Tom Dwan Is DEVASTATED!!!!! [$1,000,000+ POT]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 чер 2024
- Tom Dwan is one of the first names that comes to mind when people think of high stakes poker. During the Million Dollar Game on Hustler Casino Live, Dwan finds himself in a brutal spot on the river against a check-raise by the unknown Peter from China. We have all seen Dwan make some crazy bluffs, but can he make this monstrous laydown?
When you have a draw on a paired board with a deep stack you will often have reverse-implied odds. If you hit a card to make your hand, you may end up losing more money because your opponent could improve to a stronger hand. Hitting a flush on a paired board could give your opponent a full house. Be sure to proceed with caution with these types of hands when you are playing deep stacked poker.
Tom Dwan also known as durrrr from his online days is a 36 year old American professional poker player. He is a favorite poker player for many around the world as they would watch him battle in the highest stakes cash games on Full Tilt Poker before poker’s Black Friday hit. He was a regular on Poker After Dark and High Stakes Poker. He is known for his fearless style and big bluffs. Today, Tom is mostly known to play in high stakes private games in Asia. He is also often seen on the Triton poker tour playing in the largest buy-in poker tournaments in the world. He has over $6,800,000 in live tournament earnings. Since 2008, Tom Dwan has played on over 187 live cash game streams and has won over $4,000,000. He is ranked in the top 2 biggest live cash game winners ever as reported by TrackingPoker.
Peter is a Chinese high stakes poker player and an avid pumpkin eater according to the commentators. He has made multiple appearances on televised cash game shows such as Hustler Casino Live and Bally Poker Live and he is known to want to play any stakes. Since 2022, Peter has played on over 18 live cash game streams and has won over $3,700,000. He is ranked in the top 3 biggest live cash game winners as reported by TrackingPoker.
Hustler Casino Live is a full-scale, high-value poker production. Close to a million dollars was spent transforming the casino’s high-limit poker room, the Crystal Room, into the set of this new state-of-the-art live poker show. Hustler Casino Live looks more like coverage of a TV broadcast sporting event and appeals to those beyond the poker community. Unscripted and unedited, they host regular poker streams such as ‘Max Pain Monday’ and ‘Thirsty Thursday’. Some of the most notable poker players to have appeared on the show are Phil Ivey ‘The Tiger Woods of Poker’ ‘RaiseOnce’, Tom Dwan ’durrrr’, Phil Hellmuth ‘The Poker Brat’, Chris Moneymaker, Doug Polk ‘WCGRider, Garrett Adelstein ‘Gman’, Tony Guoga ‘Tony G’ and many more.
This was from the first day of the 2024 edition of the highly anticipated Million Dollar Game, which had a $1,000,000 minimum buy-in. The game was streamed for four evenings straight and featured an array of professionals and businessmen competing against one another. The players included: Doug Polk, Tom Dwan, Alan Keating, Santhosh Suvarna, Peter, Hook, Brandon Steven, Stanley, Rahul, Steve, Texas Mike, Rahul, and a mysterious guest called Thomas.
🔍 Preflop:
With the $2,000 straddle on, Peter raises to $4,000 from under-the-gun with pocket tens. Steve decides to call with his AJ of diamonds from the cutoff. Tom Dwan calls with 94 of hearts on the button and Hook defends his big blind with 75o.
💸 Flop - 6d 4d 4s:
Every player catches a piece of the low-paired board. Hook has an open-ended straight draw, Peter has an overpair, Steve flops two overs and the nut flush draw, and Dwan has flopped trip fours. Hook checks and Peter fires a continuation bet of $8,000. Steve calls before Dwan decides to raise to $36,000. This forces Hook out with his draw but Peter and Steve both call as the three of them head to the turn.
💣 Turn - Tc:
Peter hits his miracle card as he fills up to a boat as the ten of clubs drops on the turn. Peter checks, Steve who is now drawing dead, checks too. Dwan bets $76,000 with his three-of-a-kind thinking he still has the best hand. Only Peter calls and they head to the river heads-up.
🌊 River - 2h:
Dwan doesn’t find the miracle one-outer to improve to quads on the 2 of hearts river. Peter checks with the second nuts. Dwan, still thinking he has the best hand, fires out another bet, this time for $167,000. Peter is clearly going to check-raise, but to how much, and will the high stakes poker legend Durrrr manage to get away? Stay tuned to the end of this poker video to find out!
