This is not a hand I personally played, but read about somewhere. I have tried to summarize it as well as I could. If you have seen this hand, please do not ruin it for everyone.

I am curious as to how people would have played this hand, being the hero here, against a player like DN. If you have seen this hand before, ignore the fact that you know DN’s holdings and the results, just provide your insight into the hand itself. I personally am baffled by both DN’s play and the Hero’s play of this hand.

$1500 Seven-Card Stud Tourney

Top 16 get paid, down to 16 players. $1500/$3000 limit, ante $100, bring-in $200.

Hero $11 300 in chips, Player C has $12 500 in chips

Third Street

Player A (unknown) – (X X) 2h bring in, Fold
Player B (Huck Seed) – (X X) Qs raise, Fold
Player C (Daniel Negreanu) – (X X) Qc Re-raise
Player D (unknown) – (X X) 8c Fold
Hero – (8d 7h) 8h Calls

Fourth Street

Player C – (X X) Qc 9c Bets, re-raises
Hero – (8d 7h) 8h 7c Raises, calls

Fifth Street
Player C – (X X) Qc 9c 2s Folds
Hero – (8d 7h) 8h 7c 8s Bets

you messed up the action as DN isn't invloved on 4th street, and unless someone capped it and he folded to the cap, he should be there on 4th

I think I have it fixed up. I originally was writing it from DN's persepctive, but changed my mind...

What are you baffled about exactly??? It all seems pretty standard to me. On third street, DN is representing a pair of queens, and on fourth, he bets, and gets raised by a board of 8-7, so it seems likely the guy has either (7 7) or (8 7) in the hole, even though there is a dead eight. So when DN reraises on fourth and the guy just calls, I would think it would be pretty standard to think the other guy had (8 7) in the hole, as he likely rereraises with trip sevens. When the guy pairs his door card, it seems like an easy fold for DN unless he had concealed nines or rolled up Queens. His fold makes me think he probably had (Q 9) in the hole, making a good fold, especially considering the dead eight out there.

I'll post my thoughts after a few more people have seen the hand. 8)

Guess nobody likes Stud hands, OR hands that feature Daniel.

Here are my thoughts, on both players (please realize that I am aware this was a WSOP tourney, so the skill level of the players involved is way beyond my level, so take what you will from what I have typed):

Hero from this post -

What is he thinking playing this hand in the first place? He is very short stacked to start this hand, so IMO he needs to pick his battles a little better than to be playing a pair of 8's against a queen raiser, and another queen re-raiser.
One of his 8's is already gone, which doesn't make this hand look any better.
Huck's original raise could mean anything. Maybe he was on a steal, but we don't know that. He could have a pair of queens, a pair of kings, a pair of aces, etc., all of which are probably going to re-re-raise behind us. If he does, we are hooped unless we improve big time, and oour opponent(s) do not. Then, we have Daniel's re-raise to contend with. Maybe we are ahead of Huck, but ahead of Daniel as well (or vice versa) - I don't think so.
Why take that chance with just a lowly pair of 8's to start this hand?
Total mistake to get involved in the first place.

Fourth street is fine, as we are making a pair or a flush draw draw to beat us.

Fifth street I do not like. We have a full house. Why scare away our opponent here who more times than not will pay us off if we let him. I would have checked here. If by some fluke my opponent was able to beat a full house by me giving them a free card, so be it. Our checking here may entice DN to bet behind us, or on 6th street. Both our stack and DN's stack is very low, so both of us are probably going to live or die by this hand.

Now for DN -

I haven't revealed his cards, but most of you already know what he has, from reading his article in this website.

I hardly ever question someone's reads on a hand, but I find it highly unlikely that KowboyKoop was able to deduce that Daniel had Q 9 in the hole from the action on fourth street alone. I could probably list almost a dozen hands that he would play the same way. He DID have a Q 9 though. Awesome read, or your subconscious has reminded you that you have read that article, whether you realize it or not.

