lololololololol. This is pure gold, spot on accurate, and it certainly says a lot about Todd's range creation.


I have a lot of thoughts I haven't expressed yet about this hand, will do so when I have some free time.

Agreed, but there is one small problem with Todd's thinking - George doesn't have a fold button in these spots.

Todd is old school and probably thinks in cash game terms. Maybe he should read his father's discussion of how he learned from watching Johnny Moss about stack preservation in tournaments.

It looks like Brunson was reading the dead diamonds, maybe and went crazy with his read. Unlike Stud Hi, folding on 6th in Stud 8 happens a lot more and is necessary. Off the subject of this particular hand, I watch the big pros play stud8 like complete clowns more often than not, WHY IS THAT? I wish I had a bigger bankroll, ho hum, don't we all.

where are these you speak of? link?

On RIO Run It Once. It is like $100/month to subscribe. Mostly NLHE and PLO. Some of the analysis is too mathematical, range-oriented and 3rd level or whatever for me. I really liked his 2-7SD videos. There isn't that much material on that game. He seemed pretty nitty in the videos.

I suppose Brunson going nuts on 4th and continuing is screaming that he could be rolled up at this point? I can't really see how Brunson would ever be value betting in this spot so it's got to be a bluff surely?

i found that entire video to be close to unwatchable due to the commentary (just the main guy). i really hope they don't have that guy do all of the videos again next year.

I might be crazy but I don't think 5th street was played poorly if we take into account the line that Brunson was taking here.

He's bluffing more power than he has, and I think on 5th he's putting Danzer on a 4 diamond/4 low with 2 cards to go. He's trying to rep a set and he's trying to put the brakes on Danzer who he has, unknowingly, made the wrong (but not a poor) read on. If he feels he's convinced Danzer he has a set, and then the Q pairs on 6th street, he's hoping to get a fold out of Danzer who he thinks has missed his diamonds and his low. He also knows there's a lot of dead low cards out because of all the callers on 3rd street.

I'm a bit confused about his 7th street check though if this was the line he's taking, because there's a good chance he's behind if Danzer hit aces up and his only chance of winning at that point is to hope Danzer folds them. The only thing I can think is that he really just gave up on the hand when Danzer called 6th, knowing he's losing to a flush or all of a sudden thinking Danzer is going to call aces-up no matter what he does on 7th. It just seems like a drastic change of pace from the rest of the hand, though.

The problem is that if his read was correct and Danzer had that combo draw, Brunson is still behind on both streets and there's a 0% chance Danzer folds even if he suspects Brunson is rolled up.

There's a 0% chance Danzer folds aces up, or any hand that beats Queens and Nines. The river check is good.

Danzer wasn't showing a pair when Brunson 3bet 5th street, so if Brunson put him on a 4-flush/4-low combo then he's behind Danzer in overall equity (and he may not consider that Danzer is ahead in equity if he thinks Danzer is in tough shape for the low with Etay's all-in) but he's not behind on the high on 5th. If he's thinking that Danzer is losing to Etay's strong low draw he might be hoping Danzer folds if he can convince Danzer that he's drawing to a flush that might not be good enough if Brunson improves a set, and would be getting almost nothing for the low he might hit by 7th as an emergency.

WIth the hand you said Danzer is never more than around a 60-40 dog for the side pot even in a worst case scenario, when you add in the main pot equity there's just no way he can even consider folding after already raising 5th once.

I'm not saying Brunson played the hand well, I just don't think it was as terrible as some people are saying. I think he would admit he played it wrong even based on his read, but I've seen a lot worse if you consider that he may have felt very strongly about his read.

I feel like Brunson was a little tilted by Danzer's aggression...He made a reasonable read on 3rd that Danzer is raising nearly any two with an A showing, and then chose to completely disregard any further action from Danzer including the raise into a dry-ish side pot on 5th that should narrow his range significantly.

Whatever Brunson thought, Danzer wasn't raising ATC with an ace showing with a limp in front.

I agree that Brunson probably thought everyone else bricked out and Danzer probably didn't start with a real hand, so he could make everyone fold.