53 replies to this topic

[LONEWOLF]

In his blog he refused to say which hand he was holding and for good reason. I believe that there was only two possible holdings for him to have had in that spot. AA or A3. I just cannot see him calling Johnny's re- re-raise on the turnwith anything but, these 2 hands. Johnny led out and bet when he filled up on the turn to trap Daniel, which I am sure Daniel realized, but to me I think Daniel believed he too was trapping Johnny. Putting Johnny on an Overpair, and thus I can see him having the A3. But Daniel's style is such (has stated why he does not like to play Ax because of its chance to be easily dominated), and according to his comment of "he respects Chan's post flop play", I think the most likely hand that he held was AA. Reason being, he knew Chan would not call him with a 2 in his hand. And he had to be pretty certain he would not call that raise with 22. So when the 8 hit, he was probably thinking that he had Chan dominated and by that I mean AA vs. KK, and thus the reason for Chan's bet on the turn. Daniel re-raised to make sure, and when Chan re-raised, I am sure every alarm in the book went off, and he most likely knew he was going to need one of the 2 remaining Aces to hit and help him. When it didn't and chan went all in for 87,000 more, well this was a formality call. With AA, and that much already invested, the odds of Chan holding 88 vs. the Pot odds, and given the amount he already had in the pot, warranted the call. I too would have had Chan on a dominated hand (KK most likely), as his initiative to not slowplay a nearly unbeatable hand on the turn, really made his seem weak. Good luck to Daniel the rest of the way. L*

[JeremyG]

LOL we posted threads at the same time....I have to disagree with you... even if Daniel "can't" put Chan on a 3, I doubt he'd risk it "just in case". I really believe Daniel had the best hand on the flop... read my full thoughts here:http://www.fullconta...topic.php?t=678

[LONEWOLF]

That we did post these simultaneously. You make a good argument, however in this case, I strongly feel he had AA. If you have read Daniel's articles he states, how he feels hands like A6, A9, A3 and the likes (Ax) are tough hands to play with post flop, which I strongly agree. There is far too strong a possibility that a hand like this can be easily dominated. Therefore, when he made that raise (so large) he did so for 2 reasons. First, as he stated, he respects Chan's post-flop abilities, and 2ndly to trap Chan. Most ppl do not make such a large opening bet with Aces. They do this because they are trying to draw people in, but Chan is far to sophisticated for that. So Daniel makes an overraise (saying I am kind of weak), so that Chan would pick up on that and try to use his position to steal a pot. Chan calls, maybe to attempt to do this, or maybe sensing Daniel has a big pair, this is why he played the turn the way he did, he was certain at this point Daniel had a big pair in the hole. Thus, is how he trapped Daniel. Rememer guys, Daniel is a very good player, but even very good players can be trapped. Chan too, is a very good player and is famous for setting traps and taking big pots. L*

[LONEWOLF]

give him credit, he did not know he was beat. Sure he did, or he had a very strong feeling of that, but after the turn ended, anyone would be foolish to not call the 87,000 for what was already in the pot. There was still an outside chance he had Chan dominated (AA vs. KK) and this in itself warranted the call. L*

[LONEWOLF]

That all Daniel plays is garbage? It makes for good reading, and even better advertisement for him to tell us those crazy hands he gets mixed up with (75 suited, 6T off, etc.), but come on, this is not all he plays. I think Daniel feels that he misplayed his aces, and does not want to let Chan or anyone else for that matter, know that he did such a thing. We have all misplayed hands, and I don't think we would run and let everyone know, I got played and here is why. It just does a disservice and could not possibly help our game. In my opinion, he absolutely had Rockets. L*

[Kendren]

I dunno, I could put him on 3-2s, couldn't you? Big raise early, big bet for value post flop, willingness to keep going when Johnny hit it hard after the turn and river, I'm not sure Daniel woulda done that with just a set, ya know? With his willingness to play "little cards" and suited connectors, I could see it. Flop a boat, then get eaten alive on the turn, it happens, but man it sucks. Keep goin, Daniel, you're still there!

