[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
And yes, he did read jamie correct for having a big hand, but to rule out the possibility that Jamie would play a set or two-pair, or whatever-strength hand he happens to have in this way, is wrong. I might be missing something, but why should their stack-sizes totally change the value of the situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

First look at two absurd cases where they have the same amount of money. The pot is some constant $40 000.

If they have $10 000 its an easy call for Doyle because Gold will move in with many hands, plus the pot means he only has to be right 1 time in 4 to make the call correct.

If they have $1 000 000 000 then Doyle probably wants to fold because the size of the pot is irrelevant. He basically needs to be better then Gold half the time.

So, the larger the stack sizes the more often you have to be right in making the call.

People keep saying how Gold bluffs a lot, blah blah, but don't forget he's not a complete retard. He knows how to play poker. If his money gets all in in this hand, there's a good chance he's got the best hand. In all honesty if Doyle had moved all in over the top of him I don't think Gold would have called. He definitely wouldn't call with smaller flushes(Edit: ie. 7 high flush or lower). This is precisely why Doyle couldn't really move all in, because he's only getting called by hands that crush him.

On the river Gold is actually liable to play it pretty well with a decent mix of bluffs and value bets with a good hand. If Doyle calls the turn he's put himself in a tough spot on the river when Gold bets it. If Gold checks the river Doyle can't really extract value because if he bets the river Gold is probably only calling with hands that beat Doyle and folding the rest. In fact given Doyle's hand (10 8) there's really only one flush (9 high) that he's ahead of and that might pay him off.