#pokerstrategy #hustlercasinolive #highstakespoker
![The CRAZY Hand That CHANGED Everything!!!! [Game of Gold]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kF6MW63WQ_o/mqdefault.jpg)
![The CRAZY Hand That CHANGED Everything!!!! [Game of Gold]](/img/tr.png)
![How To TILT Eric Persson!!!!! [HUGE Error]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Wlj61EyxGig/mqdefault.jpg)
What bluffs do YOU think Peter would have here? 🤔
after watching Peter play on the streams, I would say absolutely none.
@@madsjrgensen741lol
none
@@madsjrgensen741When Peter raise on the river, it a sign of nut😂😂
Not many Ad3d? His value range is super thin too though.
That’s a hard fold I can’t see myself folding but I more than likely wouldn’t be in the hand in the 1st place
..Is it? It's a pretty obvs full house imo. I mean a river raise alone screams "full house". But an affordable value raise on one of the driest boards ever?? You're beat bro. GG. Who cares WHICH boat he has if he's not bluffing. Either you fold or go for the most brazen bluff of all time and try to fold him off (what you hope is) a weak ass boat.
I mean you're even losing to a ton of other trip 4s but it's not even relevant cuz he soo obvs has a boat lol.
that's the thing, you play bullshit like 94 suited, you should also be able to toss it away.
@@jdee7940if you play with your usual partners playing 50cent-1 USD that might be the case. In high stakes games people bluff for that kind of money to be balanced so they won't be exploitable. If dwan calls is because he thinks Peter is bluffing there enough so that the call is +EV
Bingo...this is why you don't play hands like 9 4 suited
@@KyprosEcBingo thats y u will nvr be in a million dollar pot in ur whole existence, shut up
Applying range logic: in Peter's value hands, he has full houses (66 and TT, probably not 22), bigger 4s (A4s, K4s, Q4s), 35D; he could be bluffing AxD that missed (let's say down to AT), and he might do this with 57D - by my count that's about 4-5 bluffs, and 16 value hands vs what I have. He's probably just calling the bigger 4s, so maybe we discount that to raising with 13 value hands, calling with all 4s, bluffing with missed nut flush and straight flush draws. There's still 75% value to 25% bluff, and he's getting 3/1 odds on the call - so it's close.
Applying reality: it's a luck based game
...range logic,
THEREFORE IT'S CLOSE...
Dude, You know.... You're a real smooth.....smooth.
If applied logic were used, we throw out everything you said,
BECAUSE,
range is range ...or, it's straight up speculation.
What you made up, is your own belief in what seems applicable and to explain it is really annoying, because the bottom line is you simply do not know what you're talking about.
What you said is in essence no different than terminologies such as,
VISUAL INTELLIGENCE.
It's annoying because you just sloppily make up your own reality when I already laid out the correct terminology that is now more workable on the river, because we have what was the flop as the derivative component of truth.
And now with the pot odds for Tom on the river... How you say it is close, is surely something that spells out your doom because you expose yourself and clearly not only just not knowing what you're talking about, You yourself spelled it out as proof positive because you are stoving out a range calculation and there's nothing close about it it's a no-brainer call.
That's your calculations not mine.
Our applied logic is The productive calculation here, because the reality of the flop and it's sequence now burning and turning 4th Street is all we need to know and the pot odds being a range factor no-brainer... That's your logic and not mine and I swear to God not Tom's.
The pot odds being favorable, only produces a very questionable value of More than correct odds vs a very serious mistake in which,
HOW MANY TIMES DOES THIS MAN SHOW UP WITH WHAT THEREFORE MUST BE TO JUSTIFY THE MISTAKE BECAUSE THE FAVORABLE POT ODDS IN THIS CASE DON'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO THE REALITY THAT TOM SHOULD HAVE CONCEDED.
IN OTHER WORDS, TOM IS SUPPOSED TO FOLD HERE ON THE SAME CONDITION FOR CALLING AND THAT IS THE BASIS OF RECOGNITION.
Tom better recognize that the right decision either way here in this hand doesn't exist.
..... He needs to change some things up in the way he plays as a successful interaction because what he is doing here is what he has been doing and he's not winning like this.
