3:00 Brandons is asking why Rampage would chech with a flush draw? (assume that Rampage actually had flush draw), why would it be bad to check? Or does Brandon mean flush draw in form of 2 diamonds on the board, and not that Rampage had 2 diamonds? appreciate if someone eant to answer, trying to learn more...
1:30 Can you please explain what you meaning by Rampage blocking hands that Brandon would have with examples where one of his cards is K. Then Brandon would have top pair, or am i missing something? Just trying to learn that's why i'm asking.
Wait, what if I had the nut and I said that? That seems too easy. If I had the nuts and wanted to trick top pair into calling, that's something I would say.
How many times have phil helmuth acted like an entitled baby and got mad and pouted and screamed like a child getting his Xbox taken away. Fair is fair. For him they usually verbal counsel him then suspend him for one round or one orbit before proceeding with anything else. Of course these tyrants just do whatever they want.
I see it a little differently, Jones feels that J8 on the flop is quite strong heads up. I could see J9 and JT as the only hands that beat him that call because of the statement he made. Jones figures QJ and EVERYTHING better Weinman is gonna call anyhow (which is what actually happened in the hand). Now with that statement made Weinman may call with J7, J6, J3, TT, 99, 88, 77 and 66 all of which Jones beats. 🤷🏻♂️ who knows.
did they cost him 12 million? no, because he was playing for only 6 million price difference. did it cost him 6 million? no because there is no guarantee that he would have taken first price even if his opponent would have folded. did it cost him 3 million? don't think so because even if he didn't say anything it's possible that his opponent would have called. was it a mistake to say this? yes. was it the most expensive mistake ever? no, I'd say the 88 shove earlier was worse for example.
I'm sure a poker channel didn't think he needed to explain such a well known phrase in poker. "Feels good to fade the snap" just means feels good that the other player didn't instantly call. If the players calls instantly after he shoved all in, he might think his hand is just beat. The reason this was a tell is because it seemed he was being genuine and it wouldn't make sense to be relieved that the other player didn't instantly call if he had the nuts (hand that couldn't be beaten). He basically made it clear that his hand wasn't super strong by saying this.
@@eoinj16 Thanks for explaining, I appreciate it! 👍🏻💫 Cause without context, even beginners to poker would have difficulty understanding the significance
why does everyone hate this guy. considering the amount of scum bags in poker, this dude isnt even that bad. its amazing how easily hes able to tilt the shit out of supposed pros.
After that last 2 came on the River Barney thought if I was good on the Turn must be good on the River. GREAT CALL! This is really funny, he made a laughing stock of himself. The whole table probably wanted to bring him down.
well actually Peter explain at the end , he said his friend is coming and they gonna meet and eat something, he also mentioned he have said it yesterday (which for sure not consider hit and run) he lose or win doesn’t relate to he gonna have a meal with his friends
Airsack makes his money from all the popeye movies where he plays Bluto. I really don’t care where he swiped his money. I just know that it’s fun watching him lose. What’s all the bouncing in his seat about? Is he rubbing out one between his fat legs? So annoying. Hot air in airsack.
I think the bigger tell is that he tanked for 4 minutes. Who is going to Hollywood THAT long with a big hand? Yeah, the comment helps but that tank should be the more important factor.
he stayed for three hours, there is no mandatory you must sit down here for nine hours and play. No there’s none of that he played. He got lucky he won money he left that’s what you do if you feel you’re up and you’ve had a solid run of it you can leave whenever the fuck you want cry about it
Yeah the 88 call+jam was rough with... not sure how many bb's but Jones raised to 6m, so guessing it was 1m/2m so Jones had 100bb if I am right. Call+Jamming just doesnt work very well imho in that spot. You CAN be tricky with a Call+Jam IF you have a well-established rep as a player that call-jams AA to any aggression. Idea your opponents would be faced with is you just called the Open to trap with AA but when a 3-bet hit the felt you switched gears to trap the 3-better instead. Course, to even consider that line you have to prepare ahead of time with those specific opponents by playing AA that way. Not KK or AK, but specifically AA. The idea has to be firmly entrenched in their minds that you "only do this with aces". Not worth the candle in a tournament, imho, as players come and go too fast thus probably wasting EV for a setup that won't even take place. I half-hearted tried this setup a decade or go and got one good result, rest of the time I just bled EV by limping too much with AA, trying to be especially tricky :eyeroll: . The fact the one good result was against QQ made me abandon it - that cooler happens enough on its own anyway without burning EV to increase the chances; now I just play my AA like AA and worry about being tricky only when a unique opportunity occurs. I guess Call+Jamming 100bb might work well if the 3-better is a known maniac/donk that 3-bets super-wide; but that line would be probably best for a cash game where you can rebuy after the donkey spikes his J when he calls your 4-bet Jam with 88 with J8s. xD (Unless the 3-better is That Guy that likes to 3-bet wide and then overfold to a 4-bet. But dems a dying breed thanks to the internet). ALl that being said, Jones didn't seem to be considering any of that (he literally making instant decisions) and was just done with the tournament - those things are mentally/emotionally/physically exhausting. I did something similar with 88 in a cash game back when I first started poker back in '06; Called an Open and then Called a 3-bet jam when I was about 80bb deep. Same result; was against AA. My takeaway was Don't Do That.
you can not always know how they are cheating, when you catch them. but look at the hand , and the way she is acting. the guy, RIP, said that she was cohered to give the money back, lol dose she look like a guy can coerce her. lo please .
So wild they leave such huge gaps between prize pools. Could have easily made it 10,8 and 6. No reason for there to be such an emphasis on heads up when both players made it through 8,000 players.
They just really wanted to advertise it as "The biggest WSOP prize", so they made it $100,000 more than the 2006 WSOP Main Event prize. Which is extremely top-heavy
@@MackeyDeeezThis is the actual answer. The fact they made it a pithy 100k more than the record 1st prize illustrates this, when in past years second place prizes have been as much as 7.5m.
You’re right. They did it in the name of making it the “biggest ME top prize ever”, but in doing so they fucked a lot of players out of extra value. First should’ve been 10m and the difference distributed between the other final table prize money.
