High Stakes Poker...Ivey Vs. Booth

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
I met Brad a year and a half ago in Vegas, and if I recall carrectly, he said that he was friends with Ivey and that he used Ivey's old cell phone.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, this is definitely true

[Knet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, maybe ivey is a much better player than booth and can wait for a better spot to take all his money. thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

um, booth has 1m, ivey has 260kish.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i meant take all his money figuritively. He'd have to double up once or twice. the only point i was making is that in a marginal situation, like ivey might have thought this was, then it might have been right not too risk his whole stack. this is kind of like in a tournament situation where you're out matched so you get all-in when you might be taking the worst of it (might be your only chance at beating a better player,etc). Either way, I don't see how my logic is flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because in a tournament you eventually have to bust/beat the guys at your table to win. However in a cash game you don't ever have to confront him if you think he will constantly outplay/own you.

This isn't the issue at all in this hand and your logic is very flawed.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
well, maybe ivey is a much better player than booth and can wait for a better spot to take all his money. thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah hes gotta be able to find a better spot than getting your entire stack in with your opponent drawing to 4 outs with two cards to come

[CaptDEEbo]

[ QUOTE ]
booth didnt put ivey on that strong a hand. he thought ivey missed his ace king. ivey put booth on a set, which is why he folded. but you wonder, how could ivey have put booth on a set since he overbet? if booth had a set wouldnt he have checked and then reraised? on the surface, you slow play a strong hand and bet hard on a bluff. but when your playing on that level of skill, reverse reverse physcollogy comes into play. so ivey put booth on a set BECAUSE he overbet.

this is how i saw it, im not saying that his is how it went. any comments are welcome.

[/ QUOTE ]


kill yourself?

[edge]

If we're taking the viewpoint of Ivey not knowing anything about Booth (btw I have no idea who Brad Booth is), I don't really like how he played it in general. I think I'd rather flat call pre, but I may be a huge nit. When he pops it pre and bets out on this flop, a call from Booth makes the turn very difficult to play.

I don't have any experience playing super deep, but I think a 4-bet pre would be better with only AA or some trash hand like 87s, because of the probability of the other guy holding exactly AA. Maybe I'm just weak-tight, but if I 4-bet KK in this spot I'm going to be afraid of AA, and especially so out of position where I'm going to lose a lot vs AA.

[dkangster]

no thanks, i already do enough killing of kids like you at the tables

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is what Barry Greenstein stated about this hand in another thread:

[ QUOTE ]
You people keep missing the key detail on the Brad Booth hand. Phil Ivey thought Brad was some random businessman. He said he had never seen him before (although Brad had played a few sessions on the table adjacent to the big game). Phil called me at the first break and told me about the hand.

At the next break, he told me now that he had played with Brad a little, he would have definitely called with his Kings.

[/ QUOTE ]

tv thread

Hopefully this will enlighten the clueless [kuntsored] posting in this thread...

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, I don't see how this can be true. How many random businessmen buy in for 1M in this kind of game? I mean, obv it's possible, but REALLY odd if true. I'd think some random businessman would be a bit more nervous in the hand also.

Pretty surprised Ivey didn't call though; It's not like 300k is a ton to him.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
calling this with 2 kings is god awful

[/ QUOTE ]

against 95% of players yes, against Brad it's standard

[/ QUOTE ]

this is brad's standard play with AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is brad's standard play w/ a wide range including hands ahead of and behind KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

no it's not

[/ QUOTE ]
Then apparently it is his standard play only with AA and 24s flopped gut.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
If we're taking the viewpoint of Ivey not knowing anything about Booth (btw I have no idea who Brad Booth is), I don't really like how he played it in general. I think I'd rather flat call pre, but I may be a huge nit. When he pops it pre and bets out on this flop, a call from Booth makes the turn very difficult to play.

I don't have any experience playing super deep, but I think a 4-bet pre would be better with only AA or some trash hand like 87s, because of the probability of the other guy holding exactly AA. Maybe I'm just weak-tight, but if I 4-bet KK in this spot I'm going to be afraid of AA, and especially so out of position where I'm going to lose a lot vs AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say that goes both ways though. When you are that deep, slowplaying AA can obv get you in just as much trouble as 4 betting KK, if not more, really. If Ivey got 5 bet preflop, then he has a much better idea where his KK is. As has been said in many other cases, being able to put your opponent on exactly AA or KK getting 20-1 or better on your $$ is usually very profitable, rereraised pot or not. That said, I think Ivey should have raised more preflop, but since he didn't vs an "unknown" this is a pretty standard fold, and from what I have heard about Booth, a very standard call.

Dunno where I have heard it b4, but I've heard more than one story about BB opening for 50K or so in 10-20 NL live games, etc., and usually showing rags.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
no thanks, i already do enough killing of kids like you at the tables

[/ QUOTE ]
TOP THAT!