The Worst Fold in Poker History

Moneymaker has 4,620,000 with Ks7h

Farha has 3,770,000 with Qs9h

I'm unaware of the blinds but they both put in 100,000 before the flop when Chris raised from the button and was called. After floating the flop the turn looked like:

9s 2d 6s 8s

I'm just guessing there's 200-250k in the pot. I'm going off the ESPN broadcast that I taped and I didn't see the blinds and antes.

Sammy leads with 300,000 and Chris raises to 800,000 and Sammy calls instantly. Pot around 1,900,000.

River:

9s 2d 6s 8s 3h

Chris moves all in, Sammy has about 2.7m left, and there is 4.6m out there. Sammy folds.

Analysis:

Chris is noticeably uneasy when Sammy snap calls the turn, as he pushes his glasses up(creating a barrier, see body language,) shuffles in his chair and leans forward. He's not faking all these tells and coupled with the fact that he was verbally adamant(showing strength) about his raise and is now giving off all these uncomfortable signals, he knows he is behind. The lean forward can be a sign of strength but in this case with the speech and barrier combo he may still like his hand but he shows his anxiety/anticipation about the river card.

If Sammy was ahead on the turn, the river is a brick against all likely hands Chris re-popped the turn with except 45 and 2s3s. By folding the river Sammy is conceding that Chris had made a straight, flush or two pair on the turn, but he called the turn. Basic strategy dictates if we call the turn then that card comes off we are never folding the river, never ever ever unless the guy turns pocket 3s, 45 or 23s face up.


The Greatest Decision in Poker History

This was the beginning, now we live in the age of the poker superstar where they are given huge sums of money for product promotion just like every other athlete. They have stake in the poker sites they represent making more money than casinos could have dreamed of. This fold made every Tom, Dick and Joe think he could win a million dollars by putting the pressure on the best players in the world. It's so pervasive we still discuss the Moneymaker phenomenon today in the form of "poker is all luck, donks win all the time."

When I watch this tape, Chris seems obviously bluffing. I don't think my reading abilities are better than Sammy Farha's, so I really don't understand why he folded, unless the pressure got to him, he was mulling it over for a long time. But the kicker is, Sammy knew he was letting Moneymaker get away with it! He talked about it before and after he folded, and he folded with a little smile and later on in and interview said he folded even though he felt like he was ahead because he felt he could outplay him and still win.

While he would never let Moneymaker win, it seems as though his demeanor was almost courteous with his fold. But what if something else was also going through Sammy's mind. Live players ritualistically butter up their fish and never skin them alive so they never come back. Granted Sammy never could have foreseen the impact, but its possible he had some idea of its advertisement value, since the previous year that Varkonyi one the publicity had really picked up and the year of Sammy's final table the WSOP had seen exponential growth.

So going back and watching it now it seems very possible that unintentional or otherwise, Sammy may have cut an amateur a little slack, at just the right time, to put the nail in the coffin of stale action forever. And set him and his friends atop a brand new pyramid of money, bigger than he could have imagined.

Wait... So you're saying that Sammy Farha intentionally let Moneymaker win so that there would be a huge influx of fish later down the years?

Unlikely, seeing as how nobody would pass an opportunity on poker's biggest title.

No. I did say I don't think he would ever ever let Moneymaker win and throw away a bracelet.

I'm sorry I know the post is long-winded, but I really want to make clear that I know he would never intentionally give away the world title. No one would or should ever do that, and I know it is so much more about the world title and the bracelet to Sammy than any of the money.

I'm citing the sequence of events and the poker explosion could have happened anytime and anywhere. But I was watching it, and I really think that this fold was the single pivotal moment in the poker evolution to online and such. It would have happened anyway, but in the time line of what has happened this is what I think we could narrow it down to.

Not only a key hand of the match, but of the entire history of poker going back to the beginning. You have to admit the amalgam the of online-live poker realm is so unique to it's sport it is a totally different animal than anything else in the world since the boom.

