Depending on the frequency that he thinks siever is bluffing his missed draws on the river, this might be a good call. He beats almost every straight draw (56s/67/T7/T6) chops with JT, and loses to QT or QJ. Combined with the fact that 22-77 got counterfieted, it is not that inconcievable to find a call in this spot. Obv it's a player dependant situation, but against a capable player such as Siever it seems like a nice hero on river.

A detailed HH about the sizing of bets and stack sizes of everyone at the table would also be good info to kno and determining if Sievers range is polarized or if its a spot where he can bet for thin value.

haha i do think he thought he had a pair there,

 

Originally Posted by shanetrain22

Welp, I can think of a fuck load of hands Phil is ahead of (plus some chops), and I'm pretty sure you can too, OP... so not sure why you're wtf'ing. Doubt we have enough info on the situation (positions, sizing, reads, timing, etc) to look at this hand any deeper than what we see on its surface tho, sooooo yeah.

yep pretty standard, huh

it's obv not "standard", but ya'll never called anyone w/ J-hi? tighten up.

its so funny that even if hellmuth wins poker players championship after two ft at the 2011 WSOp already (Both 2nd right?) people are still gonna bitch about him.

he might even take down main even but he will still be the worst of all..

jealous has a limit imo

 

Originally Posted by Lenail

Love it or hate it, Hellmuth is one of the few best tournament player and nobody can argue against this.

Yes, and you have to give him props for doing well in games other than NLH this year.

 

Originally Posted by willbec1

This may be a little bit more of a "standard" call then you think. Now obviously we have missed all the action leading up to his decision but there are alot of betting patterns, where a bet on the river does not make sense.

Like for instance if Phil led the flop and Villain flats, you can pretty much rule out all nutted hands (so far on the flop) 33 is extremely rare since phil has one and one is on the board, and also i think 99 and 88 and 89 are raising almost everytime due to the texture of the flop.

So say the guy flatted phils open on the flop, then phil checks the turn and the guy checks behind. His range at this point is like a draw or a low pp close to everytime, with a few 9x's thrown in (J9 Q9 etc...)

so now say phil checks river to him and he bets. Like what hands would he bet?

- Unless he is some sicko that has some soul read i don't think he is ever betting his A highs for value nor as a bluff since it would have tons of showdown value, chopping with all other A's and beating all pps 22-77 (minus 33).
- Hands like 22-77 he will probably bet because he has like absolutely no showdown value.
- Random nine
- Missed draws (Except A high ones which like i said in the first point will probably check back)

So really the only reason someone would bet in this situation would be for value with a nine or to steal the pot with like a counterfeited pair or a missed draw without showdown value.

hellmuth's twitter:

"Made a good call, called $87,000 w jack high on river in no limit!! My hand; Jd-3d. Board 9-8-3-8-9, I bet flop and turn, ck called river!"

Seiver called bets flop and turn and bet $87k into $180k...could be for value w/ 8 or 9 thinking phil would call w/ A or K.....

If I make that call, chances are that I am 10% thinking I am ahead, 90% hope that he was bluffing and that I was ahead
I would guess Phil was about 60% think and 40% hope. Probably higher.

 

Originally Posted by ricardogcl

its so funny that even if hellmuth wins poker players championship after two ft at the 2011 WSOp already (Both 2nd right?) people are still gonna bitch about him.

he might even take down main even but he will still be the worst of all..

jealous has a limit imo

everybody can win the main event and bink 2 others the same week

 

Originally Posted by xxDonkeyKongxx

phil didn't float, he led. OOP we can infer he was the preflop aggressor, or that the pot was limped(unlikely)

my b. read hh wrong / didnt see his tweet. thats pretty interesting then...

Good stuff itt, I posted this right when I saw it but the more I look the less crazy it seems...

TT+ doesn't make sense because we can prob assume that Phil raised and Scott flatted pre, and an aggro player like Scott def reraises TT+ pre

A high doesn't make sense because he's not betting the river there...he's not getting an 8, 9, or TT+ to fold and he can't expect to get value from anything worse

KQ or KJ are folding before the river

With an 8 he'd prob raise the turn cause of the draws

A 9 is more possible than an 8 cause he only had top pair until the river and he might just call flop and turn instead of raise to get to a cheap showdown. Doubt it tho, Scott's pretty good and he'd want max value whenever he can.

44-77 def make sense and would definitely take this line, as would busted straight draws, and flush draws without showdown value, especially since Phil's river check seems pretty "give-up"-ey, making it a great spot for Scott to bluff missed draws or counterfeits. And even the Q high straight draws that beat Phil aren't as likely cause they're gutters.

This analysis might be a tad results oriented but I think it's mostly sound. If so then it seems that Phil really does beat almost every hand that makes sense.