Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!

    World Series of Poker - 2019

    So, for those of you not watching on ESPN, we are down to the final table. 9 guys vying for the $10 mil first place prize. But, I am still stunned by what happened to Sam Greenwood a couple days ago. Greenwood is one of the best players in the world with more than $18 mil of live tournament winnings and the second most winnings all-time among Canadians. He was among the top 5 in chips when he ran into the chip leader Timothy Su, who is a relatively inexperienced player who is just running super hot. That is when this happened.



    -Jason "ouch... brutal... Greenwood would have been the runaway chip leader... so painful" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    It's definitely getting interesting.

    How about the commanding chip leader last night, Marchington, deciding to try a 3-barrel bluff against the one guy at the table he shouldn't have messed with - the # 2 chip leader Ensan?

    Ensan flopped 2 pair aces up. Tough to bluff a guy when he holds the cards you're representing. Marchington (with 10-2 I believe that hit his 2 on the turn) donked off a huge portion of his chips to Ensan in that hand, which is a huge reason why Ensan now is the massive chip leader.

    Nothing wrong with a well-timed 3 barrel bluff, but he should have realized the first time it was smooth called (or at least the second) to leave himself outs. That was not the time or the place, and the commentators were floored. Huge surprising gaffe he'll likely never forget. But he's still in it.

    I just wish there were some recognizable celebrity pros at the final table, but those days are probably gone with so many entrants who play decent tournament strategy. So bummer Greenwood's bad break kept him out of the final table. I'm guessing the #1 Canadian earner is Daniel Negreanu - maybe the best player in the world.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by richardjackson199 View Post
    I just wish there were some recognizable celebrity pros at the final table, but those days are probably gone with so many entrants who play decent tournament strategy.
    Antonio Esfandiari was right in there for a long time, top 40 in chips with less than 100 players remaining, but he got it all in with an AK against an AQ but the AQ turned into a straight and really crippled him. He went out in 82nd place. But other than that, it was a pretty dry final 100 in terms of well-known players.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    So, for those of you not watching on ESPN, we are down to the final table. 9 guys vying for the $10 mil first place prize. But, I am still stunned by what happened to Sam Greenwood a couple days ago. Greenwood is one of the best players in the world with more than $18 mil of live tournament winnings and the second most winnings all-time among Canadians. He was among the top 5 in chips when he ran into the chip leader Timothy Su, who is a relatively inexperienced player who is just running super hot. That is when this happened.



    -Jason "ouch... brutal... Greenwood would have been the runaway chip leader... so painful" Evans
    A friend and I have a big disagreement about the wisdom of calling off the stack there on the river. He likes the play because of pot odds, I think the board is way too wet for the call and ICM says you’re better off folding and keeping your still workable stack.

    AJ, KJ, QJ, QQ is a big part of shover’s range and you’re calling off your stack on a huge over-bet. Fold leaves you something like $7.8M.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    A friend and I have a big disagreement about the wisdom of calling off the stack there on the river. He likes the play because of pot odds, I think the board is way too wet for the call and ICM says you’re better off folding and keeping your still workable stack.

    AJ, KJ, QJ, QQ is a big part of shover’s range and you’re calling off your stack on a huge over-bet. Fold leaves you something like $7.8M.
    It is a tough call and I would not have blamed Greenwood for folding. A suited Jack-Ten could have also been in his range and would have merited that shove when the jack turned into trips. In reality, the only hands Greenwood beats are outright bluffs or a semi-bluff that has a chance to beat you on the river. He ran into the semi-bluff and it did not work out.

    Still a brutal beat... 82% of the time, Greenwood is the overwhelming chip leader in a field where he is also the best player. That's a good combo
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    It is a tough call and I would not have blamed Greenwood for folding. A suited Jack-Ten could have also been in his range and would have merited that shove when the jack turned into trips. In reality, the only hands Greenwood beats are outright bluffs or a semi-bluff that has a chance to beat you on the river. He ran into the semi-bluff and it did not work out.