The correct recognition and therefore a successful change, can also and most certainly be the alternate reality that is not logical nor productive and that is,
HE'S BURIED AND IT ISN'T GETTING BETTER AND WHEN YOU ARE IN OVER YOUR HEAD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER WHETHER IT IS MONETARY AND OR OUTCLASSED, the door therefore that must remain open with the letters of ESP and or voodoo or mojo etc.... because what I see happening to Tom and certainly a byproduct and definitely direct in which now expediency, the ego, the MONSTERS OF THE i.d.... certainly seem to have a very strange effect and it doesn't have to make sense, because it applies across the board even with horses they know and they step up in class if they could run into the 109s for a six furlong all of a sudden against winners they can't break a 110....
This is when the subjects get very very deep even within where not even Tom knows nor does he need to know but the cards certainly are working against him now in which if he plays this style in continuance and map out a trajectory way out there toward the horizon line... If he is stuck 30 million and plays his hands damn near perfect every time on the river in these basic damned if you do and damned if you don't situations over and over and over... Because just like that famous hand with ivy versus Antonius and ivy gets out flopped massively but on the river the shoe is now on the other foot and as gut-wrenching a decision and call Patrick made, A friend of mine and a very very strong mental player who goes deep into hands where his style gets others to go deep in to their own hands where things certainly are not uncommon or rarely seen in which these crazy jack high type battles on the river in and with big massive pots created where if my friends mind is right which for him is about 25% of the time and therefore one out of four sessions he's going to be firing hard on a lot of cylinders and really cognizant and aware of where he's at versus the other guy and all that stuff and so when he saw that ivy hand against Patrick and Patrick makes the reluctant call on the river, My friend said it all perfectly,
"Lol, It sucks that you have to pay off their but at that level you have no choice because if you don't, then for sure these guys are going to run you over and ride you like a donkey all night"
ten of diamonds ott would of been diabolical
Not for Dwan. He could easily find a fold there once people start blasting off when the flush comes in!
@@Nycblasian hand probably plays out differently
9 of D then T of D on river
River check pros:
- Tom cards are not blocking missed flush and straight draws and on the board both possibility was there (So Peter could easily missed).
- Peter pre flop raise as there was no re-raise lets him to have a wide range, so overpairs are just a 1/5 or 1/4 portion of his range probably and 66, 1010 is definitely in his range too.
- From Peter position with any boat trapping also make sense, so his check action could be a monster or a boat also.
- Peter can also have A4 what beats 49.
- On the turn, after Peter there was one more action, so probably you fold an overpair at this point, but he called, what is at least looks stronger than calling from Steve position.
- If you bet it will be very unlikely that is a bluff as so many things missed on the board, so it is too obvious you have smtg as the board is totally non ideal to find any bluff.
- Peter was not in tilt, he had already an upswing, but yes, he is capable bluff in general.
cons:
- Peter was the pre flop agressor, raiser what makes his range more likely overpairs.
I think checking back the river at least should be hardly considered by Tom Dawn, but here he was already a bit tilted, also prev day he ended up in negative.
On Peter river raise action... folding pros:
- Peter sizing was not bluffish at all.
- bluffing on this board is a terrible idea as nothing get there.
- using the range advantage to have an overpair here not anymore a make sense story as with overpairs everyone would only call, there is no value here only risk.
- Peter was not tilted
- could be also a value bet with A4.
cons:
- the price to take the pot is not much
- Peter is capable for crazy bluffs
So on the river Peter raise action Tom should more likely to fold I believe.
Let's be honest, at this point Tom Dwan is basically a professional bluffcatcher
lmao 🤣
Aiiiii yaaaaa
@@TheMisguidedTroll ai ya!
When I wasn't sure what was going on in the hand, I would have checked back the river. Always better to win a medium pot, than lose a big one.
I wouldve checked the river.
Only thing is, you have a 4 which you think is a trap card. Who would think you'd have a 4? You probably think you're up against a big pair like As or Ks. So why not try to extract more with a value bet?
