PokerStars homepage
;
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Daniel Negreanu vs Vanessa Rousso - Great Hand

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Nice hand, looking forward to more of these.

    Here's my take:

    Daniel opens standard to 2.. We don't have the context of recent image and table dynamic looking at a single hand in a vacuum like this, but it's probably safe to say he's opening a wide range. And I like his open with 9's.

    Vanessa 3b's with JJ to 6500. I like this as well. She knows Daniel's range is wide, she has position on him, and she knows he's prone to calling too loose in these spots to see a flop so she's punishing that to extract value. If she does get called, the spr will be just over 2, which will make her hand easier to play post flop. (If she flats, the spr will be just over 6 if no one else calls, or lower but multi-way if others come along, neither are particularly attractive spots for JJ).

    Daniel's small 4b is interesting. He can't really call, as he'll never be able to play this well out of position on these stacks, and he doesn't have a favorable price to set mine. That leaves folding or raising. Folding is a reasonable option actually, except for 2 things:

    1) Vanessa is capable of 3-betting him light, which he is a good target for.
    2) Depending on dynamic, raise/folding may not be an option (for instance if he's raise/folded a couple times recently doing so again would be pretty bad for his image).

    So folding, while not bad, isn't terribly attractive either. That leaves raising. Any large 4b (up to and including all in) commits everything and would be pretty terrible as it's likely to only get called by a range 99 does not fair well against, and fold out all worse.

    Ruling everything else out, he makes a small 4b. It looks really strong, like he wants action. The reality is, he doesn't, but Vanessa doesn't know that. I actually like this play. He's figuring Vanessa won't be likely to call this bet, she'll either fold if she's stealing or has a marginal value hand, or she'll commit with a strong hand. This bet is likely to fold out worse and only get action from better, which is generally not a great idea, but at the same time it will remove the difficulty of playing this hand out of position as well as prevent him from being bluffed (although I think Vanessa is capable of 5b bluffing if she perceives he can fold). Essentially this bet is testing Vanessa for her whole stack without actually putting it all at risk, since he can still fold.

    She 5b ships. I do agree with Daniel's fold, as he's basically not beating anything except AK and she's not even playing AK this way all the time, so he's mostly looking at overpairs. At first, I was not a fan of Vanessa's shove on the surface, as it's the type of bet where she's folding out worse and stacking off to QQ+. However, there's some deeper meta-game going on I think. She knows that:

    -Daniel understands she's capable of 5b bluffing
    -Daniel would not likely make a small 4b with a premium hand, he likes to call and play those trappy and this depth of money is ripe for him to call the 3b with QQ+.
    -Daniel may suspect she would flat his small 4b with a premium hand herself, planning to get it in over his pending c-bet.
    -Daniel is notorious for talking himself into tough calls when he reads the situation as a possible move.

    She even comments after the hand is over that she thought he might talk himself into the call.

    All in all, I thought they both played their hands well, a very enjoyable hand to analyze. The one thing I definitely didn't like was Vanessa showing her hand. Don't give the whole table free info. Would love to hear her rationale for this but not expecting I'd be swayed. Possibly just a brain cramp on her part.
    Head Live Trainer
    Check out my Videos

    4 Time Bracelet Winner



    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by TheLangolier View Post
      Would love to hear her rationale for this but not expecting I'd be swayed.
      I wouldn't expect you to be swayed but I just assumed she might have wanted the table to get that image of her that she was playing straight that day, and that if she shoved she had the nuts. As like a set up for a potential squeeze play or steal (with the cost being minimal in this case in that everybody already knew she had) - small cost, greater possible future gain?

      Who knows for sure though - just speculating ...
      Last edited by TrustySam; Sun May 29, 2011, 11:46 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
        I wouldn't expect you to be swayed but I just assumed she might have wanted the table to get that image of her that she was playing straight that day, and that if she shoved she had the nuts. As like a set up for a potential squeeze play or steal (with the cost being minimal in this case in that everybody already knew she had) - small cost, greater possible future gain?

        Who knows for sure though - just speculating ...
        showing that she would 5bet shove Daniel with JJ is hardly a desire to let them know she is "playing it straight".

        JJ as a 5bet is essentially a "bluff" versus anyone except players thinking on multiple levels above the norm.

