[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i disagree, i think there is a valid comparison here. my point was that you cant be results oriented, but that raymer played it better because he played it as if he knew kantor had a worse hand and got all his money in(just as he would have done if kantor's cards were faceup). kantor then called, which he would not have done if gregs cards were face up. this is my point. gregs read was dead on, kantors was not. gregs play was in line with the FTOP, kantors was not.

we have no way of knowing what their exact ranges and their reads was. i guess from the criteria you gave we couldnt really evaluate anyones play, since we dont know the exact range of hands greg put kantor on or vice versa, but greg was pretty confident that he was ahead and he was correct, my thinking is that both gregs range of hands and his actions were more correct than kantor, based on the actions i read happened in the hand.

rj

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's put it this way. I think Kanter played it poorly, I just think it's an incorrect statement to say the reason his play was poor is because he got his money in as a 4-1 dog. That's not quite as results-oriented as saying a play was wrong because a bad card came on the river, but it's results-oriented nonetheless. Sometimes you can make perfect decisions and still get your money in as a dog, unless the assumption is that the perfect poker player would have X-ray eyes.

Some people are saying that Kanter should have pushed on the turn. There's an argument for that, but I think it misses the point. This was a hand that was purely optional for Kanter. He called with QJs, not because he rated to have the best hand, but because he figured he could either get a big flop or maybe outplay his opponent. That's fine. And then he calls 100k on the flop looking to make a move on the turn. Also a reasonable-sounding thing to do.

But when your "move" consists of getting all your chips in, betting your entire stack on the read that Greg is weak, you had better be pretty certain you're right. Unless you're in a desperate situation, you should try to find a better line of play than one which commits all your chips. If his best option on the turn was really to push, then I think he should have played the flop differently, rather than put himself in that position at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree, i guess my point was just that kantors decisions were nowhere near perfect on this hand.

rj