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.


No announcement yet.

Great Hands #14 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 131 - Wiggins vs Negreanu vs L

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Great Hands #14 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 131 - Wiggins vs Negreanu vs L

    Great Hands #14 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 131 - Wiggins vs Negreanu vs Laak vs Tony G. KcTh vs 6s5c vs AdQs vs 8h6h

    Watch video here.

    Would you have acted the same way? What would you have done differently? Share your thoughts and feedback via this forum discussion about this hand.

    Last edited by PSO Admin; Thu Jul 28, 2011, 07:56 PM.
    Team PokerSchoolOnline - Administration

  • #2
    first off, if I'm Wiggins, I'm not opening a pot by limping against that table. That's an easy way to get absolutely no respect at all.

    Tony G was priced in to see the flop, whiffed and got out as he should have.

    I'm surprised that Phil didn't raise on the turn, he could have on the flop, but if I were him, I'd have raised the turn to truely see where I was in the hand.... although I give him credit that by just calling, he got Daniel to bet the river and get more value from him.

    Daniel's play didn't totally surprise me. He was never raised in the hand and while yes, he does get into alot of pots and play very aggressively, he could have easily had any of the hands that Phil was talking about when he was deciding to call the river bet.

    6 Time Bracelet Winner


    • #3
      With Daniel's ability to multi-barrel bluff I think raising the turn would be bad. I think Phil's line of calling and letting Daniel continue to bluff was decent.

      Phil's in a way ahead/way behind situation. You shouldn't be raising to see where you're at, you should be raising for value or as a bluff. A turn raise wouldn't be a bluff as better hands will never fold, but it's not really for value either as worse hands won't call except maybe a worse Ax (which is definitely in DN's range). But just calling you will still get value from Ax as Daniel will bet the river for you. And by taking the line Phil did, he'll get value from DN's bluffs too, which he can't accomplish by raising.

      Information is a good byproduct of raising, but it shouldn't be the primary reason you're raising. Here's why it's bad in this spot:

      He's got a better hand (which would be a monster), a moderate made hand with showdown value, or a bluff.

      If you raise the turn, you will find out where you're at, here's the result:

      vs. monsters: You'll either get reraised and be stuck with the dilemma of folding or getting it in when your hand has essentially been turned into a bluff catcher. OR you will get flat called, and have to play the river out of position in what is now a very large pot and a very tricky spot. Yuck.

      vs. moderate made hands: DN folds, you win only his 9K turn bet

      vs. bluffs: DN folds, you win only his 9K turn bet

      If you call and check the river to him:

      vs. monsters: You check/call DN's value bet, costing yourself roughly the same amount as if you had raised the turn, except in this case you get your hand to showdown, AND you realize your equity vs. KK (you have 7 outs to draw out on KK, if you raise/fold the turn you don't get a chance to hit one of these 7 outs). This option is better vs monsters

      vs. moderate made hands: DN checks down the river most likely, and you only win his 9K turn bet. Either option usually works the same vs moderate made hands.

      vs. bluffs: You garner equity from his bluff range... he won't bluff all the time but clearly will some of the time. This option is better vs. bluffs.

      As for DN's river bluff, I really don't like it. He fired 2 shells, at this point I think he should give up when called twice by Phil. Or fire more on the turn shell, his bet sizing is too small there, then he can give up comfortably on the river. He's trying to get Phil off a K, but I don't think Phil's folding KQ there even though he made a speech like it was going to fold (the speech was mostly to try and get some read from Daniel, he was never seriously considering folding AQ).
      Last edited by TheLangolier; Sat Jul 02, 2011, 07:43 PM.
      Head Live Trainer
      Check out my Videos

      4 Time Bracelet Winner


      • #4
        Great point Dave. I like your reasoning and any hand I can learn something from is a good thing!
        I wonder if Phil got something off the turn bet and it's sizing... it is a bit small, as you said? That might have been added incentive for him to just call it.

        6 Time Bracelet Winner


        • #5
          [QUOTE=PSO Admin;286533]Great Hands #14 - Behind the Poker Face - Week 1, Hand 131 - Wiggins vs Negreanu vs Laak vs Tony G. KcTh vs 6s5c vs AdQs vs 8h6h

          I would have rereaised x3 on daniels bet, on the turn card, Laak had the chips behind him!
          & give Daniel the option to fold or call. i don't know if Daniel would have reraised again?
          but at least you are not giving him a free card on the river.

          what are your thoughts please!



          • #6
            i dont think that phil was givin deniel a free card at all, because he exactly was puttin deniel on what he really had i think, deniel might really have a streight draw but it would be just godshot draw so i think he made right desision on turn, if he would reize he would knok out bluff or would run into a monster, so i think phil made maximum in this hand



            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.