WSOP 2016

[Whollyflush]

cheers tighty, much appreciated

[arbboy]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

Don't think he did a lot wrong in either hand.  The biggest pay jumps are for 9th, 10th and 11th relatively given the gtd $1m for Nov 9 then the jumps are relatively tiny until 5th % wise.  Given his chip stack, table/whole event image and the hands in question i think he was totally right to try and build an event winning stack there and then with no significant pay jumps for another 6 or 7 exits.

The value of having a huge chip stack as a mouthy Brit who clearly stuck it up several players must have an added value deeper in the event.  Shame he never got there.

[Doobs]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand. 

And the 13 million with kings is pretty harsh.  He has 30 big blinds holds kings and runs into aces.  I have yet to see it obviously, but from some reports it seems like even then he agonised over it and badgered the bloke to get info (others have suggested he may have been trapping with the 10 minute tank).    Not sure how he small balls away from a ten high flop if he just called at some stage.  He more than likely had to fold pre as the only way to get away from it without losing all his chips. 

I am also not sure how he could have small balled/missed bets on his way from 7 million (or whatever it was) at the start of the day to near 30 million(??) at peak.  Again it just feels results orientated.  Yeah we want to play small when behind and aggro when in front, if only it were that simple.

[Rexas]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand. 

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

[arbboy]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

[Rexas]

I don't know arbs, was just commenting that as a bluff it doesn't really work, I'm not going to pretend to know what was going through anyones heads, I definitely don't play high enough for that! Fwiw I think the KK into AA hand is just always going in and I don't think it's fair to criticise that at all, although depending on what was said/how long he took/the reasons for taking so long there might be something not good/unethical, but hey, he nearly pulled off the dream, I just wish I get there one day

[tikay]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

[Rexas]

I've taken the liberty of compiling a list of Blonde users who are qualified to comment on PHAs in future -

Honeybadger
Pleno

Can't think of anyone else?

[arbboy]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

That's what i meant.  He had a set of aces (on the flop as ace was the first card out per the updates and his action pre and post flop was both profitable obviously as he had the best hand at the time) and by the river he still had top set on a four diamond board.  Some of us crusty old sports betting fish did used to pay our bills from playing short stacked turbo stts many a year ago!!    The game hasn't changed that much has it?

 

[tikay]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

That's what i meant.  He had a set of aces (on the flop as ace was the first card out per the updates and his action pre and post flop was both profitable obviously as he had the best hand at the time) and by the river he still had top set on a four diamond board.  Some of us crusty old sports betting fish did used to pay our bills from playing short stacked turbo stts many a year ago!!    The game hasn't changed that much has it?

 

Please don't argue Argue, it was not a 4 diamond board, it was 5 diamond board. So they could, in theory, both be playing the board, & the action looks quite different now.

You are, quite clearly, not qualified to comment on these matters, you simply don't play big enough.

[arbboy]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

That's what i meant.  He had a set of aces (on the flop as ace was the first card out per the updates and his action pre and post flop was both profitable obviously as he had the best hand at the time) and by the river he still had top set on a four diamond board.  Some of us crusty old sports betting fish did used to pay our bills from playing short stacked turbo stts many a year ago!!    The game hasn't changed that much has it?

 

Please don't argue Argue, it was not a 4 diamond board, it was 5 diamond board. So they could, in theory, both be playing the board, & the action looks quite different now.

You are, quite clearly, not qualified to comment on these matters, you simply don't play big enough.

I stand corrected Sir.  I didn't realise the 5 diamond board on river.  My apologies.  I don't play at all nowadays never mind big enough!

[tikay]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

That's what i meant.  He had a set of aces (on the flop as ace was the first card out per the updates and his action pre and post flop was both profitable obviously as he had the best hand at the time) and by the river he still had top set on a four diamond board.  Some of us crusty old sports betting fish did used to pay our bills from playing short stacked turbo stts many a year ago!!    The game hasn't changed that much has it?

 

Please don't argue Argue, it was not a 4 diamond board, it was 5 diamond board. So they could, in theory, both be playing the board, & the action looks quite different now.

You are, quite clearly, not qualified to comment on these matters, you simply don't play big enough.

I stand corrected Sir.  I didn't realise the 5 diamond board on river.  My apologies.  I don't play at all nowadays never mind big enough!

See also this, which was really where I was heading......


http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?action=post;topic=66992.msg2140444;quote=2140444;sesc=b8b3efdd46e92f9c44f7a72de53c6138

[arbboy]

Link doesn't work.    Sure you were whooshing me or whatever the kidz call it nowadays.  I will stick to the knitting!  Get this t4 placed at Romford tonight for you.

[tikay]

Link doesn't work.    Sure you were whooshing me or whatever the kidz call it nowadays.  I will stick to the knitting!  Get this t4 placed at Romford tonight for you.

Correct.

Try this for size, then.....


http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=66992.30

[Doobs]

From an ICM viewpoint, I found the way in which Kassouf exited interesting. He had something like 26m before first Aces hand, and from how the reports read effectively turned his Aces into a bluff, losing 10-11million ; then gets 15 million in with Kings pre.

If he 'small balls' both hands, checks back on a street, etc, he's probably final tabling.

Clearly it's never bad to get Kings in pre, but in the specific circumstances of the main event, when you're in final 18, and the pay jumps are huge, who plays his hands out differently?

That isn't right.

He put 3.2 million in when he was in front with aces and "wasted" 3 million when he was behind.  But that feels a bit results orientated and the bluff may well have worked if the other fella didn't have the jack of diamonds.  The villian comes across as pretty cautious in that hand.  

Not that I particularly want to get involved here, but it seems like the "bluff" with AA actually only ever folds out worse and gets called by every realistic hand that's ahead.

It was a set of Aces right on a four diamond board on river?  Pretty sure he is value betting this a lot of the time heads up?  The guy only ever calls with flushes then and never folds a tiny flush?  Surely with top 2 or a smaller set he is still calling for 3m on the river?  Apart from this 3m (out of 26m) he did nothing else wrong surely in these two hands?  That is assuming the 3m river bet was bad.  Lot of results orientated thoughts here like Doobs has said.  30 bigs with KK is going in every time pre (if it doesn't it is going in on the flop anyway)

Not quite - the Ace was the door card.

With respect, neither you nor Rexas are qualified to comment. Pros only, please.

That's what i meant.  He had a set of aces (on the flop as ace was the first card out per the updates and his action pre and post flop was both profitable obviously as he had the best hand at the time) and by the river he still had top set on a four diamond board.  Some of us crusty old sports betting fish did used to pay our bills from playing short stacked turbo stts many a year ago!!    The game hasn't changed that much has it?

 

Please don't argue Argue, it was not a 4 diamond board, it was 5 diamond board. So they could, in theory, both be playing the board, & the action looks quite different now.

You are, quite clearly, not qualified to comment on these matters, you simply don't play big enough.

5 diamond board, lowest a 6.  I dont hate it at all.  Shows cojones to do that move with so much money at stake.  Think it all very harsh to criticise.