        I think Dave and I pretty much agree on Daniel's play, but I really like his addition of the Vanessa side. I only touched on her thinking very quickly in my post, but he really expanded it. I like that addition...
        Double Bracelet Winner

        Comment


        • #19
          Dayum JD that was thinking quickly? lol would love to see when you have thought and pondered on it for a while

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by JDean View Post
            JJ as a 5bet is essentially a "bluff" versus anyone except players thinking on multiple levels above the norm.
            Can you elaborate? Like specifically what multiple levels are you factoring in that make a JJ shove into 99 (that Daniel wasn't trying to hide) a bluff in your mind after Daniel specifically put her on a better pocket pair

            I never mentioned this, but my IQ is off the charts so there's nothing so complex that's it's going to be over my head - eager for the long-form of your analysis!! The more the better!!!

            I mean, like I saw what you said here about how you believed the sizing of Daniel's raise was in your mind an attenpt to try representing his 99 as AA/KK. So therefore in your mind was Vanessa therefore in return really scared he really did have AA and therefore tried to bluff him back by trying to represent her JJ as AA as well. Like is that the multi-layers youre referring to ...
            Last edited by TrustySam; Mon May 30, 2011, 03:11 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
              Can you elaborate? Like specifically what multiple levels are you factoring in that make a JJ shove into 99 (that Daniel wasn't trying to hide) a bluff in your mind after Daniel specifically put her on a better pocket pair

              I never mentioned this, but my IQ is off the charts so there's nothing so complex that's it's going to be over my head - eager for the long-form of your analysis!! The more the better!!!

              I mean, like I saw what you said here about how you believed the sizing of Daniel's raise was in your mind an attenpt to try representing his 99 as AA/KK. So therefore in your mind was Vanessa therefore in return really scared he really did have AA and therefore tried to bluff him back by trying to represent her JJ as AA as well. Like is that the multi-layers youre referring to ...
              It is pretty simple really:

              Just like you rarely want to 4Bet fold, you rarely want to 5Bet fold.

              5Bet shoving for value with "just" JJ is not really something you will see a whole lot, UNLESS both players are highly "advanced" and are capable of using plays/counter-plays against each other. Consider...

              If your opponent 4bets, and you had BETTER be on a hand like AA/KK, because he is pretty un-likely to be folding very often. While JJ is usually a pretty strong hand, versus a player who is 4Betting and committing him/herself, that value REALLY shrinks.

              See?

              Not saying 5bet shoving JJ CANNOT be done for value in some spots, but it would take deep thought aobut your opponent's motivations, plus analysis of HIS thoughts about YOUR motivations, etc etc ("leveling") to make a 5bet value shove on JJ possible.

              And you are absolutely correct re my "thoughts" on the hand and the leveling necessary for JJ to be a potential value shove. See The Langolier's post, his thoughts are really really nice about Vanessa's possible motivations. I sort-a glossed over that in my post, and focused more on potential thoughts form Daniel, mainly since I've seen more of his play.

              He nails it tho...

              1) Daniel raises small.

              2) Vanessa knows he will tend to do that on a wide range, so her JJ is probably pretty solid. She re-raises.

              3) Daniel knows Vanessa is capable of a light 3-bet, and he knows she is on a somewhat polarized range therefore- either she has the goods and he MUST flop a set to win if he calls, or she is on semi-"trash", and he is vulnerable because his 99 will see an over card very often. He also kniows Vanessa is perfectly capable of barrelling him on the flop a high % of the time.

              That's why he elects to "leverage" his tendency to open raise a WIDE range by 4betting small to represent he is at the top of his range- thus potentially getting Vanessa to fold the lower end of HER range.

              4) Vanessa could know full well that Daniel would tend to FLAT the high end of his range (per The Langolier, and I agree), so she takes the calculated risk that Daniel is simply REPRESENTING the big pp QQ+, or an AK "race", and jams it back at him.

              5) Daniel must know he has a big % of his stack in, and has to assess his ability to win by folding, versus his ability to win by calling. Despite having a lot of chips in (a bit over 25%), he folds.

              That's some pretty high level poker thinking, relying heavily upon knowledge of your oponent, plus relying upon the knowledge that your opponent is attempting to consider what YOU know, and basing their play decisions on that info.

