Re: How valuable are implied odds in stud?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is one possible reason P.I. played this hand rather than folding. OP didn't say who the opponent was but I assume it's another top pro & they play together alot. Phil could have played it for metagame reasons but I guess only he would know that.
But, as the cards lay, it's a horrible hand to play IMO.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nice catch Brad, and nice analysis by electrical. I agree that the odds do not seem to be there for a call on the reraise, but all of us saying it was a "bad" play is like watching an old school NASCAR race and saying "How can that Earnhardt fella ever win drivin' like that??!!" That's PI's game... ruthless... fearless.. intimidating. He knows enough not to 3-bet 3rd st, and to only check/call 4th (which is more than I can say for the average fish), and thus his odds aren't bad ENOUGH to back down from this confrontation.
[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
These are exactly the types of comments I wanted to avoid by keeping the player and the limit disguised.
It's not worth going into but I really really don't think any of those factors are relevant here.
Phil plays a zillion tables and just tries to play his best game and he doesn't have any particular ego invested in a 1k-2k 8-handed stud hi hand. Metagame is just a non-issue here.
And I realize I'm just asserting rather than arguing this but it's not important enough to get bogged down on imo.
|