Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

Bottom line is: if you never fold the best hand, you're not likely to be a winning poker player. And Doyle has been a winner longer than most of us have been alive.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

ok but that doesnt mean he deserves unending praise for folding it...

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bottom line is: if you never fold the best hand, you're not likely to be a winning poker player. And Doyle has been a winner longer than most of us have been alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty weak argument.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
no.. what i am saying is that gold believes he has the best hand at that moment. i is aware that his flush is vulnerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea why you would think Doyle would ever have AxQs there. Explain how that makes any sense based on his pre-flop, flop, and turn action.

[ QUOTE ]
the way i see it, gold did not want doyle to call his raise. he wanted the fold and to take down the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he was just thinking that he made his flush, and was going to get money in the pot, and try to make it look like a bluff. Not much beyond that. Which is what had Doyle a bit confused.

[ QUOTE ]
yet he did not want to simply call doyle, or min raise him (or a little more like 75k). if he had the nut flush he would have surely done one of these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure you're wrong there also. He would have played the nut flush the exact same way. They have $500K stacks, and Jamie just made what looks like to him like a monster. Of course he's going to pump it.

[ QUOTE ]
i believe that you are right. yet, i think that if doyle had taken more time (if it is to believed that there wasn't a chunk of time edited out of the broadcast where doyle actually did spend some time thinking) that he may have reasoned it out that gold was not very strong with his raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, he might have sniffed it out. But like I said before, QsTs (and to a lesser extent JsTs) are such huge possibilities for Doyle, and Jamie was so cocky he didn't seem worried about them at all. Which made him think the kid must have the Qs. I'm sure he considered the possibility of a lower flush, but wasn't willing to put $100K in when his read had him drawing dead.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

One thing I would like see is, at the end of the session, when Jamie told Doyle what he had (like he promised to do after the hand):

Doyle: "So what'd you have on that one, Jamie?"

Jamie: "I had the flush"

Doyle: "I know you had the flush, you little pissant. How goddamn HIGH was it?"

Jamie: "Umm, I don't really remember. 8 or 9, maybe?"

Doyle pukes in the kid's bowl of blueberries...

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bottom line is: if you never fold the best hand, you're not likely to be a winning poker player. And Doyle has been a winner longer than most of us have been alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty weak argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not as weak as your rebuttal.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no.. what i am saying is that gold believes he has the best hand at that moment. i is aware that his flush is vulnerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea why you would think Doyle would ever have AxQs there. Explain how that makes any sense based on his pre-flop, flop, and turn action.


[/ QUOTE ]

is it truly beyond your grasp to believe doyle capable of limping with AQo? have you not watched the prior 3 seasons.

god, i love weak tight internits... they watch while everyone else plays. then when they go busto with AK vs someone elses 89s they storm away crying about how bad everyone else plays. and how they can't wait to get home to their dual 30" monitors.

after they leave.. everyone laughs.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is a cash game, not a tournament. You don't surpass +EV spots except in very specific circumstances, this doesn't qualify. How does Doyle know he is going to get in a better spot against Jamie? This is live poker, meaning not many hands per hour, and there are 8 other people playing, all just as likely to get Jamie's money. If the third nuts isn't good enough then you're putting Jamie presicely on the second or complete nuts, meaning that in the future you're going to wait until you get the nuts vs Jamie's second nuts? That's extremely unlikely to happen. How often have we even seen big nuts vs second nuts hands overall during HSP? Now what are the odds that happens with two specific players?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is simply not true. Why pay someone off that you read for having a better hand, just because you happen to have the third nuts.

Jamie bluffs alot, and Doyle has a good read on Jamie. Why play a pot with him when you're getting ultra high confidence tells from him and may genuinly believe it is likely that he is holding a winning hand, when you can wait for him to bluff off money or simply wait for a spot when you read him for a hand but not for one that beats yours.

Also, the fact that it is a cash game and not a tournament also means that Doyle should be in no rush to get into a 1 million dollar pot against a chronic bluffer. I have no doubt if Doyle thought he was ahead the majority of the time there, he would have called.

