I want to see *that* hand!

Aug 06, 2006 15:07

From CardPlayer updates:

Accident or Mind Trick ( Read more... )

poker, poker rulings

Leave a comment

Comments 17

jnala August 6 2006, 22:22:00 UTC
Since 92k would be a legal raise, CP must have gotten it wrong; given that they got it wrong, it seems very likely that the actual amount was 72k...

Reply

jnala August 6 2006, 22:25:04 UTC
My wild guess is blinds 5/10, raise to 47, reraise to 72 corrected to 84.

Reply


rcfox August 6 2006, 22:31:41 UTC
So many things here. I'm going to go out on a very unstable limb here and assume that CardPlayer accurately reported the hand. If they didn't, then this all falls apart.

Since $92k is a legal raise, CardPlayer's reporting is either wrong or there was another bad ruling. Based on what I've read of this year's WSOP, either is possible, though I lean to a raise to $72k.

The first raise was from $12k to $47k, or $35k. A minimum raise, which is what would be required under TDA rules if Schmiech put out $72k, would be to $82k. So the reporting is wrong, or the floor's an idiot.

Or both.

Russ

Reply

terrencechan August 6 2006, 22:34:12 UTC
Yeah, you and Alan are right - I forgot that the action occurred preflop. I think this is happening in the 8k/16k level. So CP almost certainly has the numbers wrong. Still, the main point holds (assuming that they didn't just flat-out make up a controversy about an undersized raise).

Reply

terrencechan August 6 2006, 22:36:52 UTC
Oops, you were right - 6k/12k level.

Reply

rcfox August 6 2006, 23:03:17 UTC
I'm cynical enough to believe that they did invent a controvercy.

Perhpas the following would be a more accurate description of the hand (because this is all we can be certain of):

William Thorsson raises to about $45,000 preflop and Dan Schmiech re-raises to $94,000. The action gets back to Thorsson and he re-raises to $260,000. Schmiech pushes all-in for his remaining $879,000 and Thorsson folds.

Reply


But Then... fich August 6 2006, 23:29:05 UTC
Marcello Delgrosso raises $50,000 from early position. Dmitri Nobles thinks for a minute and then re-raises to $100,000.

Reply

Re: But Then... brec August 7 2006, 00:07:16 UTC
But fich, you've seen my LJ entry of today on what "raises $50,000" means nowadays.

Reply

Re: But Then... fich August 7 2006, 00:17:17 UTC
Ah yes.

It was made explicit in the card player writeup that this was preflop.

I trimmed to the point of ambiguity.

Reply


funkiii August 7 2006, 02:07:58 UTC
there's a video interview with the guy who folded. he said he had queens and figured the guy had faked the attempt at a call, but then he later told him that he didn't fake it so he probably folded the best hand. still very odd though.

Reply

Thorsson Interview mgrape August 7 2006, 07:34:59 UTC
A bit more from the CardPlayer video interview:

Thorsson says the other guy put out a stack of 10k chips and then said he meant to put out 5k chips. 9 big chips plus 2 1k chips would be a 47k with 5k chips and would match the 92k number if he accidentally put out 10k chips instead, which is plausible, however unlikely. Those numbers still work out to a legal raise though, so they have to be off.

He says the guy apologized to him and swore it was an honest mistake, but Thorsson didn't seem convinced.

Either way, I think I have a problem with this Schmiech guy. If he raised on purpose and then denied it, that's obviously unethical. If he genuinely meant to call, he is still taking advantage of the confusion he caused by pushing in when it gets back to him. Thorsson has to fold almost everything in this situation, because he has to give significant weight to the possibility that Schmiech has aces and is just shooting an angle by denying that he meant to raise.

Thorsson says he mucked QQ facing the big reraise on the hand in

Reply

Re: Thorsson Interview michaelsullivan August 7 2006, 18:06:49 UTC
I don't think the underraise affects my decision about what to do facing the all-in. I think you have to muck an awful lot there in any case ( ... )

Reply

Re: Thorsson Interview mgrape August 7 2006, 19:00:35 UTC
I don't think the underraise affects my decision about what to do facing the all-in. I think you have to muck an awful lot there in any case.

That's true, I think I just phrased my response poorly. With QQ specifically, and maybe JJ and AK, the doubt caused by his actions might be enough to turn a call into a fold. Given Thorsson's actions on the hand, Schmiech can put him on something very close to QQ.

Especially after five days of play, it seems pretty unlikely that someone would mistakenly push the wrong denomination chip to call. And regardless of whether it changed Thorsson's action, I still don't like the play.

Reply


another hidden motive update thomasshrugged August 7 2006, 06:14:54 UTC
running with the deception theme... as per cardplayer ( ... )

Reply

Re: another hidden motive update mgrape August 8 2006, 02:59:35 UTC
Sure... besides deception, players also manipulate the clock near the end of levels, to try and get their blinds in before the change, or to make sure they go up before the blinds get to the short stack ( ... )

Reply

Re: another hidden motive update terrencechan August 8 2006, 04:00:24 UTC
Something like this just isn't practical, for now, in live tournaments.

I suggested the following in Jerrod's journal. It's not a perfect solution but better than the status quo.

Those electronic tables they were demoing at the expo did look damn cool.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up