I think a river check is a bad move with a 4 here. You’re still way ahead of a lot of overpairs, hands like TdXd etc that might call a river bet thinking you’re betting a missed flush draw. There’s still plenty of hands you can get value from. But I think once you get check raised it’s a fold.
yeah of course you check when you know he has TT😂
@@WolfishJew986 For me the key is Peter's call on the Turn multiway on the Turn. - After that, most of his overpairs should release on the River, given how much strength Dwan shows. While we might lose to 1x 64s/ 1x A4s / 3x 66 , and 3x TT. - The possible value we get might actually be very thin.
With trips, on a board where you have serious range advantage, you'd check the river? Id bet all day. You are so far ahead of his range and he hasn't shown much strength.
The River is a fold as played, and frankly, he should have checked back. He is up against either 66 or TT or 64 way too often.
What hand does Dwan think is going to call his River raise, that Dwan beats? 54, 34, 74. It would be weird for any of those hands to be unsuited, so that only leaves Clubs and Hearts.
The missed flush draw is unlikely to call, it will either fold or bet, and because it is VERY easy for Dwan to have a stupid kind of 4 here, and Dwan doesn't like to fold trips, he is literally setting himself up to be in a difficult position, without much upside. Turning your trips into a bluff catcher if there is a check raise, is not a good strategy.
Yep at this point TT is the same as 66.
He is trying to get value from JJ to AA obviously
Are any of those low suited connectors/gappers even in Peter's UTG range? Your 45s 46s 34s ect? Pretty loose out of position like that. Can he have 2 pair that calls? What 2 pair? T2? T6? Not in his range either. He probably doesn't have a single Ten either right? Is AT in that range? OK, maybe JTs, T9s, but that sounds loose from UTG as well. Would he call with just a 10? Maybe you could target that, but it's a small part of his opening range which might not get to the river.
I think he basically has to have a pocket pair. We can rule out kings or aces because there wasn't enough action preflop. 55 77 88 probably fold on the turn when they are just middle pair. I don't think AK is in his range either. Would he float all the way to the river with AK and then check raise as a bluff? Maybe, seems unlikely, but possible I guess. More likely if it was AKs with a nut flush draw. That leaves us with 66 and TT, which both filled up and have us crushed, and the two remaining overpairs which we beat, JJ QQ. Throw in AKs and AQs with flush draws as bluffs.
If that's how we construct Peter's range, Tom is actually getting a pretty good price to call. There's only 2 hands that beat him (12 combos), if we believe Peter would check raise the river with an overpair. If we think he just calls QQ and JJ then I think it's a fold. Tough spot with trips.
Peter could of had pockets jacks and try to get dwan off a 10 ,,, don’t think Peter knew dwan had a 4 ,,, Peter know dwan aggressive so he played aggressive back but with a boat
He gets value from jj-Aa with no diamond in it that has to call , or just get obliterated from dwans bluffs. If you are the other guy and you start folding big pairs there , I mean you are going to be folding way way to much. Muck the ones with no diamonds in them and call the rest. Edit:Wait switch that around. lol. But you get my point.
6:00 And to think, if that 10 was diamonds and not clubs, Durr woulda been able to easily get away. It was basically a one outer for him to lose all that money
Every time I've led out on the river with trips and been reraised I've find myself losing to a full house. My personal experience says fold.
When Peter knocks over his stacks trying to push them in that screams I GOT IT!!!! PLEASE CALL !!
The way Peter played that hand, with early position raises, called raises, and smooth checks, he either was on a nut-flush draw or a full house. Tom is unlikely to get paid off with a busted flush draw, and surely not beating a full house. The smart move for Tom was to check the river, which he would have done against players like Ivey, Negreanu etc. But here he seems to have pegged Peter on a high pair (KKs, or AAs) and hoping to get a huge pay day. That smooth check and raise on the river meant that Tom knew he was beat.
Edit: And yes, I have laid down very strong hands in similar positions more times than I can count, and have only ever been wrong once. That one time when the guy just shoved all-in on the turn on a paired board, I put him on a full-house. Turns out all he had was a bottom pair but had to make an urgent trip to the bathroom...
My entire net worth would have gone up in a bright flash and puff of smoke had I been sitting in Dwan's seat. Which is why I never sit in a game way way bigger than my bankroll.