And we don't know for sure he has multiple bullets available. We heard PH say that the players don't like carrying huge amounts of money around (which is why PH was playing behind). Whilst this may not apply as much to Doyle, it is possible that he may have only had the 1 bullet (or 2) available at the time and given how popular the show rated to be, didn't want to bust in an extremely thin EV situation so early into the game.

and JDesab > I don't think Jamie wanted Doyle to fold, he was jamming what he thought to be the winning hand whilst trying to disguise it as a bluff.

Also, I don't think there's much basis to say that Jamie's play would change if was holding the nuts or second nuts. I don't think he was trying to price out a draw so much as to simply get paid off. And if Jamie did put Doyle on the Qs, since he just made a pot+ sized bet, wouldn't it be a better idea to just call and try and induce a river bluff? Or raise more thinly for value rather than make a bet that he can't call?

Also, the only hand that includes the Qs that bets that flop like Doyle did is the AxQs. And would Doyle really bet the turn like that with that hand? He might, since he is good at blending his range and disguising his hand strength. However, I think Doyle raises preflop with this hand, esp in late pos, which he did't do.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a cash game, not a tournament. You don't surpass +EV spots except in very specific circumstances, this doesn't qualify. How does Doyle know he is going to get in a better spot against Jamie? This is live poker, meaning not many hands per hour, and there are 8 other people playing, all just as likely to get Jamie's money. If the third nuts isn't good enough then you're putting Jamie presicely on the second or complete nuts, meaning that in the future you're going to wait until you get the nuts vs Jamie's second nuts? That's extremely unlikely to happen. How often have we even seen big nuts vs second nuts hands overall during HSP? Now what are the odds that happens with two specific players?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is simply not true. Why pay someone off that you read for having a better hand, just because you happen to have the third nuts.

Jamie bluffs alot, and Doyle has a good read on Jamie. Why play a pot with him when you're getting ultra high confidence tells from him and may genuinly believe it is likely that he is holding a winning hand, when you can wait for him to bluff off money or simply wait for a spot when you read him for a hand but not for one that beats yours.

Also, the fact that it is a cash game and not a tournament also means that Doyle should be in no rush to get into a 1 million dollar pot against a chronic bluffer. I have no doubt if Doyle thought he was ahead the majority of the time there, he would have called.

And we don't know for sure he has multiple bullets available. We heard PH say that the players don't like carrying huge amounts of money around (which is why PH was playing behind). Whilst this may not apply as much to Doyle, it is possible that he may have only had the 1 bullet (or 2) available at the time and given how popular the show rated to be, didn't want to bust in an extremely thin EV situation so early into the game.

and JDesab > I don't think Jamie wanted Doyle to fold, he was jamming what he thought to be the winning hand whilst trying to disguise it as a bluff.

Also, I don't think there's much basis to say that Jamie's play would change if was holding the nuts or second nuts. I don't think he was trying to price out a draw so much as to simply get paid off. And if Jamie did put Doyle on the Qs, since he just made a pot+ sized bet, wouldn't it be a better idea to just call and try and induce a river bluff? Or raise more thinly for value rather than make a bet that he can't call?

Also, the only hand that includes the Qs that bets that flop like Doyle did is the AxQs. And would Doyle really bet the turn like that with that hand? He might, since he is good at blending his range and disguising his hand strength. However, I think Doyle raises preflop with this hand, esp in late pos, which he did't do.

[/ QUOTE ]

what i am saying is not that gold read doyle wrong. what i am saying is possible reasons why jamie played his hand the way he did. i ask you .. do you think jamie gold holding the 9 high flush should not have felt he had the best hand when the action came to him after doyle bet 25K? i believe that had i been in jamie's shoes i would have believed i had the best hand. one point i'm trying to make is that jamie did nothing wrong. while most people posting here are going to great measures to defend doyle's play in the hand they are at the same time implying that jamie played it badly. i disagree.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

well, I agree, I don't really think Jamie played it badly.

