aba caught bluffing against bobby baldwin in 1.8mil pot - Page 38

vhawk01 · #**371** 07-17-2007, 04:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No [censored]. Is anyone even remotely interested in discussing why BB would smoothcall the nuts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

It is possible that Baldwin just called the river because he was so sure of his read, i.e., that BT was on a stone bluff, that he knew that there was no equity in a raise.

So his flat call basically says "this is how sure I am that you're on a bluff, sucka."

I'm not saying that's what happened, although his flat call on the turn in an obvious raise situation lends support to this theory. If this is the actual reason, it's some seriously badass poker from Baldwin.

[/ QUOTE ]

Misclick equity FTW

DGDolly · #**372** 07-17-2007, 04:44 PM

That Johnny Hughes guy really seems to dislike ABA for some reason. Is there bad blood between these two?

barryg1 · #**373** 07-17-2007, 05:04 PM

I was playing at the adjacent table when that hand came down. It was a nice deep-stack decision by Bobby to never reraise. We usually play with a cap or where someone will be all-in on the turn, so a reraise with the nuts is often the normal thing to do.

After Brian left, Bobby claimed he didn't reraise because he wanted to show that he knew Brian was bluffing the whole way. That's obviously easy for Bobby to say after the hand is over. However, on that board, it would be hard for Brian to call a reraise without the nuts, and it would be rare for Brian to bet with anything other than the nuts or a bluff.

I played in the game a few times and Brian was in great shape in that game, and seemed to be playing the best. Getting off to a lead in the first few sessions was huge, and Brian could have easily ended up winning between 10 and 20 million dollars by the end of the Series.

Barry

Daliman · #**374** 07-17-2007, 05:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read through the last 5 posts before mine, but has anyone yet commented on the fact that, as Brian explains it, Baldwin just calls on the river with the nuts? I can't imagine the hand went down exactly like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

my first FYP.

[/ QUOTE ]

My excuse is I started on the first page, not on the last. But congrats on the FYP.

Orlando Salazar · #**375** 07-17-2007, 05:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was playing at the adjacent table when that hand came down. It was a nice deep-stack decision by Bobby to never reraise. We usually play with a cap or where someone will be all-in on the turn, so a reraise with the nuts is often the normal thing to do.

After Brian left, Bobby claimed he didn't reraise because he wanted to show that he knew Brian was bluffing the whole way. That's obviously easy for Bobby to say after the hand is over. However, on that board, it would be hard for Brian to call a reraise without the nuts, and it would be rare for Brian to bet with anything other than the nuts or a bluff.

I played in the game a few times and Brian was in great shape in that game, and seemed to be playing the best. Getting off to a lead in the first few sessions was huge, and Brian could have easily ended up winning between 10 and 20 million dollars by the end of the Series.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

OMFG! TY Barry! Ace on the River rocks!

citanul · #**376** 07-17-2007, 05:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was playing at the adjacent table when that hand came down. It was a nice deep-stack decision by Bobby to never reraise. We usually play with a cap or where someone will be all-in on the turn, so a reraise with the nuts is often the normal thing to do.

After Brian left, Bobby claimed he didn't reraise because he wanted to show that he knew Brian was bluffing the whole way. That's obviously easy for Bobby to say after the hand is over. However, on that board, it would be hard for Brian to call a reraise without the nuts, and it would be rare for Brian to bet with anything other than the nuts or a bluff.

I played in the game a few times and Brian was in great shape in that game, and seemed to be playing the best. Getting off to a lead in the first few sessions was huge, and Brian could have easily ended up winning between 10 and 20 million dollars by the end of the Series.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

Barry,

As always, thanks for your post. It's great to see someone who actually has some clue what they're talking about contributing for a change.

GaryTheGoat · #**377** 07-17-2007, 05:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A guy I know dealt the hand. He said it was plo.

Turn action board is QJxx no flush yet. aba pots it for 207k, Baldwin calls with AKQJ. River is a T for no flush. Aba thinks for a while and pots 621k or whatever. Baldwin thinks for a few min, to consider running it twice or what? They both have money behind he said, like maybe 200k or more. Baldwin just calls with the stone nuts!

He said it may be a high stakes etiquette since he is already winning the 1.8m pot why take another 200k off the guy?? I dunno sounds dumb, if you're playing poker shouldn't you always be going for blood? Especially in a big game like that?

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true, it splains a lot.

Bobby is wicked smart. He "knew" that Brian was bluffing and could not pay off a raise on the end. He also calculated that if he just called, Brian would "know" that Bobby could read him so well that Bobby knew that a raise would be worthless.

However, Bobby calculated that to play the hand this way would put Brian on tilt. This way Brian would know what Bobby knew and not be able to chalk it off as just another failed bluff when he couldn't call the raise.