[LONEWOLF]

however, in this particular situation, I really think the hand went down as I described. Remember, there was alot going on. Tournament poker, is also about playing someone at your table. From the moment Chan sat down, I am sure Daniel had him on his mind. When he made that bet (with AA, i believe) I think he was trying to trap Chan (who would have had position on Daniel) into thinking he was weak pre-flop so that if Rags hit, Chan could try and "steal" the pot. As I am sure Chan does quite often. Knowing this, Daniel was attempting to set up Chan. So with this thought embedded in his head, the moment Chan called, Daniel was thinking, let's wait til he goes for the bait and then spring it on him. Well, after Chan called the flop bet (standard play), and then come out betting the turn, Daniel thought that he had him. This is the reason for the re-raise, then when Chan re-raised, Daniel probably was thinking uh-oh. So he calls. River is another rag (9 I believe), and Chan goes all in for approximately 87,000 more. Now, I am sure Daniel started replaying the hand. He had to be thinkings he either had Chan dominated (AA vs. KK) or that chan filled up on the turn. If so, why not check and trap? This is where I believe Chan did trap, by betting outright his monster. So now Daniel is thinking there is a 50-50 chance he is beat, and with the pot laying him far better odds, and the money he already had invested, he had to call. L*

[doublesuited]

my best guess would be pocket twos. I highly doubt he had an ace in his hand because most good players (daniel included) do now like playing baby aces out of position. Most like Daniel put Johnny on A-3 So he needed to have a better hand than that.In all likelhood, he made a small bet to represent a good draw. He was probably surprised when Johnny didn't reraise him. This would lead him to believe Johnny either had a good draw himself or 2 big cards-- either of which would be drawing dead against him. Daniel knows that checking the flop would look suspect and give away the power of his hand. On the turn, johnny made a smallish bet. Daniel comes over the top, with a 2x raise, a raise small enough though that if Johnny have a good draw, he has to call.When Johnny reraised, Daniel had to have shit his pants. Especially with the small reraise. This meant that Johnny either had the absolute nuts or absolutely nothing. It was a bet that begged for a call. At best daniel had to put him on A-3, A-8 or an overpair to the board. Since there was a decent chance Johnny had nothing, Daniel had to call.

[foodbanker]

Since we are all gussing...I'm going to use all my brain power and do the most logical prediction what Daniel had..Daniel had Jack-5 offsuit and called the river bet for fun!!!!Am I right Daniel? am I Right?

[Randall Flagg]

Raising before the flop, betting the 3-3-2 flop, raising Chan's turn bet after the 8 on the turn, and then calling Chan's all-in after the 9 on the river make sense if he had AA. However, if he had AA, he played the hand so straightforwardly that I don't believe that Daniel would not tell us that his hand was AA. My vote is for 22.

[foodbanker]

Daniel raise of addition 45k on the turn was to try to make Chan fold on the turn. If he had a 3, he would think his trips on the flop was huge and would not look to drive out Chan but to induce a call. Once again..I say Daniel had an overpair.

[eric1971]

Randall Flagg said:

Raising before the flop, betting the 3-3-2 flop, raising Chan's turn bet after the 8 on the turn, and then calling Chan's all-in after the 9 on the river make sense if he had AA. However, if he had AA, he played the hand so straightforwardly that I don't believe that Daniel would not tell us that his hand was AA. My vote is for 22.

The first thing I thought of was 22, but if that was what he had, why not say so? Flopped a boat and lost. It happens sometimes. To me it looks like he had QQ or JJ and was not at all happy about how he played the hand.

[foodbanker]

Yes..i believe he knew he shoulded have folded on the turn and did not. Daniel is so mentally strong..I don't think this will deter him from continue to play his game.

[Swift_Psycho]

While I won't say that Daniel absolutely did not have an overpair, I think it's somewhat unlikely, especially A-A. I don't really care who you are playing, why would you raise the BB (Chan) from the button hoping he would fold when you have the best starting hand in the game? That little piece of info Daniel gave us tells me that aces just aren't likely. I also feel that Daniel is capable of making this laydown (not that I'm capable of it, but I think he would be) if all he had was an overpair.As for what I think he had, I feel that he had either A-3 or a weaker 3 like 4-3, or 5-3. I won't rule out 2-2, but I think a 3 is the most likely because Daniel says that it is a laydown that he feels he could have made if he had done it again. I don't care who you are, with that board, 2-2 is a very tough laydown to make. The minimum raise Chan makes on the turn smells to me like the case 3 finally revealing himself. It seems like a raise of a person who thinks he might have the best hand, but isn't sure and doesn't want to over-commit himself. If that is the case, Daniel may become more cautious with a weak 3, and more confident if he had A-3. He doesn't really give info on how he's feeling right then. I believe the minimum raise is often used by amateurs that have a big hand, but I don't think is often used by pros in this manner. They don't want to use it because they do not want to yell "Hey, I've got an awesome hand and I'm trying to jack up the pot." So, this minimum raise on the turn probably made Daniel feel cautious, but not too concerned because of the reason I just mentioned. Chan just happened to use the minimum raise in this amateurish way to actually hide how strong his hand really was. So that's my take on the hand.Anyway, I think it was probably A-3, with a less likely chance of 4-3, 5-3, etc.