I just don't agree with you that his play would have changed if he had a higher fluez, that's all.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
well, I agree, I don't really think Jamie played it badly.

I just don't agree with you that his play would have changed if he had a lower fluez, that's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, I agree, I don't really think Jamie played it badly.

I just don't agree with you that his play would have changed if he had a lower fluez, that's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

I love this show.

Enough jabbering on the Doyle hand, what about other hands?

When does Jamie Gold leave, and DN enter the game? Perhaps Patrik bought in a for a "cool million" just because he was going to double Goldmachine up? When and how Sammy and Gee collide? TOP TOP!

Too many questions, so few answers

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]


This is simply not true. Why pay someone off that you read for having a better hand, just because you happen to have the third nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as a "read" for having a better hand. If Doyle thought Jamie was strong, he needs to think about the hands that Jamie would consider "strong." Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities. Jamie also loves to bluff as we know, and potentially picking off a Jamie Gold bluff here will reap huge rewards, mainly the $170k in the middle, $135k or so from Gold.

[ QUOTE ]

Jamie bluffs alot, and Doyle has a good read on Jamie. Why play a pot with him when you're getting ultra high confidence tells from him and may genuinly believe it is likely that he is holding a winning hand, when you can wait for him to bluff off money or simply wait for a spot when you read him for a hand but not for one that beats yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again with this read that Jamie has a "winning" or "better" hand, that type of read does not exist. He can believe Jamie thinks that he has a winning hand, which makes sense and was the case here as in his read was correct if that is what it was, but if he is beating the hand range that Jamie thinks is the "best hand" then he is incorrect to fold his flush here.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, the fact that it is a cash game and not a tournament also means that Doyle should be in no rush to get into a 1 million dollar pot against a chronic bluffer. I have no doubt if Doyle thought he was ahead the majority of the time there, he would have called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doyle is not going to get many more opportunities like this against Jamie. Remember, there is a long list of people wanting to get into this game, and the game itself rarely runs. This could very likely be the last big confrontation Doyle finds himself in against Jamie. You're acting like Doyle has all the time in the world to wait for better spots, he doesn't. Jamie could easily overplay another hand minutes later against somebody else and after he gets stacked he leaves. Now what? You'll have to wait until the next massive NL game runs sometime late next year, that is if Jamie can still afford to donk off six figures by then.

[ QUOTE ]

And we don't know for sure he has multiple bullets available. We heard PH say that the players don't like carrying huge amounts of money around (which is why PH was playing behind). Whilst this may not apply as much to Doyle, it is possible that he may have only had the 1 bullet (or 2) available at the time and given how popular the show rated to be, didn't want to bust in an extremely thin EV situation so early into the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unlike Hellmuth, Doyle consistently plays in the big game and is used to carrying around massive amounts of money, so I would be very surprised if this was the case. It's much more likely that Jamie has only one buyin with him, and common sense says the 8 other players at the table collectively are much more likely to stack him than Doyle.

[ QUOTE ]
and JDesab > I don't think Jamie wanted Doyle to fold, he was jamming what he thought to be the winning hand whilst trying to disguise it as a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you still can't see why Doyle made a bad fold?

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I don't think there's much basis to say that Jamie's play would change if was holding the nuts or second nuts. I don't think he was trying to price out a draw so much as to simply get paid off. And if Jamie did put Doyle on the Qs, since he just made a pot+ sized bet, wouldn't it be a better idea to just call and try and induce a river bluff? Or raise more thinly for value rather than make a bet that he can't call?

Also, the only hand that includes the Qs that bets that flop like Doyle did is the AxQs. And would Doyle really bet the turn like that with that hand? He might, since he is good at blending his range and disguising his hand strength. However, I think Doyle raises preflop with this hand, esp in late pos, which he did't do.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're assuming that Jamie is actively hand-reading and trying to figure out the best play against Doyle's "range." If he had been, then he wouldn't have raised $100k on the turn with a 9 high flush in a limped pot 400bbs deep against the most solid player at the table.