So, here is DN, also very short-stacked at this point in the tourney. He has a mediocre starting hand with a pair of split queens, and is facing a raise from Huck Seed, who also has a queen showing.
Huck's raise is probably one of the following: a steal, a pair of queens, a pair of kings, a pair of aces, or maybe 3 to a straight or flush.
Now, I have never played 7 Stud against Huck Seed personally, but I have seen him play Hold'em before (on TV), and IMO his game is pretty straightforward, as he is fairly tight agressive for the most part, but can get frisky every once in a while from what I have seen. Maybe he plays 7 Stud differently, I don't know.
I do know however that regardless of my read on Huck, I definately would not have played this hand in the first place, with one of my queens already gone. My chances of improving are diminished with Huck having one of my queens, plus, we do not know that he is on a steal here, so lets just sit this one out, rather than possibly playing catch-up.
We didn't though.

We re-raised, and an 8 called (after another 8 folded). Huck folded as well.

Fourth street we improved to two pair. DN indicated in his article that at this point, he figured to go all the way with this hand. Now, if that was the case, I am curious why we would bet out here. We caught one of our few outs to improve, so why lead out? Should we not have check/raised or check/called here if we have already resigned ourselves to put it all in on this hand? I don't like giving free cards to get sucked out on, but I think a check/call or a check/raise would better serve us here, hoping to get all the money in the pot.
Also, by check/calling or check/raising, we may save a bet or two, should a very scary card come on 5th street, that may make us consider giving up on this hand.
5th street - oh look. A very scary card came up, in that our opponent paired his doorcard.
He bets, and we fold.

Man, I wish we would have saved ourselves a bet or two on 4th street, OR, not played the hand in the first place.

But hey, that's just me, a guy who occasionally plays poker, and these are guys who play it for their living, so who am I to questions their play.

I found the play of both players involved to be questionable. Anyone else have some insight to shed, with your thoughts? :?

I swear I had never read the article or journal entry or whatever that has this hand in it. It is just that DN having Q 9 in the hole made the most sense to me, as he wouldn't fold three nines or three queens in that spot, and with him being aggressive, I figured he probably paired his kicker. I know there are lots of other hands he could have had, but I just figured Queens and nines was the most likely.

HUH???? Dude, split queens against a Huck Seed open raise is a pretty damn good hand....I dont know where you came up with your image of Huck, but hes a very aggressive player.....this was a pretty standard/good laydown by DN

Why would you risk your tournament with a pair of queens, against a queen showing, and many players (albeit all with cards lower than us showing) yet to act? The only upside would be if Huck was bluffing. If he wasn't, and had a pair of queens himself, or kings, or aces, we are either in a race, or well behind.

It makes no sense to me at that stage of the tourney for DN to have played that hand in the first place, or like he did on fourth street, IF he was going to give up on fifth street to a scare card.



it was a good laydown, but third and fourth street wasn't IMO.

Hence the reason I posted it. :?

Im not trying to be a prick about this man, sorry if I came across that way.....but....I'm trying to tell you that Huck Seed doesnt need any kind of hand to make an open raise there....Im sure DN knew that(hes probably played with Huck quite a bit) and figured his queens were best.....IMO DN pretty much played the hand fine

I am not disagreeing with that part of your thought process at all, its the part about the queens though that is the problem. A split pair of Queens are not a very good hand, especially when one of our queens is already out there and has raised (this means that we have one less card available to us that will improve our hand).

Then - DN has indicated that he was going to go all the way with this hand, but then bailed when a scare card came out. So, if we are going to bail when a scare card comes, why cap the betting on fourth street? This isn't a ring game, its a tourney, and all of our chips are precious, so IMOP we wasted a bunch of them there on fourth also.

I just think there are better spots to be making a stand at that stage of the tourney. :?

Huck could have any concealed pair in this spot, or three suited or connecting cards. Queens are a PREMIUM PAIR, you don't just fold because one is out. If you figure to have the best hand, which DN most likely did, then you play it, which he did. I don't know what else there is to it. It isn't THAT likely that he is gonna run into concealed Kings or Aces.

