HSP S5 Ep.2 Last Hand - Greenstein's Analysis - Page 2 - Poker Card Room

Its funny tho if this hand happened at like my local poker people would never release Eastgates hand regardless. Dwan seems to get away with so many bluffs that would never work for other people

As for Greenstein - once eastgate has called and then folded - there is no way barry can call

bet you dont get the chance to fire 104k turn bluffs in your local card game very often though.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:05 PM

#27

MaMaLuLu

enthusiast

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 82

I would never have tried to bluff a station like eastgate but dwan knoes better than me I guess

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:07 PM

#28

lurkinaround

journeyman

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 279

Quote:

Originally Posted by super_dave31

Move up to HSP where they respect ur raises imo

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:07 PM

#29

ypk

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,845

Quote:

Originally Posted by super_dave31

Yes, but Dwan wouldn't try that on low stakes amatuers. He *knows* Eastgate and Barry are good enough to fold those kind of hands in particular situations.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:30 PM

#30

Equal

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 3,120

Quote:

Originally Posted by ypk

Yes, but Dwan wouldn't try that on low stakes amatuers. He *knows* Eastgate and Barry are good enough to fold those kind of hands in particular situations.

I hate when people say flawed shiit like this. The simple fact is, call/fold/raise... Greenstein and Eastgate are good players and they will make the CORRECT decision whatever it is more often than most players.

"Good enough to fold" lol, like folding monsters is a key skill to HSP.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:37 PM

#31

MauMau

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,711

very nice analysis -ty for posting

Quote

03-09-2009 , 08:55 PM

#32

corsakh

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 12,149

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equal

What are you talking about, or do you think Eli is ever capable of folding a 4 there?

Quote

03-09-2009 , 09:09 PM

#33

Sira21

stranger

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5

I think greensteins a little wrong in his analyses that eastgate would discount him having tens full. I think thats part of why he folded so fast rather then taking a while. Greenstein might not bet out with TT's full there but I think a big case can be made for doing it and eastgate wouldn't neccesarily expect him not too. Checking looks normal in an 8 way pot, and it's more that with the stacks so deep you'd bet more to build the pot with Tens full then to disguise a good hand. The only play that would tip your hand is a check raise.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 09:22 PM

#34

theplux

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 3,506

Quote:

What are you talking about, or do you think Eli is ever capable of folding a 4 there?

Eli is alwyas folding a 4 here.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 09:27 PM

#35

udrazer

journeyman

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 358

LOL at barry saying "at least I didnt buy in for more than 200k". the min buy in for that game is 200k, barry is a short stacker he would buyin for 50k if they allow him.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 09:52 PM

#36

ORAG

grinder

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 509

Quote:

Originally Posted by udrazer

LOL at barry saying "at least I didnt buy in for more than 200k". the min buy in for that game is 200k, barry is a short stacker he would buyin for 50k if they allow him.

True, but he also explains why and how buying in deep was costly for Eastgate in this situation.

I wouldn't really consider 250 BBs short stacking though, even with the ante.

Barry's biggest mistake in the hand was his small raise UTG that deep with antes in play. If he makes it more I doubt Eastgate calls preflop and the whole hand plays differently.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 10:16 PM

#37

verneer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 6,971

Quote:

Originally Posted by ORAG

Barry's biggest mistake in the hand was his small raise UTG that deep with antes in play. If he makes it more I doubt Eastgate calls preflop and the whole hand plays differently.

Eastgate was in the SB. By the time it got to him, 6 people were already in the pot. Given how deep he was with a few other players, he would have called anyhow.

Quote

03-09-2009 , 10:45 PM

#38

Aurelius

journeyman

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 285

Quote

03-09-2009 , 11:24 PM

#39

sickaz

old hand

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,305

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurelius

haha thats on another level right there

Quote

03-10-2009 , 12:50 AM

#40

hav0c

adept

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 936

couple holes in barry's logic:

1. assuming eastgate folds flop how does 3betting aa there ever get value from durrrr's flop range?
2. as such his flop line is pretty much optimal and he's right, he should've check/shoved or check/called (both more or less the same given stacksizes) on the turn once eastgate folded.

otherwise agreed almost fully with his reasoning. especially the part about dwan "possibly" betting his t blocker (i think this is a massive part of his reasoning on the turn).

Quote

03-10-2009 , 01:07 AM

#41

pineapple888

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurelius

Yeah, this about sums it up. Barryg can analyze all he wants, he played it awfully and got pwned.

It's really something to see the lack of crispness in the analysis done by live pros. If there was any doubt that the pendulum has swung over to the Internet kids, this ends it.

Also, LOL at 2-outer.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 01:17 AM

#42

ORAG

grinder

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 509

Quote:

Originally Posted by verneer

Eastgate was in the SB. By the time it got to him, 6 people were already in the pot. Given how deep he was with a few other players, he would have called anyhow.

You're assuming a larger raise would attract the 6 calls, I don't think it does. If there are 4 callers and a much larger raise I think Eastgate ditches 42 from the SB.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 01:37 AM

#43

Dos

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 1,271

I also think Barry`s analysis was a bit off when he says Peter should know that he can never have TT is this spot cause he wouldnt lead out with it on the flop. Just because it WAS an 8-handed pot, and therefore more likely that someone has hit trips, it makes a lot of sense to lead out with TT to try to build a big pot vs 2x.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 01:37 AM

#44

Six Finger Nate

old hand

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,623

Sometimes great poker players just make great reads and great plays, and there's nothing you can do about it. Durrrr read the situation beautifully and made an awesome, fearless bet. There's just no way Barry could call there.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 02:17 AM

#45

ecstzatic

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,176

Quote:

Originally Posted by pineapple888

ummm for comparison here is durrrr's analysis of the hand from the hsnl thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by durrrr

viff taught me that sometimes u just need to empty the clip

Quote

03-10-2009 , 02:23 AM

#46

pineapple888

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111

Quote:

Originally Posted by ecstzatic

ummm for comparison here is durrrr's analysis of the hand from the hsnl thread:

LOL have you ever heard durrrr in an interview? He's never given up any of his thought process. The post-hand kibitzing on HSP where he clearly knew exactly what both Villains held was far more illuminating.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 02:24 AM

#47

pineapple888

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dos

Especially because it was a gaybet by barryg, like 1/2 pot into 7 villains. Looks exactly like a scared overpair, would have been a great move w TT in that spot.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 02:55 AM

#48

kakon3

newbie

Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 43

i dont get how barry can say that buyin for allot is a mistake, it may be a mistake if you are worse then the only other player who is deep as you but it cant be a mistake in general.
was it a mistake for durrr? could he have done this bluff if he wasnt deep?

Quote

03-10-2009 , 03:20 AM

#49

pineapple888

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111

Quote:

Originally Posted by kakon3

If you have a big edge vs others at the table, go ahead and buy in deep to exploit that edge as much as possible, but with a small/no edge, there are some theoretical benefits to being among the shorter stacks that can allow you to profit despite not having much or any of an edge.

The basic idea is that the deep stacks are playing against each other, which sets up situations which you can exploit with your shorter stack.

I'm pretty sure durrrr is always going to want to be the deepest stack at the table, when possible.

Quote

03-10-2009 , 03:30 AM

#50

ecstzatic

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,176

Quote:

Originally Posted by pineapple888

so why exactly does barry have the obligation to be "crisp" (wtf) in his analysis while durrrr just has to make illuminating table talk

judging any top player on the way they vocalize their thought process seems pretty dumb tbh

Quote

Page 2 of 8

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 8

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Last