Thinking levels above your opponent is a mistake. It's Doyle's job to figure out what level Jamie is on and then go from there to figure out what Jamie is thinking. If you're thinking about what to do with your ten high flush against Jamie as if he were on the level of Daniel Negreanu then you probably are going to make a big mistake.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

aislephive and futuredoc own this thread imo

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doyle is not going to get many more opportunities like this against Jamie. Remember, there is a long list of people wanting to get into this game, and the game itself rarely runs. This could very likely be the last big confrontation Doyle finds himself in against Jamie. You're acting like Doyle has all the time in the world to wait for better spots, he doesn't. Jamie could easily overplay another hand minutes later against somebody else and after he gets stacked he leaves. Now what? You'll have to wait until the next massive NL game runs sometime late next year, that is if Jamie can still afford to donk off six figures by then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jamie is not the only player at the table.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doyle is not going to get many more opportunities like this against Jamie. Remember, there is a long list of people wanting to get into this game, and the game itself rarely runs. This could very likely be the last big confrontation Doyle finds himself in against Jamie. You're acting like Doyle has all the time in the world to wait for better spots, he doesn't. Jamie could easily overplay another hand minutes later against somebody else and after he gets stacked he leaves. Now what? You'll have to wait until the next massive NL game runs sometime late next year, that is if Jamie can still afford to donk off six figures by then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jamie is not the only player at the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

This only means something if indeed Doyle only has one buyin with him, which is extremely unlikely. Besides, we have seen people borrow hundreds of thousands from each other on the show, and I don't think anybody is going to have a problem loaning him money. From what I understand borrowing is a very common practice for high stakes live poker. Don't forget Doyle is also 75, it's not like he can put in crazy long sessions like he might have at 25. Point being that his time in this game is going to be very limited and there is no need for him to pass up a somewhat siginificant +EV spot. A 5 or 10 percent edge might not seem like much, but 5 percent of a million is $50k. Does it still seem so insignificant now?

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

Hello. At the end of this episode we see a teaser for ep 12 where Jamie Gold appears to go all in for a large amount and Antonius appears to call (assuming it's not cross cut). Who wants a guess at the outcome?

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

Doyle won the first hand. Everyone knows this means he will get unlucky. bad luck came in the form of a difficult hand. Why so much other irrelevant analysis?

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

A queen or jack high flush is much more likely than the others. I don't think even Gold is loose enough to be limping utg with hands like 72s or 94s (unless the 72 game is on), but he likely would play any Qxs.

Edit: I also think double and triple gappers and 42s are a stretch too. Of course when it comes to his hand range, your guess is as good as mine.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

A queen or jack high flush is much more likely than the others. I don't think even Gold is loose enough to be limping utg with hands like 72s or 94s (unless the 72 game is on), but he likely would play any Qxs.

Edit: I also think double and triple gappers and 42s are a stretch too. Of course when it comes to his hand range, your guess is as good as mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ultimately whether this was a 'good' or 'bad' fold comes down to what we think Gold's range is. I'm going to assume Doyle is in a much better position to estimate that then we are. Also saying two pair is in his range is slightly ridiculous, especially given how he was acting.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

A queen or jack high flush is much more likely than the others. I don't think even Gold is loose enough to be limping utg with hands like 72s or 94s (unless the 72 game is on), but he likely would play any Qxs.

Edit: I also think double and triple gappers and 42s are a stretch too. Of course when it comes to his hand range, your guess is as good as mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jamie pretty much has no real starting hand requirements, especially in a limped pot. We've seen him cold call J8o, crappy offsuit aces, and even stuff like 32o. I really don't think it's unreasonable at all to say Jamie is playing literally any two suited here, and while you could also say that his turn raise should be a strong flush more than a weak one, I also don't think this is the case with Jamie. His turn raise size was pretty huge, I don't think he would make that particular raise size with the nut flush. I think his raise is almost always a non not flush simply because the way Jamie thinks. Nut flush = not vulnerable, yet every other flush ranging from the second nuts to the nut low needs to be protected, because if another spade falls Jamie will think it killed his hand, regardless of the action. He is scared to get to the river and not know where he is at, which is why he tends to freeze up and check marginal hands that are extremely likely the best hand. When he has nothing, in his mind his decision is pretty straightforward, either try to bluff or give up. When he has a strong hand, (ie two pair +) he has another pretty easy decision, bet. His turn play in this hand is a good example of what I mean to a degree. He wants to avoid those tough river decisions, so he decides to raise big hoping to end the hand before the river where a card could likely fall that will put him in an uncomfortable spot.