Bobby just miscalculated the extent/reaction of said tilt. Brian lifetilted so badly that had to leave the table, bow to Bobby, get manager to rack up an unknown amount of chips for him, get homesick/leave town, and not be able to post the hand as promised two days ago.

Sometimes Bobby is too smart for his own good. Bobby was definitely going for blood.

Unless Bobby thought that Brian had the nuts too and was trying to save time. ie Chad Brown v Kristy Gazes lol

[/ QUOTE ]

possibly the dumbest post yet, and how can you people honestly sit there and rag on aba when he is a winner in the game over the past couple weeks, he had a losing session get over it, everyone has them and i'm guessing from some of the responses i have read that the majority of idiots in this thread have them more then they have winning ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nahhh...Dumbest post is "What's a doorknob box?".

I'm so dumb that I didn't even realize that I was ragging on Brian/Aba!

[/ QUOTE ]

I sincerely hope that you are kidding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nahhh...I'm not kidding.

If you're referring to the part of my post about Brian, said part was my attempt at parapharsing BRIAN's first blog about this ONE HAND OF POKER. I won't attempt to do same with his second blog on this one hand. If this isn't the part that you thought I was kidding about, please highlight same so I can join in the joke.

Most of my post was about Bobby's apparently untenable play on the river. These were my original views in an attempt to explain the seemingly inexplicable play of Bobby.

Some other views of mine as to why Bobby played like a donk on the river include, without limitation, that he:

1. Is too old to read the board, his cards or his opponent.

2. Contracted some quick-acting, brain-attacking ailment from Brandi and is now braindead.

3. Prefers to employ the Rousso coined "aggressive call" tactic these days instead of the tried and true check/raise bluffer with the nuts tactic used in the old days.

4. Decided to start playing like a little school girl. ie check/call, check/call, check/call with AA,QQ,broadway etc.

5. Was scared that Brian would bitchslap him for checkraising with the nuts while Brian was bluffing.

6. Had empathy for the younger player playing above his bankroll, felt sorry for him, didn't need the extra money and thought that Brian would rebuy if Bobby didn't bust him.

7. Knew that "Lady luck can be a bitch sometimes" and wanted to enhance his karma.

8. Has (self?) destructive impulses.

I am so confused about this part of this ONE HAND OF POKER. I really think that I understand all the other parts. I admire, respect and somewhat fear both Bobby's and Brian's poker prowess.

If you hope that I was kidding about me being dumb, why would you hope such a thing? I sometimes play poker. You probably play poker. Don't you hope for dumb opponents?

GaryTheGoat · #**378** 07-17-2007, 05:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was playing at the adjacent table when that hand came down. It was a nice deep-stack decision by Bobby to never reraise. We usually play with a cap or where someone will be all-in on the turn, so a reraise with the nuts is often the normal thing to do.

After Brian left, Bobby claimed he didn't reraise because he wanted to show that he knew Brian was bluffing the whole way. That's obviously easy for Bobby to say after the hand is over. However, on that board, it would be hard for Brian to call a reraise without the nuts, and it would be rare for Brian to bet with anything other than the nuts or a bluff.

I played in the game a few times and Brian was in great shape in that game, and seemed to be playing the best. Getting off to a lead in the first few sessions was huge, and Brian could have easily ended up winning between 10 and 20 million dollars by the end of the Series.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Barry. You have alleviated some of my confusion.

glimmertwin · #**379** 07-17-2007, 08:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I played in the game a few times and Brian was in great shape in that game, and seemed to be playing the best. Getting off to a lead in the first few sessions was huge, and Brian could have easily ended up winning between 10 and 20 million dollars by the end of the Series.
Barry

[/ QUOTE ]

Take that, Johnny Hughes!

Mrnoluv · #**380** 07-17-2007, 08:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
only a moron would win a million dollars at a cash game and then turn around and give the gov't 40% of it.

you keep the damn $400,000 and use it as part of your bankroll so that you can make more.

you pay taxes on your tourney winnings and other earnings only because you have no choice.

maybe when you hit the age of 50 do you give uncle sam "the world's biggest strong arm thief" a cut of your winnings. maybe 10% at the most.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???

[/ QUOTE ]

come on dude, i would guess that 99% of cash game players underpay their taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am just a regular joe that plays online for fun, let me ask you guys, do you guys pay taxes on your winnings? I just assumed you did, I mean all income is taxable and if you have have a job or if you make $8,450 or more from your winnings/employment, you have to file. So don't most file? I mean it would be pretty dumb for these guys not to, I mean you can see how much and who won on most online tournys, I would figure the IRS would find it pretty easy to verify that you made a certain amount if you were audited. Cash games of course would be harder, but hell all you have to do is look at the UB Leaderboard and you can figure if someone is constantly in the top 20, they are making over $8,450 from their winnings. Sure you may lose it all back, but that would mean you still would have to file. So do most online players file/claim their winnings on their taxes? Maybe it's a dumb question.