Having a friend feeding you the hole card information about hands from 5min ago is more important than all these things you mention. Those things should have been done also, but the hole card information is so important for confirming reads and developing a metagame

Can't believe nobody has mentioned the hand where cate c/r 84o on 722 and got mike to fold 55. That was probably the most interesting hand of the match, it was really a turning point early in the 2nd match, and the only hand I really saw where cate displayed that she is thinking on a higher level and is a superior player. The rest of the hands were pretty standard on her part.

To be fair, you could argue that "knowing that the best strategy is to play standard when you discover your opponent has seemingly never played poker before" is higher level thinking.

So painful seeing Deeb struggle to understand balanced poker and explain his momentum strategies to Doug.

Not really. Who cares

I didn't see any of this match, so I can't comment on the play.

But I don't understand why anyone would criticize Hall for getting hand updates on her phone during the match. If this was allowed under the rules of the match, it seems pretty stupid not to do this.

If Hall was doing is and Dentale wasn't, Dentale is the one who should be criticized for not doing fundamental preparation for the match. It's like someone going out onto a baseball field without a glove, and then blaming the other players who have the proper equipment when you drop the ball.

I thought dan Polk got the better of Shawn in that exchange, but Shawn is a heck of a player and i generally quite liked his commentary.

If you think Shaun's commentary was a true reflection of his poker ability then you simply don't understand what level he is on or what he was doing. He understood that of the two of them Doug was always going to be the more fundamentally sound and definitely the better HU player. That commentary wouldn't have worked with Doug and another/worse version of him and both just trashing the play and saying the same things. It worked, quite frankly, bc Shaun was smart enough to know the best approach was to balance Doug's analytical POV with a different one.

In a grander sense, Doug is obviously the better HU player, I don't think even Shaun (who is one of the most self-confident poker players I've ever met) would dispute that. HU poker is a lot of figuring out opponents tendencies and creating baseline strategies/ranges to figure out how to optimally beat them. But don't sell Shaun short- there's a reason he was the biggest online tourney crusher, then moved to live mixed games, destroyed those, then moved to open face and was regarded as best in the world in that. He is legitimately one of the most talented card/strategy game players in the world. Give him a complicated game and he will just figure out how to win. It's what he's always done.

FTR as far as poker goes, I myself try to emulate Doug's way of thinking and I think, ftmp, that should be the ultimate goal if you're trying to be the best poker player possible. You should have ranges, know where your hand lies in your range, and make decisions based on that+your perception of your opponent's range. Obv over-simplifying it a bit but I'm saying that when Doug/Shaun were talkin about feel plays vs GTO I def fall on Doug's side. I also just wish I had half of Shaun's ability and critical thinking skills when it comes to these strategy games, and I think it would be a mistake to assume that because he isn't as good at the theoretical side of poker as Doug is that his thoughts lack any merit whatsoever bc that couldn't be further from the truth. He's really ****ing smart and good at this stuff.

+1, excellent post.

hes an LOLlivepro... what do you expect. he and all the regs on PNIA are all donks

https://twitter.com/DougPolkPoker/st...57052725698563

Cate's 48o hand was actually not well played despite winning the pot, but overall she clearly played decently whereas mike's play was a trainwreck. He isn't a professional poker player so whatever, no one is saying he needs to be good at poker. But he thinks the fact that he's been around for so long makes him good at the game. Watching him trying to justify some of his bad play in the booth afterwards was pretty crazy. He was just completely unwilling to listen to a couple people that he should be able to realize are better than him (especially doug). In terms of personality, obv they both can be a little annoying sometimes. Mike is just horrible though. How do you think he'd feel if someone like him was going around calling his daughters the types of words that he uses constantly to attack cate and others.

Not that I necessarily disagree, but what's your analysis of the 84 hand?

For sure. +1

LOL at these people that call Shaun Deeb a donk or bad or clueless or whatever. Not one of them could touch his results. Poker players are just the worst for this type of behavior.

Apparently, them both being bought in by PNIA was fake news, that I then repeated in this thread. Sorry about that.

So them risking $15k to $30K of their own money does shed a different light on Mike not prepping as well as Cate for the match, although if he can easily afford those stakes then congrats to him as it means he's got a very nice net worth plus has no fear of playing in big games.

This definitely needs a rematch IMO, and with some adjustments so that there can be no excuses, ifs, buts or maybes and so that we can get a better idea of their relative skills.

I would suggest:

* Best of 5 games

* Bigger buy in of $25K per game

* Also 25K chips instead of 15K to encourage more 3 and 4 bets pre and moves post flop. (also to match the real cash at stake in each game)

* Blinds to go up to the new level a bit quicker and then to a third level after that. I think is was a blind increase after 65 hands. Making it 25 hands is better for the action in the game and for the viewers.

* Absolutely no electronic devices allowed at the table and during the breaks. If either player goes anywhere, even the rest room, someone goes with them. So no association with any other players allowed during the breaks.

So make the rematch so that it's under proper laboratory conditions and make it hurt more and have more pressure on both players to give A+ effort in the run up to the match and to play their A game during it. Extra pressure created by more money at stake and by a best of 5 with no electronic devices being allowed being a purer test of who is the more capable HU player.

No shame in either or both players getting some backing for some or a lot of the potential $75K at risk whether it's within their bank roll / comfortable net worth or not.

this is way to much quality to reside in NVG, please delete

Live pros are the nut low. Anyone who can beat 10nl can crush any live game.

Have you heard of this Zach Freeman guy? Absolutely awful. Don't even get me started on Torelli.

Why would it matter whether you put up your own money or not in terms of how much you should prepare? Either way the swing between winning an losing is the same; only your baseline prior to the match, win or lose, changes.

Because with your own money on the line your end P & L ranges from
-30K to +30K but if you are put in for nothing it is 0 to +60K

Your baseline point is correct, but losing $30K of your own money surely is more painful than
not winning a $60K freeroll, or at least that is how I think, and I how I would feel.

Something that hurts more (financially, and otherwise) should you fail, theoretically, should make you try harder.

I think this is why people do weight loss challenges for big bets, as it acts as a huge motivation.

IIRC Mike said he's not doing that out of principle. He certainly said he didn't seek any training out of principle but I'm sure he said something similar about being fed hands.

While it does give an obvious edge and I understand why anyone would do it, the fact Caitlin he planned that doesn't sit well with me. It goes against everything she'd said prior to the match, and lest we forget, she challenged him. Imo she should've had someone on standby feeding hands should she notice Mike doing it, then it's fair game. Getting coaching is kinda lame and I'm sure she said she wouldn't be doing it.

Watching the match I picked up a couple of reads on her, wondering if anyone else noticed them.

Also, can't believe no one is mentioning Kate's disgustingly boney arms

Ethics are generally kind of a grey area in poker. You can bash someone all you want for not conforming to your standard of it, but it doesn't really change the fact that they're well within their rights to do so, as long as it's not something that explicitly isn't allowed.

Probably because it has no relevance to this discussion.

Hey fester how about you and dentale HU on twitch?

I also noted that one of her ears was bigger than the other! Disgusting. She is not a perfect physical specimen like myself and all other random dudes posting on the internet.

Lol at blaming preperation. You get in there and play. Terrible is just terrible.

The $EV of both situations is the same. A rational, property rolled player would treat them identically. Treating them differently is like declining to make a call you know is +EV because you have too much of your bankroll on the table. The money you've put up (or not) is a sunk cost and shouldn't factor into your decision.

If his "principle" against mid-match updates was so strong, why didn't he negotiate this as part of the rules of the match? It seems much more likely he was simply being lazy.