[KiwiMark]

[ QUOTE ]
Doyle's fold is bad, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this for an idea:
Let's say that Doyle is brilliant and that after betting $25K into a $20K flop he did not believe that Jamie's raise to $125K + the way Jamie was behaving = anything other than QsXs, JsXs or 9sXs. If this was Doyle's read then it turns out he was absolutely correct, and his fold was 100% the correct move. It would seem unlikely that Jamie put Doyle on having a flush and he definitely thought he had the best hand.

Between the 2 players it seems that Jamie's ability to read Doyle is very poor and Doyle's ability to read Jamie is very good and yet a bunch of idiots on this thread criticize Doyle for how he played that hand.

Everyone that said that Jamie could have had 2 pair, trips or a straight the way he was acting were wrong, we know this because we saw the holecards. Doyle from Jamie's behaviour thought he was VERY strong (as in a flush and not a little baby one), we know he was correct. Since Jamie had a hand in the range that Doyle thought he had then Doyle was correct in his read. Since Doyle did not KNOW the EXACT 2 cards in Jamie's hand he is human, but it does not mean that he played it badly.

This Doyle bashing by the idiots is completely results based, if Jamie had been holding Qs7S then no one would say that Doyle played it badly.