Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="zorro222_zorro222, post: 6417503, member: 415300"] Agreed, congrats to Espen, a very worthy winner !! I also agree that the 'November Nine' was not a good thing. Not only was it too long of a break, but it tainted the purity of the tournament because most of the final table hired pros to train them and some even gave them a cut based on their performance which many didn't like and I don't blame them. But you do bring up a good idea of maybe giving them a few extra days. I do however disagree with you that Attenborough had an obvious fold with his J4. It was a very draw heavy board that every single one bricked out (QJ, J9, and all flush draws, which were all in his range) and given the action you can take out AK which he always 4 bets pre instead of just calling the 3 bet, I will keep in AA and KK which he might want to slow play but AA would raise the flop or turn given how wet the board was. I also don't think he jams QQ or JJ on the river given that they have a lot of showdown value, or even hands like 99, etc. so all in all, I think there are just as many, if not more bluff hands that Espen has than value hands (KQ, KJ, KK, TT, and maybe a few others). I guess you could argue that would he have enough courage to bluff there given the stakes, maybe not?? but I still think that was a tough lay down given the action by both players. Don't get me wrong, I think the 20 minute tank was a bit excessive lol, and I will probably always be in favor of a shot clock, I just think that it was a tougher decision than most people. Anyways, good hand to discuss and maybe now they will take into consideration some of the suggestions that you mentioned like the sixty second warning which would be a good thing going forward imo. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us