But the really amazing thing that drove me to post is how bad of a fold I think it was. Don't you agree? That's the thing for me, it's like an insanely bad fold.

But Hardball I thank you for being so civil and giving me the benefit of the doubt that I just wasn't being clear. Other people would have jumped on my case.

I don't think it was a terrible fold. A mistake nonetheless, but not a terrible one. Sammy obviously thought it was the right move; he must have figured that he was probably beat. I don't know exactly how the heads-up play went down, but IIRC this was the first time Moneymaker moved all in on him. If indeed it was the first time, you have to give him credit and fold.

I think Sammy would check the flop hoping to check raise, and could have given Moneymaker credit for making a better hand on the turn but calling with his Q because of how much money was in there. But, my theory is predicated on the fact that Sammy calls the turn believing he had the best hand, and not that he was calling for PO because of his spade draw. I think he believes he has the best hand, it's of course subjective but if you get the chance to watch it again, Chris is so clearly uncomfortable, and someone as seasoned as Sammy would very rarely not notice. So this is why I think Sammy would realize he was ahead on the turn.

Maybe Sammy cracked under pressure.

I guess he had to have cracked a little, at least in some form, but I really don't have room to talk. Though it did inspire more than it would have if Sammy won I think, after all the boom coincided with the back to back amateur wins.

He calls the turn because he is going also for the flush . He cant possibly be thinking that the Moneymaker has also that flush covered with higher card although its one possibility that explains the raising too. If the river was another spade say an Ace or a King (of course it cant be a king) he would be a lot more eager to think his flush was ok .

It is a lot easier when you see the hole cards to do the seemingly careful analysis. The fact is the analysis is always biased when you see the cards because it eliminates the natural uncertainty that on occasion confuses logic just enough to make it harder to see things clearly in the limited time left to think .

You cant be possibly thinking it has come down to calling someone that you think is bluffing with some % with only a 9 on this board. The guy can already have a flush made, a straight , 2p, set, even 9 with better kicker ,pocket pairs over 9 etc . I mean its ok to think he is bluffing more often than usually here but i want you to make that call for all your stack on just a 9 pair in what to me looks a significantly sub 50% position based on the other things that can be wrong . Additionally every time you make a fold you gain soem advantage for the next time they will try to bully you and you actually have it . You also gain respect in the sense that your own bluff rate may be elevated next time and they will likely let you get away with it since you proved tight enough to be unwilling to put all your stack in then but eager now.

Bottom line it goes like this ;
Call the bluff -semi bluff probability pb
Farha wins with 90% times pb if he calls. If he folds he wins with 32% .So for the call to be made we must have 0.9*pb>0.32 or pb>0.356. If the other guy is bluffing over 35.6% of the time there you call. How often will you think that your 9 there is good over 35.6% of the time.

You want to criticize something here if true , then focus on why we get past the flop without Farha making a pot bet with his 9 or stronger say a 300k bet . I mean at this point only realistic hand that beats him is a bigger than 9 pocket pair (all other choices are smaller probabilities) and of them you would think that there would be no raising preflop trying to trap possibly (say with QQ,KK,AA) so as the things are at flop Farha is way up say 78% vs a random hand and in fact even 72% vs a guy that is holding a top 35% hand preflop. If you are not going to bet such a flop what are you waiting? I mean why give the opponent a free card? Setting a trap etc why do it with just a 9. You want to set a trap do it with something decent. I totally object to checking the flop here . If i bet and my opponent puts me all in so be it i fold and lose far less . Otherwise i open the door to risk a lot more later ona hand that cannot exactly be considered a lock. Yes it is 78% but for how long? If a big card comes i may be in bad shape. If a small card comes at turn i may be in straight problem . If a spade comes i will be in a flush risk situation too. If the guy has no 9 2 or 6 then whatever he has may be getting better by the next card weakening your 9 pair and so does his bluff capacity.

