|
Newsletter Signup |
Enter Your Email address to signup for our newsletter
|
|
Users Online |
Guests Online: 3
No Members Online
Chat: vidarr
Registered Members: 7,910
Newest Member: Camanchi
|
|
|
Breakdown of a TV Hand: Uncovering the Bluff |
Uncovering the Bluff
As poker players in a new era, where poker is as widespread as plagues were in other ages, we have been given a blessing. We are blessed with the ability to see hundreds of hands an hour online, and to review and analyze for ourselves hundreds of televised hands a week. Think of the latter as homework, as you can learn tendencies of different types of opponents, find new plays to implement in your game, and learn from other's mistakes without putting any money on the table.
The final option is what we're going to concentrate on as we break down and analyze a hand on the horrendous Celebrity Poker Showdown between 7th Heaven's Stephen Collins and Malcom in the Middle's Brian Cranston.
Heads-up, with the blinds at 400-800, Brian raises to 3100 on the button with . Stephen, holding , reraises 3100 more. Brian thinks, then calls.
The flop comes comes . This is not a scary flop for Stephen, but he checks his option, and Brian follows suit rather quickly.
The turn comes . Stephen checks again. Brian bets 4000 and Stephen beats him into the pot with his call.
The river comes . Stephen onces again checks, and and Brain moves all-in for about 18,000, forcing Stephen all-in for his tournament. Stephen considers, then folds.
Now, Brian earned a healthy pot, while Stephen made several mistakes. He failed twice to take control of a pot he could've won on the flop or turn. Then, he compounded the mistake, by not fully reviewing the hand to figure out he was ahead in the hand on the river. How is that possible? Let's review the betting, ignoring what Brian has.
First, Brian raises, then calls Stephen's reraise. This leads me to believe that Brian does not have a pair of tens or better; he's at least got overcards. On the flop, he might have a ten, or have a set off his low pocket pair. Which is why I believe in betting 1/3 of the pot for information. If Brian raises, he may have the ten; if he calls, he's most likely slow playing the set. However, with Stephen's check, we gain partial information by Brian's check. He does not have the ten, as he would probably bet out the ten. He may still be slowplaying a set, but since we didn't bet, we don't know that.
On the turn, I would bet for information, and to push out the straight draw which might have hit overs like QJ, which is a possible hand for Brian to have. Stephen, checks, and Brian now bets. This gives a lot more information. I now tend to lean more towards the bluff than anything. The way things have played out, Brian could put us on AK. If he has a set, he would be more than happy to check to see if we caught something to bet with on the river. However, I do like Stephen's call on the turn, as the only thing that could call us is a hand better than ours if we raised.
With the all-in on the river, Brian has told us everything we need to know. This is a desperation bluff. With the possibilities to make a straight, a player with a set would be happy to check/call this hand down, especially seeing as how Stephen beat him into the pot on the turn, as a quick call is usually the sign of a draw. If Brain had a straight, he'd bet small for value, wanting a call if Stephen had anything. But reviewing, all betting rounds, it becomes blatantly obvious that this is a bluff.
While Stephen made gleaming mistakes in this hand, he coul've rectified those mistakes by still getting maximum value out of his hand. However, he failed to fully dissect the hand and succeeded in giving Brian a 4:1 chip lead.
Breakdown of a TV Hand: Uncovering the Bluff written by: HangukMiguk |
|
|
Login |
Not a member yet? Click here to register.
Forgotten your password? Request a new one here.
|
|
Poker Stars |

Home of WSOP Champions Chris Moneymaker, Greg Raymer, and Joe Hachem. Also now featuring Daniel Negreanu
US Players Accepted |
|