My sentiments exactly....if you dont play this hand with aggression, then youre probably playing way too tight, imo

Perhaps my thinking is skewered towards my tight playstyle in all forms of stud. Hence, the reason I am here trying to learn, and DN is playing in these big tournaments...

I still don't agree with how either player played at that stage of the tournament (except Huck). 8)

I don't agree with the other player's play either, but I do agree completely with DN's. How can you agree with Huck's play, he could literally have had anything, noone knows what he had!!!

Twas a joke. Sorry it went over your head.

Not that I've never done it before but you broke one of Chip Reeses cardinal rules. Never call a re-raise with a pair and a kicker lower than the raisers up card. It seems to me that even though Daniel is an aggressive playere and the money round has just began that it is very easy to give him credit for split queens on third street. In this situation I think Daniel got maximum value from his hand when he was leading and then lost the minimum once he fell behind. Furthermore once you hit runners to fill up on fifth street against a world class player I believe the optimal play might be to check, and then check agian unless he makes an exposed pair on sixth street. Maybe this way he makes two pair on the river and you get paid off. I know this is the riskiest way to play the hand but I think calling the initial re-raise was too risky to begin with so why not live dangerously... Yeah Baby.

Why would Daniel choose to play this hand as described? Here would be my thoughts in this situation:

1. Huck might have a pair but not split queens, and I am familiar enough with his play that if I raise he will most likely give me respect and fold. If he does have split queens he may put me on hidden AA or KK, setting up a steal for me on later streets should he call. Atleast I'll be heads-up if I'm a dog.

2. I have about 4 times the big bet left. How many more antes and bring-ins can I fold before I'm out? How many can I fold and still have a shot at the final three places?

3. How likely am I to pick up any premium pairs with nothing but undercards left to act behind me, in the next 10 hands? 15 hands? Can I afford to play vulnerable drawing hands now, like 3 high cards to a flush, and miss?

4. How is my current image likely to affect the decisions made behind me? (For DN's example here I couldn't comment on this factor, not having seen or played the tournament in question.) Am I less or more likely to get chased by a draw, or called by an underpair, and can I stand that action right now (yes imo considering the chip counts and stage of tourn).

I think question #3 is the most important one. Split Queens coming 5 hands later but with an Ace and a King both left to raise behind you is less appealing than the one DN found himself. Picking up a (KJ)A suited would almost be a mandatory play but would result in committing all my chips on a no-pair drawing hand, also unpleasant.

Everyone seems to be looking at this hand from an isolated Hand-Strategy point of view, when I think the largest factors are the tournament ones. (I know, this isn't the tournament section but how it affected this hand shouldn't be ignored.)

Most top pros, which IMO would include DN, have one agenda for this tournament - TO WIN! Not to make the top 3 (as you have alluded to), nor even to make the money, so that is not a factor.

If winning the tournament is your main objective here, and with your relatively short stack, is THIS the hand to take your stand, and if so, why fold (after improving) when you have committed the majority of your stack to the hand already, leaving you basically dead to the upcoming antees and bring-ins? :?

I really don't see how you can question DN's play here at all.

When you have split queens, and someone raises a queen in front of you (with no aces or kings showing for him to be scared of ), the most likely hand is either a bluff or a random pair in the hole. I'd say that you're looking at aces or kings less than 10% of the time here. Especially, if you're getting short-stacked, a fold would be absolutely ridiculous, and a raise is the safest way to protect your stack. Then, he improved on fourth street, (a situation where he had to think he was ahead), an then made a good laydown when his opponent improved and got aggressive on fifth street.

Now the play I don't get here is that of his opponent. I mean is a re-steal really likely enough to call two people raising queens when you have 8-7-8? He's got no chips committed to the pot, and yet he's stil calling in a situation where he's almost certainly a dog. Maybe if you're playing 1/2 against someone who's never played stud before you could try it, but in a $1500 tourney against one of the best in the world? I just don't understand it. How could anyone perceive value in this play?