swayed but I just assumed she might have wanted the table to get that image of her that she was playing straight that day, and that if she shoved she had the nuts. As like a set up for a potential squeeze play or steal (with the cost being minimal in this case in that everybody already knew she had) - small cost, greater possible future gain?

Who knows for sure though - just speculating ...

Last edited by TrustySam; Sun May 29, 2011 at 05:46 PM..
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 08:18 PM
(#18)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustySam View Post
I wouldn't expect you to be swayed but I just assumed she might have wanted the table to get that image of her that she was playing straight that day, and that if she shoved she had the nuts. As like a set up for a potential squeeze play or steal (with the cost being minimal in this case in that everybody already knew she had) - small cost, greater possible future gain?

Who knows for sure though - just speculating ...
showing that she would 5bet shove Daniel with JJ is hardly a desire to let them know she is "playing it straight".

JJ as a 5bet is essentially a "bluff" versus anyone except players thinking on multiple levels above the norm.

I think Dave and I pretty much agree on Daniel's play, but I really like his addition of the Vanessa side. I only touched on her thinking very quickly in my post, but he really expanded it. I like that addition...
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 08:24 PM
(#19)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
Dayum JD that was thinking quickly? lol would love to see when you have thought and pondered on it for a while
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 08:54 PM
(#20)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDean View Post
JJ as a 5bet is essentially a "bluff" versus anyone except players thinking on multiple levels above the norm.
Can you elaborate? Like specifically what multiple levels are you factoring in that make a JJ shove into 99 (that Daniel wasn't trying to hide) a bluff in your mind after Daniel specifically put her on a better pocket pair

I never mentioned this, but my IQ is off the charts so there's nothing so complex that's it's going to be over my head - eager for the long-form of your analysis!! The more the better!!!

I mean, like I saw what you said here about how you believed the sizing of Daniel's raise was in your mind an attenpt to try representing his 99 as AA/KK. So therefore in your mind was Vanessa therefore in return really scared he really did have AA and therefore tried to bluff him back by trying to represent her JJ as AA as well. Like is that the multi-layers youre referring to ...

Last edited by TrustySam; Sun May 29, 2011 at 09:11 PM..
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com