These guys aren't playing hands bigger than their bankroll. They got the bankroll
Nah bro you would’ve folded the 94. Im not sure what Dwan was trying to do here but it was obviously terrible
@@hammertyme8392 Pretty sure there are sources around saying Dwan has 30 millions in debt and he owes money to a bunch of people... I guess Hellmuth was right back in 2014 when he said Dwan would go busto... (although he said 5 years when in reality it took 10 years)
@@hammertyme8392 You're probably wrong. You don't borrow money from multiple people if you're not playing hands "bigger than your bankroll". Might wanna look up all the recent tweets of poker players Dwan owes hundreds of thousands of dollars to. Seems like he's playing with other people's monies.
Then you should never play poker.
argument for calling is the missed flush draw, argument against calling is the small raise size.
Tom can't undo any of this hand but the call on the river. Any experienced card player knows they have a bluff catch making that call. He decided ultimately that Peter was bluffing. The size is small enough to actually call a bluff; which is a great indicator that it wasn't a bluff. I think honestly I probably make this call in my 2/5 local game and end up paying off a few grand. Tom, because of the insanity did it in a 500/1000 game!
Loving the new chair setup!
This is what happens when you play very low value hands pre flop. Been there, done that.
Yeah but Dwan plays a wide range which helps his image. If he didn’t on these boards he bets they know he doesn’t have a piece of that board. If I played against him and he bets like that Im thinking he hit some bullshit lol
That had nothing to do with it. It’s not like he hit top pair no kicker or the crap end of the straight. Would you consider 45s from the button to be a low value hand? I think it’s GTO approved. That hand would have got you to the same position. Until that Ten hit Dwan basically had the nuts.
Problem with this sort of thinking is just that the overall range become extremely wide of it contains hands like 94s. Those suited connectors make only fairly small amount of hands and they still have way more playability having connectivity.
This could happen whenev if you call a river raise on a paired board tbh. At least with a weird hand, he had an extra blue that his opponent isn't bluffing this board. Too bad he didn't use it. 😆
Sometimes you gotta switch it up...play shitty hands here and there. If and when you catch a fish it'll be a monster!
That river bet by Peter was the stringiest in poker history…more stringy than string beans. ONE FORWARD ACTION.
It’s not if all action is behind the line
One question i have John.. when you and even other poker coaching UA-camrs talk about range betting. Say youre in the cutoff vs UTG. And the board comes out J 8 2 rainbow, are you betting 100 percent of your range 30% of the time or 30% of your range 100% of the time just as a rough example. When you say you should be betting 40% of the time, is that 40% of your preflop range or 40% of the time regardless of your hole cards because the board crushes your range compared to UTG?
Big Fold for me... Durr seems to not be as selfaware as he used to back in the days. It is a really interesting hand.
He dumped his chips in the pot. He’s not bluffing. I fold.
I probably call. I probably would have bet the river. If he's up against an over pair, flush draw or damn near anything else, its the right play. Can't be results oriented. With that said, I'm never in the hand with 4 9 suited.
nah it's very hard for him to find bluffs here, he should turn something like a random 6, T or busted diamond into a bluff witch is crazy to even think
But you'd be in a hand with 45s right, from the button? I think 45s is in the buttons GTO opening range. I don't think that's the problem. He just got coolered here. The board is better for Tom's range as well. The only card that should, and did, hit Peter's range is that 10. Maybe 66 is in his UTG range, but it should mostly be Broadway cards and suited aces. You can see why Tom bet the way he did. Tom was targeting an overpair like JJ and QQ, maybe the less likely slowplayed AA and KK. It's only TT and 66 that have you beat.
@@gesus.christ99he's betting for value here man, targeting an overpair. The bluffs will all bet and not risk it being checked back. The question is would Peter check raise aces, kings or queens on a board like that? He might. It looks pretty inocous and it's unlikely that Tom has a 4. A call here is not crazy.
@@timblizzard4226 he's not raising worst hands for value, stop playing come on😂.
And a call is actually crazy because the opponent is not Malinowski who can find bluffs
there was no way he was bluffing there...
This is why I never enter a pot with crap.
then nobody ever calls u and u get blinded out brah
@@a55tech People call me plenty.
@@NoExitLoveNow ah yes i forgot, they'll call u when they know they got u beat
@@a55tech If all I have is 9 4 they probably do.
Dwan played 5000.000$ omaha pots on full tilt ;) ...that was much more money that time than today
Would Allin from Peter be a bad move?
