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

Great Hands #13 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 54, Brunson, Hellmuth and Negr

 
Old
Default
Great Hands #13 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 54, Brunson, Hellmuth and Negr - Mon Jun 27, 2011, 03:39 PM
(#1)
PSO Admin's Avatar
Since: May 2010
Posts: 301
(Administrator)
WhiteStar
Great Hands #13 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 54, Brunson, Hellmuth and Negreanu


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; Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 01:06 PM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Jun 28, 2011, 01:57 PM
(#2)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,817
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
That hand was really surprising to me, especially on the flop.

Phil getting in first with K10o and raising was normal (if you're going to get into a hand from UTG, then make sure you don't limp). Daniel raising with 2 low suited cards, to try and isolate Phil and outplay him after the flop was something I've seen him do to players alot (from the way it played out, he also had a pretty good read on Phil at the time too). Doyle calling preflop is what I'd do in that situation too.

On the flop, with them all missing, I understand Phil and Daniel's checks.... but the play that surprised me the most was Doyle not making a bet to see where he was at in the hand. If he bets with that flop, he should drive at least one of them out of the pot, to isolate them, or possibly even both and take it down then. Yes, one may have a Q, but you need to find out if they do.

The turn, Phil sensed weakness in both and bluffed at the pot. Daniel sensed it and called. Doyle probably put him on a Q, but with 3 checks on the flop... I think it's a stretch.

On the river, Phil's bet was another one that didn't make sense to me. He bet less than he did on the turn with nothing. If he'd have bet about double what he did, he might have taken it down... but the small bet, if Daniel senses a bluff at all makes a call or raise very easy to do since the 2 on the river gets him ahead of any big A except AQ. Like the raise on it too, so he wouldn't have to show he went in with the two low suited cards.
 
Old
Default
Tue Jun 28, 2011, 11:39 PM
(#3)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,501
(Head Trainer)
I think this hand was played pretty yuck mostly. In fact there's actions I don't like from all 3 of them.

Phil opens KTo. Fine.

Danial 3b's with 62s. Generally not a great play but he's got position on Phil and some meta game with Phil that I suspect leads him to believe he can play this situation profitably in isolation. He's probably right.

Doyle flats with JJ. Given the action sequence and who's involved, I think this is by far better than folding or 4 betting, so I like it.

Phil calls the 3B out of position. This is really bad, and one of the reasons Phil is generally thought of as a fish in cash games. This is not a hand that plays well OOP in a 3b pot. Now I think vs. just Daniel I understand the sentiment, given what we'd expect DN's range to be, but Doyle's flat of the 3B should scare the pants off of KTo. Doyle has a real hand here, he doesn't really flat this kind of action with suited connectors etc, at least not on TV much that I've seen. Plus Doyle makes the comment to DN before calling, "who lost the last hand?" implying weakness, another indicator of real strength and I was surprised to see this from Doyle.

Flop misses Phil and Daniel, and they both check. Understandably so, their hands are pantless now after Doyle's cold call pre. lol

Doyle checks. I think this is a mistake, I would bet here. Not to see where I'm at, I think he knows he usually has the best hand now unless someone is slowplaying a monster. I think he needs to bet because the pot is already large and he will expect to win it right now frequently. If he checks it back, he may induce bluffs etc but that line is usually for pot control to get your hand to showdown without playing a huge pot. This is a good hand strength for it but the pot is already not cooperating as it's 3 way for a 3b pre... the pot is already large. So turn/river bets will be possibly pretty big, and the pot will be big, and although he thinks he's probably good right now he still would have to deal with the fact that 1) someone might be slowpaying a monster, 2) someone might be slowing down with Qx, and 3) He has no idea what cards are scare cards for him, it's not just aces or kings, with these 2 in the pot anything might be a bad card. So I would take a bet/fold line here, if called, perhaps then check back the turn and plan to pick off a river bluff depending on what happens.

Turn gives DN an open ended straight draw.

Phil seizes the opportunity to bluff at it. I like this play. DN's wide range is likely to have produced a lot of marginal holdings... Doyle has turned his hand face up as JJ or TT by checking back the flop. There is some chance Doyle might play an overpair this way, but if Doyle calls Phil's bluff I'm sure he's done with the hand.

DN calls. I'm not sure about this one. Generally I think this is a great spot for DN to semi-bluff raise and take down the pot often enough with 6 high to show an immediate profit. That being said, idk what the depth of money is here either, and being really deep might dictate the call is better and perhaps bluff-raising the river if you miss or betting as a float if Phil gives up.

Doyle folds. Given his flop line, I'm not inclined to like this fold. It's a tough spot to overcall after DN calls, but given these 2 guys I think I call it and with the images I think Doyle calling would be sufficient to depants their hands again when JJ is good and they'll check to him on the river (position ftw!) But this is why he should just bet the flop when checked to, as he now avoids this tricky spot altogether.

River pairs DN's 2, which he believes is not good enough to win.