Anyway we can speculate all day here but the fact remains you have 78% at flop with a stupid Q9 and no draws that can make it stronger why the heck are you checking the flop here against a preflop aggressor. Its not like you are holding 2p or set or pocket pairs over 9 . You just have a 9 and there is substantial volatility for that holding. Bet 300k at flop and take it down and leave the trapping for something better. Or if you get called you have a decent pot building and a very good chance to land a superstrong hand with a little luck . The aggressor that made the raise checks the flop . What are you doing not betting him out or at least finding out if he feels comfortable with 300k more at that flop he just checked. Anyone that calls a 300k bet there is in good shape in my opinion and was probably trapping when he checked . So you gain information by not checking plus the 78% vs random hand etc.

As things presented i am out of the hand by folding too at river but I would have probably never arrived there by simply taking it at the flop . Even if the flop bet was lower say 100k or 200k it makes sense to secure a small trap with a little extra money (you can always maintain the small trap capacity by offering a smaller bet which can be interpreted as defending or testing the opponent. Anything is better than checking! Maybe one can argue that checking leads to bigger gains statistically because we may get action later with inferior to 9 cards but i would like someone work the math here and prove that this is the case.

Yes I'm sure Sammy believes the Qs is good if it hits, and the raise Chris made to 800 justifies a call, but he could have also made a decision here as well. Clearly he should have played his hand faster on the flop or even preflop, and he could have won the hand.

But I'm talking about Chris's body language on the tape that I'm watching. I'm talking about the visual element of the game, and I'm attesting that Sammy should know his nine is the best hand on the turn. I'm nobody compared to him, but if you watch the tape it seems blatant. That's how all this came about, I was watching the video.

At the end of the day i want you to tell me how likely would it be for the bluff to take place at river if Farha had lead at flop with a decent bet? Sometimes it is greed that opens the door for the disaster that comes later. To minimize the bluff potential of others you need to be taking some lead at some point in the hand or you are preparing yourself for an iffy fold.

First of all it would be wrong for Moneymaker to call a pot bet at flop (maybe possible to raise big though as he does at turn but still the board doesnt look very scary yet so he would be less likely to go for it). Also now that i am rethinking it all i probably would fold at the raise to 800 with just a 9 and non top flush draw with 3 spades showing already.


So again my position;
1) bet the flop, pot bet or better.
2) fold the raise to 800k at turn with just a 9. The fact is at turn Ks7h is only 51% vs a random hand and in the 30s really vs the real Qs9h. So it is already becoming a bluff .
3) If you dont fold the raise to 800k you must go all in there before river. Either you think the guy is playing you or not. Things will not change in the river in such a way to be feeling massively better . So if indeed he feels he is ok with his 9 and back up plan flush draw he needs to go all in there . I still however would personally fold at the 800k raise and avoid the all in but in my opinion anyone that just calls it is better off going all in instead. Either you think the guy has you and you fold or you think he is playing you and you push. I mean exactly what can happen at the river that can make Farha defeat a hand that already beats him .A flush is one way to win but not secure. A 9 or Q will not change the fact that flush or straight risk is already out there. So it seems to me there is nothing that can make you feel much better at river . The opponent that is raising to 800k after 300k deserves credit for either having it or for being willing to go all in at river . So you either fold or go all in after the 800 to avoid the river bluff. Calling to me is a weak choice. By calling you invite an all in at river either because the opponent finally gets his better hand or because he is still bluffing . Whatever he is bluffing representing with on that board is not going to be demolished at river . He knows that Farha likely doesnt have the flush when he bets 300k so he is representing a hand that is not afraid of the board at all . Calling will lead to all in anyway either because you are defeated anyway or because the bluff has to be finalized. So indeed if Farha thinks he is right at turn he should also think he is right at river . We agree there.

