[JokersAttack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't fault Doyle's fold at all. When you see a guy who's afraid to value bet unless he has the nuts, raises you in that situation, you figure he's either got a monster or he's bluffing. And Doyle knew he wasn't bluffing. It was actually a great read on Doyle's part, if we can get away from the results-oriented thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

the problem is that everyone seems to be assuming that gold will view the 9 hi flush as that much better than than an 8 or 7 hi (or 3 high flush really). Gold is def. capable of being stupid enough to not understand the RIO that come w/ huge stacks, and thats why Doyle should probably have called, but as i said earlier its a really tough spot and anyone saying that everyone arguing one specific side is an idiot is being absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you're right, there is no magical boundary that turns the 9 high flush into balls out monster compared to the 8, 7, or 6 high flush.

However, do you really think Jamie is jamming mini flushes there? I don't know, but I'd guess he isn't. It's hard to estimate how low Jamie's flush would have had to get before he merely flatted Doyle's bet. I don't know if its even possible to say, and I'm sure there is a degree of randomness involved.

But, even if Jamie does make it 100k with a mini flush there, do you think he exudes the same confidence he did with the nine high one? That's also a factor we have to consider. Not just the way Jamie's hand strength may have affected his betting, but also how it affected his demeanour, which is clearly readable and exploitable by the top players at the table.