People saying check the River are doing so from a results-oriented point of view and if somehow they would check River regardless that is way too nitty. Peter will call our bet with Tx of diamonds, overpairs, and even worse 4s like 54, and 43. Sure he’ll have you beat sometimes but by that logic you should check 64 back since he could have 66 or TT still which would be insane. Also Dwan has a super aggressive image so that makes it even more probable a bet will get paid off by plenty of worse hands.
💯. JJ-AA is well in his range too and potentially calling. Plenty of hands that might pay Dwan off. Not betting is nit central.
Not CHECK the river.
BET-FOLD the river.
River raise means "full house". Obvs it's not that simple--but it kinda is here.
@@jdee7940 or 53 of diamonds.
I dnt think i saw peter bluff. 😂😂
would you fold that flushdraw?
It’s like bizarro High Stakes Poker where Durrrr gets wrecked every time 🤣
Ah yes the check raise was the siren's call for Durfur.
I would have checked for sure. It is a really hard fold once he got check-raised
Of course you call. Durr's lifetime ev is very positive in these types of hands. Probably 6 or more times out of 10 such hands his opponent has jacks or better.
Dwans sizing throughout the hand look like a 4 but pretty committed but after getting check raised its looks incredibly strong. I’d maybe find a fold but if I’m Durrr who seems to have infinite backers/loans I call
I would have been scared of the 3-5 suited, and it would've matched up to Peter checking
This hand has a lot to consider. First of all Peter is the original raiser to $4K and Steve Durr and Charlie just call so a little over $20K preflop. The fact that there is no 3-bet makes it possible for Peter to have big pairs as well as big cards and also medium pairs and suited connectors so little is really known about his range other than he is the raiser.
Bingo. Given how the action went, why can’t Peter have aces or kings at the river? That board looks good for jacks and queens as well; all undercards, no flushes or straits and trip 4s is statistically unlikely. Couldn’t Peter play queens like this?
After all the calls check back was probably the smart thing
It's hard depends on the player would probably fold to a tight player but generally I don't think I could put him on 66 or 1010. I would most likely make the call
On the one hand, check-raise bluffs on the river are probably not done frequently enough to call. On the other hand, there are very few hands we are losing to. I wouldn't expect Peter to show up with many 4x hands since he raised UTG. There is literally only A4 of clubs, maybe 34 or 45 of clubs, but I wouldn't expect that very often. The hands we lose to are 66/TT, and he can have both of those hands. We beat everything else but how often does Peter get sticky with like JJ-AA and c/r them on the river?
I really don't know, we barreled three times here, we are saying we have 4x. People might argue because of Dwan's image people do stupid stuff against him and this might be a bluff. But Peter would literally need to be check-raise bluffing with absolutely nothing on the river because I think if he believes Tom is bluffing, it would be a call with hands like JJ-AA.
This is a really, really tough spot and I'm sure the GTO robots would say if you fold you are getting exploited. But I think in this spot, I don't think folding is terrible and neither is calling. It's possible Peter turns the nut flush draw into a bluff, it's just that I don't think he gets there that often, especially after calling the turn bet. It looks like a fold to me, with some merit calling because he could have some missed nut flush draws (which I think is unlikely).
Do you think it ever makes sense for Peter to Donk bet this River?
On a paired table that's 100% a fold, more often than not probably the guy will have a full house
Peter with pp10's is the initial raiser. Tom Dwan with 94 at the river has the 12th best hand possible (gets beat by pp10's, pp6's, pp2's, 10 4, 6 4, 5 3, and 4 2, as well as A4, K4, Q4, and J4). Out of all those, only pp10's seems the likeliest. Can't believe he called.
you know for pocket pairs you can just write it like TT, 66, 22, T4, 64, 53, 42, etc
None of those are in the UTG range so you can rule all of them out. Basically there are only 2 hands that beat Tom, 66 and TT. Everything else folds pre-flop or to later bets. Tom beats all of the over pairs and the very, very unlikely 2 pair. Peter can absolutely show up with slow-played kings or aces here, even QQ and JJ makes sense. Tom beats all of that. If you understand what an UTG range looks like call makes sense here.
99% no 2-4 or 3-5 there
I would have folded assuming Peter has at least also a 4 with a better kicker. But I wouldn’t bluff for such stakes like Tom can and knows his adversaries at this level would from time to time.