    Still a brutal beat... 82% of the time, Greenwood is the overwhelming chip leader in a field where he is also the best player. That's a good combo
    I have a friend who has played the Main Event for the last ten years or so. The last two years in a row, he busted out getting AA in pre-flop. Both times he was called with QQ. Both times he got cracked.

    He busted about 200 players before the bubble this time with it.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Antonio Esfandiari was right in there for a long time, top 40 in chips with less than 100 players remaining, but he got it all in with an AK against an AQ but the AQ turned into a straight and really crippled him. He went out in 82nd place. But other than that, it was a pretty dry final 100 in terms of well-known players.
    It's crazy that after playing hundreds of hands, everything changes so much with one hand -- even with one hand played perfectly. Nothing Greenwood can do (IMO) - just bad luck. Same with Antonio. He would love nothing more than to have AK vs AQ. But sometimes your opponent gets a Broadway straight when you have him dominated, and it's not your day.

    That's why in a cash game you don't have to swing at pitches painting the corner of the plate. You can wait to crush the big fat ones down the middle. But in a tourney, time is limited and the blinds are rising. You have to make the right play with top-ten hands and hope luck is on your side.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by richardjackson199 View Post
    It's crazy that after playing hundreds of hands, everything changes so much with one hand -- even with one hand played perfectly. Nothing Greenwood can do (IMO) - just bad luck. Same with Antonio. He would love nothing more than to have AK vs AQ. But sometimes your opponent gets a Broadway straight when you have him dominated, and it's not your day.

    That's why in a cash game you don't have to swing at pitches painting the corner of the plate. You can wait to crush the big fat ones down the middle. But in a tourney, time is limited and the blinds are rising. You have to make the right play with top-ten hands and hope luck is on your side.
    Phil Gordon posed something along the following in his Little Green Book:

    You get dealt AA once every 221 hands on average. You get dealt about 350 hands in a 10-hour session. Which means that over six days of a tournament, you will get AA dealt to you roughly 9 or 10 times on average.

    You are an 85% favorite with AA against a random hand. So if you shove with AA each time and get called by any two cards, you survive the first flip 85% of the time. You survive the first two flips 72% of the time, First three, 61% ...

    The odds of surviving all ten of such such flips, despite having the absolute best starting hand possible, is only about 20%.

    So, running well helps.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    6 miles from Heaven, 10 miles from Hell
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Phil Gordon posed something along the following in his Little Green Book:

    You get dealt AA once every 221 hands on average. You get dealt about 350 hands in a 10-hour session. Which means that over six days of a tournament, you will get AA dealt to you roughly 9 or 10 times on average.

    You are an 85% favorite with AA against a random hand. So if you shove with AA each time and get called by any two cards, you survive the first flip 85% of the time. You survive the first two flips 72% of the time, First three, 61% ...

    The odds of surviving all ten of such such flips, despite having the absolute best starting hand possible, is only about 20%.

    So, running well helps.
    It’s 85% each time. The previous seven don’t matter on the eighth.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by DU82 View Post
    It’s 85% each time. The previous seven don’t matter on the eighth.
    Yes, each time it happens you have an 85% chance of winning. But if you have pocket aces 10 times the odds you survive to the 10th is 19.68%. The math is just 0.85^10. I'm not sure about that 85% but that is another discussion.

    I'm probably being petty in another thread.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    The odds are probably considerably lower than 85% because your AA is only going to get called by somewhat premium hands... hands that already have a pair or hands with suited connectors. Sure, sometimes your AA would get cracked by a 10-5 when two 5s come on the flop, but the 10-5 ain't calling the all-in shove of an AA very often.

    As the commentators note in the video hand, suited 10-9 is one of the best hands you can have to crack aces.