[lasvegas91179]

like i said i was there standing right behind daniel 3 feet away. i did see his cards but out of respect of course im not going to say what he had. i do feel kinda special that im the only one that knows besides daniel. lol

[LONEWOLF]

When I first posted, I though A3 could be a possible holding, but after re-thinking and recalling some of Daniel's previous articles, I KNOW that he does not make that raise with Ax (plays too poorly post flop). Even more so, he could not have held anything but AA, because any PP lower, he easily would have gotten away from the hand on the turn, after Chan's re-raise (putting Chan on a Higher PP). Thus the only hand he could have held was AA, and put Chan on a dominated holding of KK. Listen, the reason he stated before going into the situation that he "respected chan's post flop play" was because he knows that AA is just that after a flop...a pair of aces. He made a big raise, to do one of 2 things. Either trap Chan, into thinking he was weak, or raise Chan out, as he was probably intending to avoid getting into pots with him. As I stated earlier, tournament play is about beating up on the weaker players and in doing so accumulating chips. It just isn't a good proposition to be tangling with Chan all day. When Pro's of this caliber are playing each other Heads up, they limp a lot, and I mean A LOT, of monster hands pre-flop. They do so, either going for a limp re-raise or in an attempt to trap, knowing that if things don't pan out, they can get a way from the hand. Daniel knows that Chan knows this, and thus the huge initial raise with AA. If Chan calls, Daniel figures he has him trapped when Chan goes for the "steal", and if he doesn't the poor sap that does call will be severely outplayed. If it folds around to him, all the better as he was 2nd in chips and probably did not want to Jeopardize too many of his chips with one hand. L*

[LONEWOLF]

make such a huge raise with 22? If Chan or someone else comes back overtop of him, why would he jeopardize a majority of his chips with a pair of ducks in the hole. The big raise pre flop was absolutely intended for all the reasons I stated earlier, and if somoene did sense weakness and came back over the top, then Daniel would have an easy call with AA. Daniel stated that he had to get up, go to a corner and regroup. Think of how you feel when you get your aces cracked? Not a sicker feeling in Hold'em. Now take that feeling and couple it with the fact that you realize that you probably misplayed them and should have folded them to a re-re-raise on the turn. Then called 90,000 more after you committed yourself to the pot. I think that amateurish way he played his aces, really upset him, to the point that he had to go cool off. Hey that happens to the best of us. There is no shame in that what so ever. Daniel was unafraid to tell us when he laid down his 6T because he knew he was beat. So why would laying down 34 or 23 be any different? Reasoning is simple, he had AA, felt like he misplayed them and the situation and just did not want anyone to know of this fact. L*

[eric1971]

LONEWOLF said:

When I first posted, I though A3 could be a possible holding, but after re-thinking and recalling some of Daniel's previous articles, I KNOW that he does not make that raise with Ax (plays too poorly post flop). Even more so, he could not have held anything but AA, because any PP lower, he easily would have gotten away from the hand on the turn, after Chan's re-raise (putting Chan on a Higher PP). Thus the only hand he could have held was AA, and put Chan on a dominated holding of KK. Listen, the reason he stated before going into the situation that he "respected chan's post flop play" was because he knows that AA is just that after a flop...a pair of aces. He made a big raise, to do one of 2 things. Either trap Chan, into thinking he was weak, or raise Chan out, as he was probably intending to avoid getting into pots with him. As I stated earlier, tournament play is about beating up on the weaker players and in doing so accumulating chips. It just isn't a good proposition to be tangling with Chan all day. When Pro's of this caliber are playing each other Heads up, they limp a lot, and I mean A LOT, of monster hands pre-flop. They do so, either going for a limp re-raise or in an attempt to trap, knowing that if things don't pan out, they can get a way from the hand. Daniel knows that Chan knows this, and thus the huge initial raise with AA. If Chan calls, Daniel figures he has him trapped when Chan goes for the "steal", and if he doesn't the poor sap that does call will be severely outplayed. If it folds around to him, all the better as he was 2nd in chips and probably did not want to Jeopardize too many of his chips with one hand. L*

You make a good argument for AA. It could also be explained that he didn’t want Chan to know his hole cards because he didn’t want him to know he made such a large bet pre-flop with AA. I’m not 100% convinced, but less certain of my previous post.

[LONEWOLF]

I did not look at it that way. Him not wanting Chan to know he made such a huge bet with AA. Also an excellent reason for not wanting to show/say. Probably better than my "disappointed in his play" excuse. L*