Hope that made sense. Playing donkaments and running bad so if it doesn't I blame that.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

A queen or jack high flush is much more likely than the others. I don't think even Gold is loose enough to be limping utg with hands like 72s or 94s (unless the 72 game is on), but he likely would play any Qxs.

Edit: I also think double and triple gappers and 42s are a stretch too. Of course when it comes to his hand range, your guess is as good as mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ultimately whether this was a 'good' or 'bad' fold comes down to what we think Gold's range is. I'm going to assume Doyle is in a much better position to estimate that then we are. Also saying two pair is in his range is very ridiculous, especially given how he was acting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

whats hilarious is that gold actually tried to be tricky and deceiving when the flush card hit. Does gold give any of his opponents hand reading respect at all?

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

tomorrow!!!!!!!!! omg cant wait!

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

Gold hits Flushdraw:"Yeah ... I came here to bluff, and take a big pot from Doyle, raise 125k."
Gold misses:"OMG Degenyamine, why so much? That was my move, I call".


(lol at him trying to float imo)

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
tomorrow!!!!!!!!! omg cant wait!

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
is it truly beyond your grasp to believe doyle capable of limping with AQo? have you not watched the prior 3 seasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I have. It's not just the limp, it's the flop lead into a big field with nothing but a gutshot Broadway, and it's the turn overbet after both draws got there. Sure it's a possible, but to think Doyle has AxQs even 5% of the time there, much less to base an analysis on that assumption, is pretty absurd.

[ QUOTE ]
god, i love weak tight internits... they watch while everyone else plays. then when they go busto with AK vs someone elses 89s they storm away crying about how bad everyone else plays. and how they can't wait to get home to their dual 30" monitors.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea what this paragraph has to do with anything. I'm primarily a live player (and TV viewer, of course). Doyle does not play AxQs that way.

I will concede Doyle gave Jamie too much credit. But whatever, let's move on. Looking forward to tonight's show...

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
There is no such thing as a "read" for having a better hand. If Doyle thought Jamie was strong, he needs to think about the hands that Jamie would consider "strong." Any flush is certainly among those hands, and while two pair / sets / straights are not very likely, they are without a doubt possibilities. Jamie also loves to bluff as we know, and potentially picking off a Jamie Gold bluff here will reap huge rewards, mainly the $170k in the middle, $135k or so from Gold.

[/ QUOTE ]

a point well stated. i wish i had been able to come across as well.

look. flush over flush is a very profitable hand. while others have called it marginal as if marginal situations are disdainful. they are not.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

Flush over flush is one of the most profitable situations to be in- but do people honestly think Gold was going broke with, say, the 3 high flush in that situation if no spade comes on the river? Doyle is ahead of most flushes; the way this hand was played though, he'll win what's in the middle when he's good if Jamie gets a clue with a really low flush, and he'll lose it all those times that Jamie has the 2 flushes better than his. If you know Gold will go broke with any flush, then Doyle didn't play it well, but Gold may be able to fold a flush.

Re: High Stakes Poker thread (11/5 - 500k buyin - Spoilers expected)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Flush over flush is one of the most profitable situations to be in- but do people honestly think Gold was going broke with, say, the 3 high flush in that situation if no spade comes on the river? Doyle is ahead of most flushes; the way this hand was played though, he'll win what's in the middle when he's good if Jamie gets a clue with a really low flush, and he'll lose it all those times that Jamie has the 2 flushes better than his. If you know Gold will go broke with any flush, then Doyle didn't play it well, but Gold may be able to fold a flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never seen Gold fold more than "TOP TOP" when the flop was all of one suit and he had none of that suit.