Was watching a tournament at Party Poker and it was one of the bigger ones (single table not multi table) so big for regular single table tourneys.
$200 buy in (+$15), was just watching it to see how some of these guys where playing at the higher stake tournaments.
Watched this hand and after looking it over it just made no sense to me, why someone would play this and lose so much on a hand like this, specially at these stakes.
Here it is, tell me what you think about this hand and the way it was played. For the record I'm talking about manduca and when looking at the hand don't forget to check out the blinds and his chip stack compared to others.
***** Hand History for Game 580930549 *****
Table Table 11131 (Real Money)
Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: TeddyKGB69 ( $1438 )
Seat 2: signiasam ( $1343 )
Seat 3: visionsguy ( $2384 )
Seat 4: s_stone ( $1290 )
Seat 5: rolex100 ( $1285 )
Seat 8: manduca ( $2260 )
Trny:3571548 Level:4
Blinds(50/100)
** Dealing down cards **
TeddyKGB69 folds.
signiasam folds.
visionsguy folds.
s_stone folds.
rolex100 calls [50].
manduca checks.
** Dealing Flop ** [ 4d, Td, 9c ]
rolex100 bets [150].
manduca calls [150].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 3s ]
rolex100 bets [425].
manduca calls [425].
** Dealing River ** [ Ks ]
rolex100 is all-In.
manduca calls [610].
rolex100 shows [ 9s, Ts ] two pairs, tens and nines.
manduca shows [ 8d, Tc ] a pair of tens.
rolex100 wins 2570 chips from the main pot with two pairs, tens and nines.
Maybe it was just me I don't know but the way he played this and with such a bad hand and of course him not being forced to because of chip stack made no sense to me.
If you look he was second in chips and only barely behind first so there wasn't even an issue there, basically tied for 1st since it was so close. Easy well ahead in second and in very good chip position over-all.
I think he lost 1285 in that hand and also was down to 975 after the hand which put him in last in chips out of the people that where still in the tourney.
Of course he had 100 in the hand anyway from the BB so you could kind of say he lost 1185 I guess and the first 150 bet could have been excused, so 250 is understandable a little bit IMO but once the 425 bet came down that's where he really messed up and where he should have folded at and saved his self 1035 in chips.
Why would you call 425 after the turn with 8d, 10c in your hand and 4d, Td, 9c and 3s on the board? I know you got top pair but your in good chip position and this guy isn't throwing all his money in there for no reason and (even though I'm not sure the difference skill wise) your in the $200 buy in tournies which I would think would be some tough/smart players there.
Sorry for the long post but just curious what anyone else thinks about this play and if anyone else would have did the same, I wouldn't but I don't pretend to be an expert so that's why I ask, maybe I'm just wrong and it wasn't "that" bad of a play???
manduca looks like he put rolex on a possible flush/straight draw. I would always be a bit wary of someone limping in the SB heads up as it could indicate slowplaying a monster (BB should really have raised to see where he was at).
If he had a pocket pair (other than AA or possibly KK) or something like AT or KT even down to JT he often would have raised pre-flop so rolex is unlikely to have trips or ten with a big kicker. The turn was a real blank not completing either straight or flush possibilities and he may have looked at the pot sized bet as another attempt to steal the pot on a semi-bluff.
Having said that (and by the river manduca was pretty much pot committed) I am of the firm belief that you should not generally call off your chips. If manduca was basically going to the wire with his ten (on his evident belief he had the best hand) he may as well have raised all-in on the turn and put rolex to a decision.
He may have read the fact that the short stack did not go all-in on the turn as a sign of weakness but any player whose committed half their stack to the pot against the 2nd chip leader is going to a) have a hand and b) not go anywhere. Looks to me that rolex milked manduca very nicely.
As to whether he should have called it to the river. On paper, evidently no, but you cannot be sure how this game unfolded. rolex may have been bluffing at a lot of pots, manduca may have thought he got a betting pattern tell, rolex may have shown willingness to fold in the face of a bluff should a scare card fall, manduca may have been on tilt.
Plus on top of all that you are, perhaps incorrectly, assuming everyone playing a $200 STT are poker guru's. That assumtion in itself may not be acurate.
given the information we have it wasn't a sensible play. But as Siohmy says at the end, it's by no means baffling - he's probably just a bad player. Just because the buyin is $200 does not mean the players are great. True overall the standard is no doubt a little higher than in a $10 game, but theres plently of bad players with lots of money who player higher because they can afford to, and also disillusioned players who play there because they think they're better than they are.
I suspect, maybe, that cobrasnake would like an insight to a higher limit of poker that he might just play one day. I don't think this is necessarily an irrelevant question to ask. True, we are picking an isolated case and may not represent a typical high limit game but he was curious as to whether this was a fair example of play at that level.
First I would just like to respond to this, and Siohmy is pretty much correct just looking for any feedback and to see if anyone else might have played it the same way.
For anyone that is wondering, this hand is not bothering me and I could care less how other players play there cards but sometimes you get curious and want to know why they play them this way or that way...etc
I always thought that was part of the learning process and a way of getting better.
Also it was a little late when I posted this and I was getting ready to go to bed so I'm not even sure I worded everything correctly or if what I said made sense for that matter...lol (never double checked it)
Anyway it was no biggie and I had some free time on my hands so figured why not?
Now to reply to the people that are saying it's hard to say with out knowing how rolex was playing his cards before that hand...etc
I watched most of it from close to the beginning of the tournament.
Rolex was playing pretty solid IMO and fairly tight, if he did just call he would see the flop and either hit or not hit and run or slow playing something (which I don't think he did to much but possible on that hand).
He was not buying pots and if he did try to he wouldn't try to hard, mainly throw 100 out there and see if the guy would fold if not he backs off and basically gives the pot away (if you showed that you wanted it, bet and he folds...etc).
So maybe I'm not as good a player as manduca and he may have read him different but I sure didn't see it.
Plus rolex even though he had low chip total was only about 150 out of 3rd at that time.
Like I said though the hand is no big deal to me, didn't mean to post it like I cared what manduca did just posted to see what others might think about his play and maybe there play in that same spot.
Yeah I agree and understand about there being some bad players at that level but I thought he played pretty well to get to the chip position that he was in and seemed to play fairly good after that hand even though he didn't finish in the money but I think he lost on a pocket pair can't remember what it was.
Either way, I think I would have been better off not making this post since it seems that it is a crime to ask a question on here about someone elses hand other than your on.
Well I did say that I figured there would be some tough/smart players there but honestly I do understand that there's going to be some weak players no matter where you play or no matter the amount. Could be a tourney or could be regular fixed or regular NL games and at any place on the internet no matter what there's going to be some weak and some tough players there.
Now like you said though I may have over-assumed at how many of the players at that level are poker guru's but I do understand not all are and realize that the game there might not be as tough as you would think but still would have to think that it would be tougher than the $5-10 tourneys.
Thanks again for the reply Siohmy, atleast you understood the point of my post...lol
