Trying to understand if this was a good move or not by Ted. Watched this hand a few years back, but thought I get some insight on this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t8-8IMynbg
Also was his fast call downs on every street done to induce checks from Chad? You can even see Ted already picking up his chips before Chad's bet on 6th street. I'm trying to understand this from a analytical standpoint and if this could've worked online.
Did he have some sort of plan or was he already on call down mode?
And Would Ted of checkraised as a bluff with if a 3rd diamond hit on his board on 5th or 6th?

Oh I miss the days when tv poker was more than just NLH...I find it annoying though that they moved the hole cards around.

Yeah me too, but for everyone's convenience I laid it out in order.

ProPokerTools Stud Hi Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
2cQd	2dJd9s3h8s	100.00%	600,000
2h4c	6cAdKsTc5s	0.00%	0

My guess is that Ted's history on Chad is that he would steal with 100% of his range and follow through 100% if Ted's board didn't look threatening. So if he feels he's up against a random hand it's a good calldown.

Tell my way typing all 7 cards in both hands is neccessary? You didn't know that a pair beat A high?

he's showing the order the cards were dealt in because the broadcast shuffled them so they read highest>lowest or something.

Pretty sure either fifth or sixth is a -ev calldown based solely on the upcards, but nobody knew anything in 2004 and it's a thinking play, so it's understandable.

Are you sure about that? So Chip Reese's section in Super System (1979), Sklansky's Seven Card Stud for Advanced Players (1989) and numerous other respected works written before 2004 are all worthless because they were written by people who didn't know anything?

That seems like a strange statement.

There's some tongue in cheek in there, obviously. The point is nobody had really done any of the math behind a bunch of these situations, and while a few people here and there knew about implied odds the odds themselves were also very different from today. I actually respect TF's stud game quite a bit (IIRC), but I really doubt he knew his exact odds vs. Chad's range or even thought about it in those terms, which was entirely acceptable in 2004.

e: note my join date/it's not like I'm excluding myself here

This particular hand may not only be about equity and odds, but live reads/tells as well. I certainly think TF is well versed in those. That's why in one hand I played vs. him last week in the WSOP razzament I wouldn't even look at my hole cards when I brought it in with a K, he limped UTG, and it folded around. I figured I couldn't give off a tell if I didn't know what I had (I outflopped him on 4th and 5th and took it down there with automatic bets).

This is why when I play against really tough players, I never look at my cards. Sometimes I don't even look at my board.

play the player, not the cards ldo

Unless he caught a K on 4th, shouldn't he act first and bet into you? Is this really an automatic bet for you with similar strength boards if you have trip Ks or something? Very hard to win at showdown then.

I've got around 30 or so hours under my belt playing with Ted, thats not much, but its enough to have an understanding of the man's game. After all the stories I have heard about him crushing stud, I was surprised to realize he doesn't have a sound ABC, game, he mostly plays an exploitive/counter exploitive style in every game I have come across him in. He is very good at reading people, as do many of the older-school players, and like most players of this type they tend to make gut decisions. Obv his gut is often right, or else these stories would have not been around for so long - but lately you don't hear about Ted that much anymore, I think this in itself is a bit of a tell.

Long story short - Ted was not a savant for his play in this hand, he just got lucky.

PS: ignore the fast timing on TV, gotta remember they cut the show to tell a story. I would assume the decisions were fast because that was the story they picked up on, but even though it might be based on reality - the timing cannot be accurate.

Where in the hand should Ted fold if this is all so bad? I assume 3rd and 4th are standard and its a question of if the villain will often keep betting. If so then isn't it a call down?