Play a Hand With the Masters Results and Panel Comments

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

[ QUOTE ]
Filtering through his ubiquitous negativety,

[/ QUOTE ]

Man I dont even see how I was being negative. I was just saying I saw potential and I think the format can be imrpoved.

-Jason

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's pretty hard to represent KJ with your raise preflop, why do you think the chances of representing KJ are improved by beting a T93 flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well maybe I'm nuts, but I raise so many hands on the button after a limper with stacks this deep. KJ is well in the range of hands. And I'm pretty sure with stacks like this I'm betting KJ on this flop all the time if I raised preflop.

So I guess what you are saying then, is by raising preflop Soss can't rep KJ at all? I guess then he should just give up the river, right?

-Jason

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly I don't understand Jason comments; Why if we analize a street we're not thinking in the whole picture? I don't get that.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are going to get three expert players together to comment on a hand, then you should probably work in a way to offer them a chance to comment on the most interesting aspect of the hand, which is the entire hand as a package. Analyzing something street by street is great, but the real good stuff IMO comes from analyzing how the streets interact with each other.

That was my only point.

-Jason

[bugstud]

man, if he called with KT I really like flatcalling the turn, lol.

I appreciate the effort everyone put into this and maybe we can get a hand or two from aruba? one with a little better result? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

One of the points of checking the flop was to keep the pot size small in an unclear situation, which is generally a good tournament strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't a bet have cleared that up a bit for you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I happen to disagree with this 'information uber alles' argument. When there's a strong chance you're behind, and a free card may noticeably improve your hand, take the free card. Just because our draw didn't get there on the river doesn't mean we erred by getting to the river with a good chance to win.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I really hate this idea of 'how could you risk your tournament on AJs' or 'how could you go broke with top pair' or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]
I wasn't clear enough on this AJs in this situation is not a hand I go for broke.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get the relevance of the two cards at all. It still seems like you threw it in as a gratuitous comment, sniping at the fish who were silly enough to lose all their chips with AJs. The issue is whether this was a profitable opportunity, not whether AJs is a respectable enough hand to bust out on.

[Foucault]

Thanks to Lloyd for putting this together and to everyone who offered their comments on the hand. I thought it was a really interesting and informative exercise.

I had one thought following Jason's questioning of the street-by-street format: would it help at all to invent a situation, rather than choosing one from real life, give each member of the panel a position and a hand, and let them play it the way they want to? The peanut gallery's analysis would still be street-by-street, but at least the experts would be able to plan and implement a holistic strategy rather than being forced to deal with a situation that the real life Hero created that perhaps would have differed from their own play. There's a risk the exercise gets truncated early if an expert chooses to fold, but that's alright: sometimes poker players fold in real life!

What I've got in mind is a situation where maybe 3-4 experts are PM'ed as their turns come up, and they are told what their opponents have done so far. They respond with their play, including their reasoning, and then the play is PM'ed to the next expert to act. (This would be similar to, and perhaps could be supplanted by, analysis of a hand that comes up during the 2+2 Masters tournament, if that ever happens). But do you see where I'm going with this? Would this help to inject a more holistic view of the hand into the analysis, at least that of the experts, which it seems is what Jason is most concerned about?

Thanks again, everyone, for your contributions to this discussion.

[SossMan]

Thanks, everyone for their input. I wish I had folded preflop. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Obviously, I misread the guy because it turns out that he was pretty loose, passive, bad, unthinking player for the next 3 hours or so that I was there. He must have had a run of unplayable cards for the first hour causing me to misread him as tight. I was shocked when he called w/ KT as I was trying to get him to lay down much better hands.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your villain played very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I think he misplayed almost every street.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to here more about this if David is willing to talk about it. When I read through the responses in all the threads I tried to play the hand through villain's seat and see what range I came up with and what I would do.

- I certainly would have done a lot different pre-flop.
- The flop I would have checked, do you think leading into both opponents is better?
- The turn I would not have bet since it just opens us up to getting outplayed and makes it more expensive to draw.
- The river might have played out differently but I very well might have ATMed this one. Hard to say.

Good threads,
tpir

[Stipe_fan]

I advocated checking behind on the river. Now, I see the reasoning behind your play. If he had half a brain, he would have definitely laid down K-10. I think your mindset and play was correct. This is what makes these excerises difficult.....reads. We don't have reads here but have to go on pure analytics. More deductive reasoning.

My question to you, Soss. If you had NO reads, would you have put in this bet. I know that you said you thought he wa weak but if you did not have this information, would you have bet the river??

Thanks for your reply,

Stipe

[Kirkrrr]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I'm concerned, there is absolutely no hand that I'm not willing to go broke with at any time in the tournament if I think I'm making the right play.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, you question your decisions, but you gotta trust your reads and go with your gut.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more. Those following a more conservative strategy undoubtedly make it more often "in the money." Just as undoubtedly, they win it all far less often.

Kirk