Seems like a pretty easy fold in most games as most players don’t bluff raise enough. In this particular game, I wouldn’t have an idea, as I don’t know how he plays.
I think, mathematically you are supposed to call, but it would depend on the opponent. If they are tight, fold, if lose, call sometimes fold others, because there arent that many bluffs.
I would make up my mind before i bet the river. If im going to fold to a raise, then i just check.
I always play 9 4 when I join million dollar games.
I would fold. There are only two options for Peter's raise - he is value betting, which (given the board) means he must have a straight or far more likely a boat, or he is bluffing. If he IS bluffing, the raise size doesn't make sense; its not going to get any big hand to fold. If he was going to try a bluff, given he covers Tom he would shove. So if he is bluffing it's a super creative, post-oak bluff with a missed flush draw. And frankly, given the size of the pot and the action to date that seems extremely UN likely.
I think Peter should have shoved. Maybe he loses a little value against a weaker hand, but if Tom had a marginal hand (like an overpair) he wouldn't bet the river., and if Tom is bluffing he wont call anything anyway. A shove increases the chance it will be seen as a bluff.
💯 on this too. Because Dwans hand is polarized too. You want to make your hand as polarized as possible. Check-raise shove was clear play.
How is that EVER a bleff?? 😅
Jonathan, In effect, Tom is getting almost 3.3 to 1. Is three of a kind good here 1 out of 3 times? If it is then Peter is saying that he wants Tom to call. Tom is assuming this is a failed flush draw turned into a bluff or an inferior pair. Why would he assume this? Why would he not assume that his opponent improved to three of a kind making a flush. Why would he assume Peter is bluffing or is he assuming that Peter assumes that Tom has nothing? Insights, Jonathan?
Honestly, if you’re gonna play 94 pre-flop you deserve what you get. It always works until it doesn’t.
what is a million between friends?
I'd like to think I'd fold but id probably call
That dude hit everything
I’ve seen Dwan win big pots, couple over 1m. What goes around comes around. But then I wouldn’t have played 9-4. Tough to fold, had the same situation and the other guy turned a boat.
Peter and Santosh were the big fish last year. This year they took the pros' lunch money.
Did Peter ever bluff the river that entire week? If he did, I missed it. Every big pot river bet was for value.
Fast forward to this week and he's doing his best to give it all away.
Absolutely Crushed Pre Flop, teach you to play 9 \4 , but its suited! Suited = only a tiny additional 2%!
pot-odds seems to be very big, there're AA-JJ plus busted draws at least, but the size of check-raise on river is too sus
Steve poker reads 101 like buddy shots up to the front of the table when the diamonds hit .. realized then straight back arms crossed ..I miss Joe Navarro
I'm still in the tank , i just wonder what pete had tom on ?,
Durr did nothing wrong in this hand. Peter did do a good job disguising his strength, nevertheless it's a hideous turn. And it's one of literally 10 hands where Peter not only binked but it also strengthened opponents equity to where it was bad beat after bad beat.
Sometimes, you just have to write the check.
dont know the player but against a random opponent i would call here, too. wouldnt assume 66 in the range anymore and id lean towards full house/overpair/missed draw, and with these pot odds id call.
And people saying uh i wouldnt play 94 imagine he had A4s, what then?
I would call also...and found out the exact same way. Who would put Tom on trip 4's?? Had that been a 9 on the Turn instead of the 10 it would've went horrifically the other way.
I had to fast forward alot because Tom usually takes 2.5 weeks to make a decision 😅
I think i'll always be results oriented. I don't play professonally, I always deviate from GTO strategy depending on player types. So why wouldn't I be results oriented per hand also??
This guy catched every card he needed this cash game. It's a proof that luck > skill in poker.
67% call, 33% fold. I would’ve been racked and mentally corrupted🤕
I believe I would have checked back river and not gotten in that spot.
fold because I would lose to so many hands... 22, T4, J4, Q4, K4, A4, 66, TT. Imagine seeing 53o from your opponent after going all in with a 4...
I would’ve snap checked on the river because I know I couldn’t handle a check-raise
Perhaps Dwan is guilty here of not thinking about the player. Does Peter bluff raise enough in this spot? Maybe but very few do. Why not bet larger , which may induce Peter to raise larger thus making bet fold an easier decision?