    -Jason "still a brutally bad beat that will probably stick with Greenwood for a loooong time" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The odds are probably considerably lower than 85% because your AA is only going to get called by somewhat premium hands... hands that already have a pair or hands with suited connectors. Sure, sometimes your AA would get cracked by a 10-5 when two 5s come on the flop, but the 10-5 ain't calling the all-in shove of an AA very often.

    As the commentators note in the video hand, suited 10-9 is one of the best hands you can have to crack aces.

    -Jason "still a brutally bad beat that will probably stick with Greenwood for a loooong time" Evans
    If he is a real pro, he will be over it two hours later. He knows the game and the inherent randomness.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    It is a tough call and I would not have blamed Greenwood for folding. A suited Jack-Ten could have also been in his range and would have merited that shove when the jack turned into trips. In reality, the only hands Greenwood beats are outright bluffs or a semi-bluff that has a chance to beat you on the river. He ran into the semi-bluff and it did not work out.

    Still a brutal beat... 82% of the time, Greenwood is the overwhelming chip leader in a field where he is also the best player. That's a good combo
    I agree with you and OPK. But I like Greenwood's call of the all-in. Because, I think Greenwood trusted his read, and of course if he could see Su's cards he makes that call every time. Certainly the 10-J (or those other J hands) would be in Su's hand range. But lots of running hot, less-than-top players will not shove all in after hitting trips on that Jack on the turn. They'll try to be sneaky, slow-play it a little, and try to make sure they get paid some value. They don't want to risk going all-in, inducing a fold, and getting paid nothing with their monster. I'm not saying such strategy is always correct, and of course no clue what Greenwood was thinking.

    But I think Greenwood read Su's all-in shove as a likely semi-bluff draw and made a great call. To get paid, especially in tourney poker, you want your opponent to have something (draw usually fantastic since odds of hitting it aren't great), and you'd take the made hand (Pocket aces there are just fine). But of course that is why all-in semi bluffs in that situation aren't awful plays. Fold equity and sometimes the draw hits and you win like Su. But those semi-bluffs are dangerous and aren't brilliant plays either. I know all-too-well that feeling of playing against someone who is just so much better than me and can read me almost as if he can see my cards. I'm giving Greenwood credit for being a pro that good. When I'm playing at a table like that, I get that feeling of - "I'm not likely to make any money against these guys. Even when I hit my hands they always correctly fold without paying me off." Time to ask for a rack, cut my losses, and go play some craps.

    Lady Luck becomes huge in a tournament that big. Just ask Chris Moneymaker, who caught more than his share of cards in 2003.

    I hope this one is a fun final table.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    I sorta hate that the pay jumps get to be so huge at the final table that guys start to play tight because surviving one more player means $250k and up in extra prize money. I watched a good bit of the final table last year and the action seemed really slow. I suppose I would rather see not difference in 9th-7th place and then no difference in 6th-4th.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I sorta hate that the pay jumps get to be so huge at the final table that guys start to play tight because surviving one more player means $250k and up in extra prize money. I watched a good bit of the final table last year and the action seemed really slow. I suppose I would rather see not difference in 9th-7th place and then no difference in 6th-4th.
    Agree 100%. Playing to win should be rewarded above playing to survive longer.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by richardjackson199 View Post
    Agree 100%. Playing to win should be rewarded above playing to survive longer.
    The final 9 currently earn a minimum of $1 mil each and the winner gets $10 mil. They divide 30.8 million among the 9 of them. I would like to see the new prize structure look like this:

    1st - $10 mil
    2nd - $5 mil
    3rd - $4 mil
    4th - $3 mil
    5th-6th - $2 mil
    9th-7th - $1.5 mil

    That would be $30.5 mil of prize money, almost exactly what the final table makes right now. By having only a $500k difference in 9th and 5th, we will create more action early on. Yeah, the pay jumps are huge in the top 5, but I think at that point everyone starts sniffing the $10 mil first place prize and so they won't sit back and allow themselves to be blinded away. Plus, they are already guaranteed $3 mil, so perhaps they will feel like they are playing with house money to earn an extra mil or two or more.

