Klobberer
Full House
AA vs KK and KK to get down to the final table of the WSOP...gotta be on YouTube somewhere.
I played in a $1/$1 NLO game where pocket quads beat everything else... The only caveat is that you couldn't raise... Only call.At my home game, when we play Omaha, the house rule is...if you are dealt quads, you have the option of revealing your hand and scooping the blinds. Kinda tough to improve...only happened once.
Never hit while I played. I like your variation better.
A 3 way Allin on the WSOP final table bubble should NEVER EVER happen. Especially after Manion reshoved with about 10 SEC of thought, Kabat completely lost his mind. He didn't even tank, it took him about 30sec to put his chips in. Terrible.
All lot of shit Polk says is tongue in cheek.Did Polk just imply that Cada was lucky?
Now what does KK do?
Yes Yes Yes. I'm not that good, but if I was Labat, I could have laid down those kings with about 20 second's thought.I think Labat can let 1.5M go, even if he had the best hand. On the FT bubble of the main, with the pay jump, I'm playing this pretty tightly (as I sit here in front if my keyboard with no TV cameras on me). It's just not worth the risk.
I remember the old adage that a 4-bet is always aces or kings. If that holds true, I am chopping or way behind. I don't like either of those options.
I'm not saying I'm good enough to fold kings in that spot. I'm not even good enough to fold them in a 25¢/50¢ game with a $50 pot. But Polk's assessment that calling was the right move if you're trying to win the main? I just think that's a little too far.
Yes, hindsight is 20/20. Yeah, Zhu was short and could be shoving wider. I'm sure these things went through _'s head. I would have made up my mind (tho probably not acted as soon as it was on me) beforeb Manion re-shoved.
But Manion raised. After Labat called, Zhu re-raised. Then Manion re-raised. To me, I don't think Zhu re-raised too wide, given that Manion already raised (and was called). He has to assume two (at least one) pretty premium hands. So Zhu is not pushing too wide. I don't think Zhu pushes with AK there. Maybe QQ. Now Manion 4 bets?! Sure, Manion's bet could have been an isolation bet, to get the Labat's bug stack out so that he's not at risk. But when I am Labat, I can't give both of them credit for shoving wide, can I? Labat only had $1.5M in the pot. Zhu made it 24.7M and then Manion made it 43M. I think Labat can let 1.5M go, even if he had the best hand. On the FT bubble of the main, with the pay jump, I'm playing this pretty tightly (as I sit here in front if my keyboard with no TV cameras on me). It's just not worth the risk.
I remember the old adage that a 4-bet is always aces or kings. If that holds true, I am chopping or way behind. I don't like either of those options.
I'm not saying I'm good enough to fold kings in that spot. I'm not even good enough to fold them in a 25¢/50¢ game with a $50 pot. But Polk's assessment that calling was the right move if you're trying to win the main? I just think that's a little too far.
You take down that pot, you have suddenly vaulted to the top of the leaderboard.
I don't believe [Polk] would have called off the majority of his stack, in Labat's position.
I don't think they're mutually exclusive here. It's not like Labat would have been hanging on in hopes of finishing 8th instead of 10th if he folded. He could have folded away 1.5 million and still been in second or third place with over 80 big blinds.I appreciate your line of thinking, but are you playing to win the Main Event or are you playing just to ladder up a couple spots.
I know if I was in main.......id have to shove with KK.....but i apply same theiory to my .25 .50 cash game as well...what do i knowYes, hindsight is 20/20. Yeah, Zhu was short and could be shoving wider. I'm sure these things went through Labat's head. I would have made up my mind (tho probably not acted as soon as it was on me) beforeb Manion re-shoved.
But Manion raised. After Labat called, Zhu re-raised. Then Manion re-raised. To me, I don't think Zhu re-raised too wide, given that Manion already raised (and was called). He has to assume two (at least one) pretty premium hands. So Zhu is not pushing too wide. I don't think Zhu pushes with AK there. Maybe QQ.
Now Manion 4 bets?! Sure, Manion's bet could have been an isolation bet, to get the Labat's big stack out so that he's not at risk. But when I am Labat, I can't give both of them credit for shoving wide, can I? If Zhu had to give Manion/Labat credit for at least one good hand between them, doesn't that hold true (ever more so) when action gets back to Labat?!
Labat only had $1.5M in the pot. Zhu made it 24.7M and then Manion made it 43M. I think Labat can let 1.5M go, even if he had the best hand. On the FT bubble of the main, with the pay jump, I'm playing this pretty tightly (as I sit here in front if my keyboard with no TV cameras on me). It's just not worth the risk.
I remember the old adage that a 4-bet is always aces or kings. If that holds true, I am chopping or way behind. I don't like either of those options.
I'm not saying I'm good enough to fold kings in that spot. I'm not even good enough to fold them in a 25¢/50¢ game with a $50 pot. But Polk's assessment that calling was the right move if you're trying to win the main? I just think that's a little too far.
I don't think they're mutually exclusive here. It's not like Labat would have been hanging on in hopes of finishing 8th instead of 10th if he folded. He could have folded away 1.5 million and still been in second or third place with over 80 big blinds.