Phil makes a terribly weak blocking bet. IDK what he's thinking. DN is sort of known for being a bit of a calling station, particularly in spots like this. He will get weak calls with this weak bet but they'll all be beating K high... this is a better bet with something like 2nd pair maybe. DN reads it as weak and decides to turn his pair of 2's into a bluff and sticks in a big raise. I like this line, as Phil is likely to fold his entire range to it given that he's now declared he's weak. Phil may grandstand these spots at times, but he does fold eventually.
 
Old
Default
Wed Jun 29, 2011, 01:58 AM
(#4)
pokerstar671's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,206
I dont know why Doyle folded he should have reraised after the turn or bet on the flop. Phil Helmuth should have folded before the flop after Daniel reraised. Daniel Negreanu made the right play there just because the way phil was playing his hand. But I think it would have been a big differnece if Doyle didnt fold hes so lucky doyle folded. Anyways if Phil Helmuth was gunna bluff atleast make it believable. He bet ok on the turn but that weak bet on the river made it obviouse. He should have bet the pot theres no way hes going to reraise there.
 
Old
Default
Fri Jul 01, 2011, 09:32 AM
(#5)
Deltan's Avatar
Since: Jul 2011
Posts: 5
Pre-flop:
There seems to be a general consensus that Phil's opening raise is fine. I'd do the same.
Daniels raise with 62s is a great move imo. Most people won't raise an UTG raise unless they have something good for fear of being re-raised off their hand. I think this is the move that causes Doyle to fold his hand on the turn.
Doyle's flat call with pocket jacks is also a great move also. If a jack flops, he's got a well disguised set and I doubt he'd want to risk raising for fear of Daniel or Phil re-raising him off his hand. I think Doyle's comment relating to who lost the last hand showed him a very relaxed Daniel and contributed to him just calling.
Phil's call is a little weak but ok since it's not that much more to call and he may flop a monster. He is OOP, but I think his mistake comes on the flop! I would have folded here, that's not a hand that can take much action.

The Flop:
Phil's check here is very poor. He raised pre-flop and should have bet about 2/3 of the pot, probably taking it down right there. Checking it here told both Doyle and Daniel that he had nothing. I think I'll give him some benefit of the doubt here as he may have read Doyle as being strong.
I have no issue with Daniel's check in this situation. I think he definitely read Doyle as being strong and would have folded to any action.
Doyle checking the flop is fine. There is a queen on the board and both Phil and Daniel are capable of slow-playing top pair (though I believe he knew Phil had nothing) and 68 is a definite possibility with Daniel. I think he took the opportunity to take the free card to perhaps make his set on the turn. If a J did indeed come on the turn he would be way ahead since it was an uncoordinated rainbow flop and would wtfpwn top pair with only minimal risk of straight or flush draws. From his perspective he's probably ahead anyway and I think that being stuck for $100k may also have influenced his decision here. I would play my Jacks the same in this situation half the time and bet about 60% of the pot the other half.

The Turn:
Phil's bet on the turn is his best play of the hand, unfortunately having checked on the flop takes away a lot of the power of his move. I think this move is essentially a forced blocking bet because otherwise he has to give it away.
Daniel just calling Phil's bet is interesting. I'm sure he had a solid read on Phil and wasn't concerned about him really. I think he was concerned about Doyle's holding and wanted to play a smallish pot here or fold to serious action. He had the open ended straight draw and really wanted to see the river. If it were me I would be torn between making a huge raise (representing 68) and calling. I think I would call 60% of the time and raise the other 40.
Doyle folding the best hand is entirely forgivable and probably the right play. He's stuck 100k. There's an overcard and a straight on the board. I noticed that he flicks more than a few glances Daniel's way and only once at Phil. I think he's totally discounted Phil now and is very concerned about Daniel and losing a huge pot to a straight or two pair. There's too many scare cards that might arrive on the river and too few that improve his holding. It's nice to be an armchair tactician in this situation. I wish I had the capacity to make decisions like this for myself in the heat of the moment. When I first watched it, I would have called here because Daniel was uncharacteristically quiet and thoughtful and Phil would have bet more if he had something. I suspect (now) that in the long run I would lose more than I would win by calling and raising is out of the question.

The River:
Phil's bet on the river is at best an attempt to get Daniel to perceive it as a value bet (a value bluff? ) for the best hand. Betting less than previous rounds is likely to be perceived as weakness. On the other hand, he can't check or he may as well fold and a big bet would take a lot of courage as there are now 3 straights on the board, a flush and a Queen. Still, a 50% - 60% pot bet here would be a better play.
Daniel's raise of Phil's small bet is the play of the hand. Phil's comment to him about the gray chips is a classic example of representing strength to cover weakness, and will have confirmed Daniel's earlier read on Phil. Additionally, he gets to represent the straights and/or flush. I would have done the similar, though I suspect a 75% pot bet would have the same result with less risk.
Phil's fold is right as he can only beat a bluff.
 

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