              A more "typical" 4bet/5bet scenario would be:

              1) Player A open raises small from EP because the table is playing pretty tight.
              2) Player B only knows that he holds JJ, and player A has been pretty active. He 3Bets.
              3) Player A then considers he has seen Player B fold to play back, and decides to min raise in hopes of "scaring" player B.
              4) Player B, with JJ, is now stuck in a tough spot: either player A is jsut amp'ping up the pressure, or he really holds what he seems to be; AA/KK. If player B thinks player A is a wild bluffer, he probably calls. If he feels player A has shown down enough solid hands in this spot, he probably folds.

              Jamming over the top is often a "desperation move" for players with this less developed poker thought process, therefore a shove is usually made only in HOPES of getting a fold: Anytime you bet or raise in hopes of getting a fold, it is by definition, a bluff.

              See?
              Last edited by JDean; Mon May 30, 2011, 10:47 AM.
              Double Bracelet Winner

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by JDean View Post
                That's some pretty high level poker thinking, relying heavily upon knowledge of your oponent, plus relying upon the knowledge that your opponent is attempting to consider what YOU know, and basing their play decisions on that info.
                Oh so we weren't in disagreement about the fact that everybody at the table knew it was pair over pair and that it was middling versus better, because everybody's high level - they're pros.

                And so 5betting JJ was 'straight' in that it was for value, and NOT a 'bluff'.

                Which is probably also why Daniel let leak that "even against AA or KK" he felt like he was supposed to call - because everybody likely already knew where he stood.

                So what are you saying is the big deal about attempting to leverage the situation to potentially extract future value by telling everybody what they already know in an attempt to shape one's table image as a set up to a future bluff?
                Last edited by TrustySam; Mon May 30, 2011, 05:35 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
                  Which is probably also why Daniel let leak that "even against AA or KK" he felt like he was supposed to call - because everybody likely already knew where he stood.
                  He said this trying to get a read. If he was actually up against AA/KK he should fold with a lower pocket pair, not call.
                  Head Live Trainer
                  Check out my Videos

                  4 Time Bracelet Winner



                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by TheLangolier View Post
                    He said this trying to get a read. If he was actually up against AA/KK he should fold with a lower pocket pair, not call.
                    My point was that if he was trying to rep AA or KK then that undercut his usage of a 4bet to admit he didn't have either of those hands since it exposed him as a bluffer. I mean like if he felt he needed to expose his game in an attempt to garner information then I guess he did what he had to do. But he also shows agitation when Vanessa shoved in the first place - that also blew his supposed AA/KK bluff game, and he wasn't even looking at Vanessa when he did it, so that rules out his leak as strategy. And what's worse, it would have likely given her confidence that she had him beat, or could beat him because it's a massive sign of weakness.

                    Anyways, let's suppose for the minute that Daniel by mentioning AA or KK really was trying to get a read on Vanessa - wasn't that dangerous because what if Vanessa had shown alarm that he left out QQ? We know that she didn't show alarm though because the fact that she showed her JJ and told Daniel it was a good laydown means she knew she was up against TT or worse and not QQ.

                    This is jmo but I think these high-level pros read hands a lot faster and more precisely than the rest of us, especially against people they've played repeatedly the way Daniel and Vanessa have. If Vanessa knew for sure after Daniel's 4bet that she was well ahead, then why wouldn't Daniel know that too after her 5bet? I would tend to think that he did, hence he felt free to express agitation because like I thought we already agreed that he probably already knew before he 4bet that he was going to fold to a shove.

                    Anyways, JD I mean like you've probably already read all the same articles I have, but here's some that discuss the fundamentals of how there's value in fostering a table image ... and then playing against type. The only reason I can see to to not attempt to leverage this particular situation for table image purposes as a precursor to a future bluff would be if you subscribe to boilerplate rules at all costs, like 'never show your cards' the way some people always believe you should 'never 4bet and fold' JMO

                    http://www.suite101.com/content/crea...-poker-a150766
                    http://pokersoftwarepal.com/basic-ru...poker-game.htm
                    Last edited by TrustySam; Tue May 31, 2011, 12:17 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      nf:

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X

                      X Cookies Information

                      We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.