Not familair with physical tells enough to be able to know what is going on and i havent seen the tape like you have so you are able to claim a lot more than me here from that perspective.

But after i took some time to rethink everything i finally have decided that the reason i dont like how Farha played is not because of the wrong choice at the final fold (in fact i agree with that there). The problems i have are the no betting at flop and the calling of the 800k raise . For me the 800k event is either a signal to go all in or to fold, calling invites problem and promotes uncertainty and is indeed inconsistent with folding the river. And to top all this i am also against the all in by Moneymaker at river. I mean at the end i dont like any of those 2 and the way they played it. He feels its fine to bluff with nothing against the guy that made the big bet first , that then called the 800k (unless the call takes a long time to happen and Farha gives some weakness signals - which however can still be Hollywood) . For me that final all in proves the guy is a gambler or a very good reader of the opponent. I would find it highly risky to put all my money with nothing on a pot that is already so big on a baord that looks scary with straights and flushes . I mean its like betting the entire tournament on a bluff that is not exactly coming out of the blue but rather follows some strong bet calling. I mean i wonder how many times a bluff like that is successful against an opponent that has called a huge bet after leading with a bet of his own anyway on a scary looking board. To me it seems Moneymaker is flipping coins or worse in fact with that final all in . Yes i am finally finished with this, i dislike both players and how they played it . I only allow some respect for Moneymaker if he did what he did based on Farha's signals of weakness. Then its indeed a bravely executed bluff . In the absence of that its a punkish gambling move that i have no respect for.

maximumprobability I never read your posts because they are too long.

+1

If Sammy had made the final call, he would have extracted the maximum. Granted there are other, safer ways to have gotten the max but nonetheless he would have made a huge double and the line he took could have been the only way, we will never know.

So you could say he played it perfect, he just didn't finish it off.

ahh thats how you get through to kids these days, less words more pictures, pls put the real book down before you hurt yourself

yes because the more words a post has, the more intelligent it is. right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sox_scandal

i guess you never know when you don't get through the first paragraph

You know the chip lead really wasn't drastic at all for the blind levels, Sammy might have been a favorite on the money line, looking back I might have given someone 5 to 4. But again I have no idea what lines were going on the winner at the time, it would be interesting if anyone does remember.

OK, what are you implying here exactly?

Unless OP saw it live, this is what I imagine everyone has seen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgdnUlIdvxE

I'm just saying the idea that no one has ever thrown a championship match on purpose is ludicrous. Even with nothing nefarious going on, Farha could have considered that letting an amateur with a great story line win would have been +EV long term.

Of course, it is. I was sort of expecting you to say something crazy along the lines of, "Sammy was betting against himself."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgdnUlIdvxE


Yes, this is the ESPN broadcast I watched, more than a few times after I noticed it. After Chris "shows" so much strength with his raise at 0:55 notice what happens when they show Chris as Sammy calls. He is not even close to good enough to fake this entire cluster of physical tells as to his discomfort. His initial show of strength (fast raise, verbalizing, adamant, spoken to dealer and not to Sammy, lowered head) cannot be true. In fact, speaking to the dealer while lowering his head is contradictory to his other projections. He just can't have a hand here.

-2

2008 WSOP day 1A-1D

Two unknown players.

Unknown J: JJ
Unknown K: KK

Board: AKJ,T,T

Don't think straight flush was possible.
Could be wrong.

(J) folded to (K) on the river. Believe this a the strongest hand
ever folded on TV.
8th nut. Counting all permutations. 1 TT, 3 AA, and 3KK.
Only 7 possible better hands.

Greatest TV fold in history.

If anyone knows the complete hand with suits or
the names of the participants, feel free to post them.

There was no straight flush possible. And it's unnecessary to name the various suit combinations of AA and KK that had JJ beat. The number is 3. There were three hands that had him beat, and with minimal betting he managed to lay it down.

To quote Mike Matusow: "WOW!"