    Just a thought...
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The final 9 currently earn a minimum of $1 mil each and the winner gets $10 mil. They divide 30.8 million among the 9 of them. I would like to see the new prize structure look like this:

    1st - $10 mil
    2nd - $5 mil
    3rd - $4 mil
    4th - $3 mil
    5th-6th - $2 mil
    9th-7th - $1.5 mil

    That would be $30.5 mil of prize money, almost exactly what the final table makes right now. By having only a $500k difference in 9th and 5th, we will create more action early on. Yeah, the pay jumps are huge in the top 5, but I think at that point everyone starts sniffing the $10 mil first place prize and so they won't sit back and allow themselves to be blinded away. Plus, they are already guaranteed $3 mil, so perhaps they will feel like they are playing with house money to earn an extra mil or two or more.

    Just a thought...
    I think the TV executives would agree with you, especially now that they're broadcasting the whole thing pseudo-live. Your payouts are fair, but would lead to much more exciting play, and better poker. And better TV, before they edit out the filler for the rebroadcast that includes only the dramatic hands.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    So, for those of you not watching on ESPN, we are down to the final table. 9 guys vying for the $10 mil first place prize. But, I am still stunned by what happened to Sam Greenwood a couple days ago. Greenwood is one of the best players in the world with more than $18 mil of live tournament winnings and the second most winnings all-time among Canadians. He was among the top 5 in chips when he ran into the chip leader Timothy Su, who is a relatively inexperienced player who is just running super hot. That is when this happened.



    -Jason "ouch... brutal... Greenwood would have been the runaway chip leader... so painful" Evans
    Also fascinating in this hand is Greenwood's bet on the flop and the turn. Both bets are notably small - closer to 1/3 pot size bets than even standard half-pot size bets. The commentators are all over it. Even a basic poker book would tell you to bet bigger there on that draw-heavy board to protect your aces and charge the draws. The commentators note that Su has been given not only implied odds but even the expressed odds to call (and then hit his draw by the end).

    But Greenwood is no donkey. Why was he betting so small on the flop and turn? No clue of course, but I'll guess. Greenwood started a decent pot by betting 10 BB and 3-betting Su's preflop raise to 5x. When Su called initially, Greenwood wanted Su to stick around. Greenwood figured correctly he was better and could outplay Su. So Greenwood's first and second bets were small on purpose to induce the correct calls. But that gets Su more involved in the pot, and closer to pot commitment (eh; devildeac).

    It's tougher for many players to get away from a big hand once they've gotten more involved and built a bigger pot, even if they aren't really pot committed. Su had a lot of chips, and Greenwood was happy to take his chance to get some of them when he was holding aces.

    Greenwood isn't terribly worried about Su hitting his draw, because he figures he's good enough to still get away from the hand if that happens by making the right read and outplaying this guy. And hitting the draw is the lower probability event. And he gets more information from how Su responds to his little call-me bets.

    Greenwood probably didn't like or expect Su going all-in and putting his tournament life at risk on the turn. But he still made the right read, and his initial strategy had worked perfectly - get Su more involved early and more heavily involved for as many chips as possible eventually, when Greenwood has the best of it. That's all you can ask for in poker, especially when so many hands in a tourney end up getting decided by coin-flip race hands.

    Fun hand - just sucks for Greenwood. But it made him look like a stud, and getting outdrawn on the river won't bother a pro nearly as bad as if he had made a big blunder to end his tourney.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Su used his “one time” so the result was ordained.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Su used his “one time” so the result was ordained.
    Probably. He's fairly short-stacked at the final table. I'm rooting for him though. He seems like a nice guy.

Similar Threads

  1. World Series of Poker - 2013
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-05-2013, 10:10 PM
  2. World Series of Poker 2012
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 11-04-2012, 06:03 PM
  3. World Series of Poker
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-20-2011, 02:35 PM
  4. World Series of Poker 2010
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 07-18-2010, 11:04 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •