Mizzi vs Frankenberger (and Schwartz's epic commentary) - Page 6 - Televised Poker

SyntaxError · 04-02-2012, 09:39 AM

It was more like 5.5:1, cos the graphics show Timoshenko's full stack.

**MrBump** · 04-02-2012, 12:15 PM

That QQ fold is loltastic. He mad bro

zakid · 04-02-2012, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rundeep

The Queens hand was pretty awful, but Mike Sexton was waaaay out of line there. No hate to Frankenberger. Seems like a nice guy.

I don't think anyone was out of line criticizing what he did with that QQ hand. In a regular tournament, the moment something like this happens the guy gets reported for collusion. They guys at the table head a right to be pissed at him since he gave away 90% of his stack for absolutely no reason to a very dangerous player.

After the A7 hand I was willing to give him a benefit of a doubt that mistakes happen to everybody, but the QQ was just completely atrocious. I mean, how on earth do you fold there. If the guy shows you AA, you're getting decent odds with 27o.

blankoblanco · 04-02-2012, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Frankenberger

It’s easy to criticize, especially in a forum like this. I’ve never been afraid of criticism, or of going against popular wisdom. I was fully aware when I made that play that it would draw criticism, but I did it anyway for reasons which I’m happy to explain. I am sure there are some of you out there who are going to jump at the opportunity to criticize regardless of my reasoning (haters be hating), while some of you are actually curious about why I played the hand the way I did. To the latter group, which I would hope would be the majority of the people who take the time to follow 2+2, please -- read on…

The point structure of the tournament had everything to do with my decision to play the hand the way I did. It was not a cash game, it was not a standard sit and go. The 12 players in the tournament were split into 2 groups of six. We played three heats vs. this group of six, one heat in each of NLH, PLO, and PLH. In each heat, the tournament paid the following number of points based on finishing 6th to 1st place: zero, 1, 2, 3, [BIG GAP] 6, 8. So coming in 2nd place got twice as many points as coming in 3rd. There was also a “double card.” A player could use their double card in one of the three heats, and they had to announce before the heat that they were using the card. To these players, the point payout structure for 6th to 1st was (obviously) zero, 2, 4, 6, [HUGE GAP] 12, 16. Three players used this event, which was the first event – Sorel, Ben, and Andrew. Long story short, there was a HUGE point gap between the first four places and the top two.

Have a look at minute 2:33, the chip counts at the time. I had a massive chip lead going into the hand in question, and I knew that if I could hold on to my chip lead and finish 1st or 2nd in this heat, not only would I win 6 or 8 points, but I would prevent at least two of those three players using their double card from a crucial score of 12 or 16. This would put me in great shape to make the final table (after the 3 heats, the 3 players with the most points advanced to the final table).

Think about how you would play in a satellite tournament with 6 people where there were two seats up for grabs and the bottom four spots paid practically nothing… Are you going to look to get max value in every spot when you have one of the two seats virtually locked up? That’s how I looked at this structure, and this perspective certainly helped me win the tournament.

Do I think I played the hand perfectly? Not at all. I’ve played poker professionally for just over 2 years, and I am certainly still learning. In retrospect, against a tough player like Sorel, betting the flop is the better play because the strong player assumes I’m C-betting every flop, even when I miss. I hadn’t played much against Sorel at the time, so I didn’t know much about his game other than I perceived him to be aggressive, the kind of guy who is better to let hang himself. There are PLENTY of players out there who would take the bait and lead out on the turn, but Sorel didn’t do that. As for my decision to check back the turn, say what you want, but once I decided to check back the flop, I felt that checking back the turn to continue to look weak was the right play in hopes of him catching a card or barreling on the river. I didn't want him to fold assuming I hit a K. When Sorel bet out on the river, I knew I had made a mistake to check back the flop, but I ultimately decided that I was unlikely to get called by a worse hand, and in the off chance that he caught a hand that beat me, I was never folding to his shove… That last decision to simply call his bet on the flop had EVERYTHING to do with the point structure, where, again, with my massive chip lead, I was virtually assured of locking up first or second place in the heat. There was A LOT more downside to me losing a big pot in the off chance that I was beat than there was in winning the marginal chips. I had only 2 points to gain if I went from 2nd to 1st place, whereas I had up to 6 point of downside if I lost that pot. Of even greater importance, if I surrendered the 2nd place finish, another player using their double card could jump from 6 to 12 points just by moving from 3rd to 2nd.

I’ve spoken with several pro’s whose opinions are QUITE different from Luke’s. But Luke is Luke – we all know he’s not on these shows for his poker prowess. Right, wrong, or indifferent, I have always been the kind of person who prefers to defend someone being criticized rather than join in, but that’s maybe that's just me. If you’re in the habit of ignoring the unique point structures of tournaments like this, I hope to see you at my table soon.

maybe focus more on the "i'm a novice, and i didn't play the hand correctly" aspects, rather than relegating that to the background of your desperate attempt to justify a botched hand. that admission undermines most of your jumble of words anyway, so give up the defensiveness

and there is absolutely no justification for that QQ hand. you can spew something about the points and blah blah blah but if you were going to fold to the shove you shouldn't have 5bet. there is no soul-read that makes this untrue, no scenario under which you did not horribly misplay the hand. people will like you a lot more if youre just humble, admit that you screwed up, and move on

p.s. mike sexton was way out of line though criticizing the play at the table of someone who just lost a large pot

hang · 04-02-2012, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankoblanco

people will like you a lot more if youre just humble, admit that you screwed up, and move on

have you met the internet at all?

blankoblanco · 04-02-2012, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hang

have you met the internet at all?

most people on the internet aren't confronted with video evidence of them blatantly screwing up, so they can always find some way to argue their side

but if i was caught making a play that bad (and i've made plenty of terrible plays in the comfort of my own home or casino) i would feel like a total fool trying to justify it. i don't know why it's so hard for some people to just laugh at themselves and say wow i sure ****ed up that one

hang · 04-02-2012, 03:13 PM

its still only your opinion that he messed up

spacecakezzz · 04-02-2012, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankoblanco

p.s. mike sexton was way out of line though criticizing the play at the table of someone who just lost a large pot

i thought sexton's comments were more chit-chatty than critical..he did say "in my opinion" right before. but yeah..when a player loses a big pot, especially in a tense situation (as this hand was) you should keep quiet in general - but this is on TV and that's Mike's thing, to comment on hands. so i'm gonna say his comments were in line on TV but prob if it was off camera he shouldn't comment.

thought frankenburger was classy also in the way he responded and i've always enjoyed watching him play. you all might not agree with his reasoning but he is always thinking about his plays and he's not a coward. honestly that's pretty brave of him to fold QQ there. im not saying it was right and i think he rushed his decision a bit when he re-potted (hard to tell if that was edited though). but still he has the guts to go with his read, not just in this hand but in other hands where he is more the aggressor in other tourneys i've seen him play.

blankoblanco · 04-02-2012, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hang

its still only your opinion that he messed up

technically yeah, it has to be, but when nearly every better poker player than you would agree you misplayed the hand, maybe thats when you just admit they likely know better than you instead of acting like you have some magical insight beyond them. that seems like the sensible course of action to me at least

the thing is its his own opinion that he messed up too. the annoying part to me is that he commits two lines out of like fifty to basically agree that he didn't play the hand right and that he's relatively new to the game, but he hides it in an essay of justification for why he's right. i guess it's his way of hedging or something, but it makes the whole thing a pointless exercise in defensiveness imo

MMD · 04-02-2012, 06:27 PM

lol @ that QQ hand.

Mikita0 · 04-02-2012, 08:04 PM

QQ more

EGarrett · 04-02-2012, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Frankenberger

It’s easy to criticize, especially in a forum like this. I’ve never been afraid of criticism, or of going against popular wisdom. I was fully aware when I made that play that it would draw criticism, but I did it anyway for reasons which I’m happy to blahblahblahbalbhblah

You should've bet the minimum on every street, I hear it's what all the pros are doing.

camz2895 · 04-02-2012, 09:09 PM

QQ hand is wow. frankenburger = vietcong?

Aqalung... · 04-04-2012, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harkin

LOL Sexton's face after seeing the cards.

priceless...

striiing · 04-05-2012, 05:27 PM

nh