Phil Laak fold on HSP Season 4 ep02??

[F0rtysxity]

Anyone whose watched the show knows which hand I'm talking about (not that it was a big hand but because there aren't that many hands on the show).

On the turn a new player bets 20,000 into a 30,000 pot and Phil holding KQs has a flush draw and an inside str8 draw on a xs x 10s A board.

To justify his call he'd need to win another 10,000 on 5th street. Which I think he could certainly do especially since he has position on his opponent.

My only thinking is that he's worried about his opponent holding AJs. But then again his opponent is an amature poker player and probably wouldn't have reraised with AJs out of position from the BB.

Seems like a weird hand. I would've called. But I respect Phil's play so I'm wondering what might a pro be thinking about here.

Thoughts anyone?

oh here is a link

[dynacraze]

dont need the link but i saw the entire episode already. Let's just face it. Laak is a scared nit. The board wasn't even paired. If it was then maybe a call is fine. The new player had more than 100K left behind and he had more than enough odds.

[bustedromo]

Why do we need separate thread for this ????

We already have a threads entitled :

1. High Stakes Poker thread (9/3)
2. Phil Laak on high stakes poker season 4

Lock thread.

[LGs0pHT]

What does it mean "Laak is a scared nit". First, he plays the only effective strategy at the table. Brian Brandon reraises a raised pot with one caller out of position with 52s. How often does that have to work to be profitable?

If you watched his play at "Cash Poker" you might have seen making bluffs with hands like J6o which were highly effective since his timing to float his opponent was chosen excellently.

His fold is correct I think. The "amateur" could have hit a set either on the flop (TT) or on the turn (AA), which would reduce Phil Laaks chance to hit a flush. Otherwise, if his opponent had a hand like KK or QQ, he would call nothing on more on the river with one or two overcards on the board. Phil Laak could not know that he had the chance to make the best hand with a K and he also was obviously drawing, so his opponent would not call another bet in case Phil hit his Flushdraw. If Phil would not hit, he had zero fold equity on the river.

So, the only options were raise or fold, and a raise would have ended up in a highly speculative pot of big size.

[Hipsdontlie69]

Phil should have called there, no question he made a mistake, the bet was not so big with zillions out, we all make mistake at some point, that's why Phil Laak is considered an aMateur by his peers. both him and Antonio are donkey fishes.

[Sammy430]

[ QUOTE ]
Phil should have called there, no question he made a mistake, the bet was not so big with zillions out, we all make mistake at some point, that's why Phil Laak is considered an aMateur by his peers. both him and Antonio are donkey fishes.

[/ QUOTE ]


Are you a complete idiot. antonio has some serious skills. His timimg is amazing, he can sense weekness and act upon it like on of the best. only once was his timing of during the entire 3 seasons oh HSP against and that was against David B. and you have to give him credit for even trusing his instincts that far. you are a serious hater.

[Whitewash]

lol, Antonio is in another universe compared to most of the HSP lineup. Of everyone on Season 4, I'd book him before everyone except Patrik.

[Dromar]

[ QUOTE ]

His fold is correct I think. The "amateur" could have hit a set either on the flop (TT) or on the turn (AA), which would reduce Phil Laaks chance to hit a flush. Otherwise, if his opponent had a hand like KK or QQ, he would call nothing on more on the river with one or two overcards on the board. Phil Laak could not know that he had the chance to make the best hand with a K and he also was obviously drawing, so his opponent would not call another bet in case Phil hit his Flushdraw. If Phil would not hit, he had zero fold equity on the river.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like this analysis.

First off, Laak's immediate pot odds are almost exactly 2/7, which tells us that, if he has ~28.5% chance to make the nuts, it's a mistake to fold.

Board: 7h Ts 4s Ah

Laak has 10 outs to the nuts, giving him ~21.5 equity right there. He may have an additional 4% if Baxter doesn't have a set. Can he make up the remaining equity with implied odds: Yes.

If Baxter has a set, it seems unlikely that he'll check/fold to any bet whenever a scare card comes. If Baxter has an A, Laak has even more outs, and even a small river bet will cover his tiny implied odds deficit. That pretty much leaves only a few small possibilities: QQ, KK, and AsJs. AsJs leaves Laak with almost no equity, and in position to lose a hefty sum, but it's pretty unlikely relative to the other hands he could have. When Baxter has QQ, Laak has the added outs of 3 K's, and a good possibility of a showdown when a K hits the river.

It seems the only unfavorable hands for Baxter to have here are AsJs, and KK. AsJs is obviously bad for Laak as mentioned before, and KK is the only hand that seems unlikely to pay off Laak if he hits. Also, I think fold equity exists here, albeit small. If Baxter has QQ or KK, he may go for a checkdown even if Laak misses. If Baxter checks, I think there's fold equity. Then again, probably not enough to make much of an impact.

I think this is a call. Laak made a mistake. His nitty tendencies probably had something to do with it though.

[Hipsdontlie69]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Phil should have called there, no question he made a mistake, the bet was not so big with zillions out, we all make mistake at some point, that's why Phil Laak is considered an aMateur by his peers. both him and Antonio are donkey fishes.

[/ QUOTE ]


Are you a complete idiot. antonio has some serious skills. His timimg is amazing, he can sense weekness and act upon it like on of the best. only once was his timing of during the entire 3 seasons oh HSP against and that was against David B. and you have to give him credit for even trusing his instincts that far. you are a serious hater.

[/ QUOTE ]

Antonio is very a likable guy why would I hate him?, he's very predictable like Phil Laak, him and Phil Laak are Amateurs who's trying to get more TV time so they can stay famous in the poker community and get more endorsement money.

[KSOT]

Hips, you're a fool. Antonio is a very good NLHE player and not at all predictable.