I thought I heard that too but


where is the math in that proposition? lol

Hewitt had a tight image and gets 3bet shoved on by a nit. Dude's range for shoving there at WORST is 99+ KQs+ and I'm being generous here. KQo is 30% against that range and Hewitt needed to be about 41% against his range to make it a neutral ev call from a chip ev perspective and maybe even more than that when you consider ICM/tournament equity. I love how he started defended his play by cherry picking hands from the bottom of Bounahra's shoving range and justified the call as based on "math."

See, you might think it is going to be boring, but for me it won't. I'll have a good friend in it, fighting to win the prize, I'll be glued to the rail!

someone photoshop this pic with Doug lee in the middle instead of effel lol

Did he really say this? Without a read, the math is meaningless. Obviously.

Never mind ICM considerations on the biggest bubble in the poker world.

Huge fail.

Can I get some confirmation that Hewitt's open shove with ATo with 13m after not playing a single hand and losing 9m via blinds and antes was a stupid play. My opinion is that his hand beats absolutely nothing that people on that final table would call with. At best he's flipping against 99 or 88, but I don't think anybody was calling without AQ (unlikely) AK AA KK QQ JJ and MAYBE 10's when there were 100 hands played and 7 of them went to the flop. He's losing against any hand that calls him, if he were a reasonable player but folding for 5 straight hours and first hand you open shove?

Can I get some confirmation here that it was a completely idiotic move, and lets not go on about the KQo hand yet.

well you know my opinion already

(NVG not the best place for strat discussion :-P)

who else is happy we get to see old man poker in november?

We need one of those pop up windows that comes up when you enter the P2P transfer thread, but instead telling people not to spoil and making them agree not to (or suffer consequences).

yup that was a good idea novahunter pm'd me

Have these implications ever been considered? Probably not 7 ways, but a 3 way is possible, when down to 10 players, leaving us with the November 8! Wonder how WSOP/Espn would handle it.

I am

with another Phil in the November 9, we can finally get that all Phil Poker After Dark I've been pining for all these years

Laak, Gordon, Hellmuth, Ivey, Galfond, Collins (i know, it wont happen and its stupid)

how exactly did the Ukrainian lose his stack?

Lamb has an almost enviable spare tire.

I am so fricken glad I went to sleep considering some mother****er spoiled it

what an amazing last couple days of poker at the ME. thankfully I was able to BARELY stay up and watch it live. Props to everyone that made it.

and special props to Gianetti for being patient enough to make that late run, he deserves it immensely. They all deserve it.

On to November

I actually left this thread last night near the end because i had a feeling someone was going to spoil it. Happy i went with my read.

This was actually interesting. Obviously open limping or calling instead of 3betting at a 10-handed table of mostly young aggressive players screams donk passivity - either slowplaying a monster or just stubbornly wanting to see more cards with a marginal hand, but, Collins made it work. It was clear he was only doing it in very specific spots - it wasn't like he was open limping 80% of hands like some lol-liveplayers. I think it had an effect because it was so out of the ordinary it through some people for a loop - if other people were also open-limping from time to time or calling as opposed to 3betting, then I don't think it would have been nearly as effective.

I'd actually be curious as to know, once 10-handed play started, how many flops were seen (not counting AIPF), and of the flops seen, what % involved Collins.

yeah, I loved the way Collins mixed it up like that -- very creative and it worked because he played well post-flop.

No, you can't.

Even if that is true, it's not necessarily relevant, because when everybody folds you win what's in the middle outright, and if you ARE called, you aren't dead yet.

In those types of spots, you expect to be trailing when called. In fact, if everyone is tight enough, it can be correct to shove with any two cards, even though you would be crushed if you do happen to get called.

Cliffs: You have to run the math vs. their calling ranges.

I got a picture of Mike Matusow last night after his interview.

I thought it was totally the correct strategy... I usually take the same line with mostly young aggressive players.. Let them take the lead with no info on your hands strength and make good post flop decisions with pots that aren't enormous to begin with pre flop

I like to do that too, but the problem is that you need to be the only one doing it for it to be as successful as Collins was yesterday. That was the key - he was the ONLY one at the table to try such an approach.

At the vast majority of tournament situations - you know, the ones that aren't the final 10 of a 8000+, $10,000 buy-in tournament, you'll have a table that includes a few lollivepokerz old nits who limp/call and play fit/fold the flop without any regard to stack size, pot odds, etc..

So open-limping like Collins did will lead to 2 old nits limping in behind, and then the Ben Lamb-type at the table will bet big from the button and put you in a tight spot where you have to call (or 3bet) with 2 people behind you who want to see a flop despite the price.

Conversely, when the Lamb-type opens at the table, if you just call, said people will love the opportunity to create a 4-way pot with each person putting in 2.5x the big blind.

Those type of easily abusable nit-passive players are the reasons the young/aggro style has developed and become as prevelant (and successful) as it is, and yet of course said old nits won't ever adapt because they just stubbornly think all the young guys are morons who just wanna gambool instead of "play real poker", so the result is having to essentially stick to 3betting/4betting to punish the dead money.

But Collins correctly identified this table as the perfect spot to actually go back to such strategies for the reasons discussed, and definitely used it to his advantage.

Wow thanks for that actually.. (not being sarcastic)