For that price, it’s a call
Normally i would argue that je might have some natural bluffs in there, but since that third guy acted so obviously like He would draw to some Kind of Flash, I would fold just because of that show this third guy in the Hand was producing after calling the Raise on the flop. To offen it is Ax dd and thus blocking the most natural Bluffs of Peter. No worse Hand than Trips 4 is raising there, so i definirely Fold because of that live read
Some how when i have trips always someone has a full house so i just fold them easily
Easy to say with all the time and nothing on the line, but the only 2 hands he does that with are 66 or TT. That said, I’m not sure I would’ve gotten there in that spot so I’ll say I would’ve called too.
It seems Hook has an interesting problem on the flop. On the one hand, he's open-ended and they are HELLA deep. Jonathan calls it a "junky draw". You're so deep that I see merit in continuing, but of course 2/8 outs are dirty due to them being diamonds, and then you have awful reverse implied odds if somebody has pocket 6s, or if the board pairs, or somebody has an overpair that they hit.
What's the general strategic advice when you're deep and have such awesome implied odds, but also potentially nasty reverse implied odds? It sounds like the fold was the correct play (and of course given how the hand played out, I'm sure it was the right play here).
I don't have enough experience to really evaluate the decision matrix.
I like to think I would fold, but I’ve never played for higher than $1 anty 😅
Three words - Reverse Implied Odds. That hand should have been folded pre-flop.
I find it odd that raises are shown which include the previous raise. As a non player, I find that confusing and it actually confused Tom as well. The dealer should state, "raise of 258K" or "258K to call". Because the raise is NOT 425K which the graphic also shows.
The graphic is correct. Peter has committed $425k to the pot. Durr has committed $167k to the pot. He owes $258k to call, which is also displayed on the graphic. Durr gets confused because the dealer says "425 large" and Durr heard "425 more" which is quickly clarified.
@@HolySpicoli What do you mean Peter has committed 425K to the pot. What does the word committed mean in this context? Some of that Pot is Tom's money. The graphic says raise to $425K. What it means is that the pot has been increased to 425K. The word raise is being used in two ways. That is confusing as you need to do the math for yourself. It isn't until I look at how much Tom has to call do I know how much the raise was without doing the math and also remembering how much the previous bet was. I actually need to remember to subtract 167 from 425 to learn that the actual raise is 258 or look at how much Tom needs to call. I get that this is the way it is done. But the fact that a smart guy like me had to figure out what the raise actually was means it could be clearer. No where in the graphic does it say what the raise actually was using the word "raise".
Easiest fold ever bc we know Peter isn’t doing that with a missed draw. You’re basically dead to any other 4X, and a lot of full houses have arrived by the river. Fold the 94s
Agreed. As played this is a pretty standard fold imo. You got all the information you need to tell you your hand is no good anymore.
I would consider calling the raise with any made full house... and MAYBE A4 against certain spazzy opponents. A weak 4 just isn't going to cut it.
Surely bet fold river is sensible fromDwan. What can be beat. Peter didnt raise at any point prior to this so does that reduce his chances of having a busted flush draw. Dwan cannot beat T4 J4 Q4 K4 and A4 (the last is quite possible). TT . He does beat JJ-AA but would they be played like Peter played this preflop?
It would take me 3 times as long to make a decision, and it would prolly be fold, I’m a TAG but idk if I’m THAT aggressive lol
There's only 3 scenarios Tom can guess which are Ace-4 of diamonds, or pair of 6 or pair of 10. But Peter checked all the way down to the river. so that's all she wrote
I don't understand what Durrr is targetting on the river, what is Peter calling 76K on the turn that would pay him off on the river, I can only think of 5, 4, the missed draws aren't paying him and certainly poket sixes and tens are a possibility as is A4 clubs or heart.
I'd fold just based on the way he put his chips in 😂
I check behind regardless to avoid being c/r with a missed draw. You don’t get paid if the draw misses, so why bother. Yeah I know, can sometimes get the extra cash catching bluffs, but that’s how I’ve played for about the last 10 yrs.
I call 89% of the time and fold the other 11%. Trip 4s is strong, but definitely losing to value hands in Villain's range, though bluffs are rife in this runout.
Peter effectively hits a 1 outer to stack Tom
I fold but I also play at levels where a river check raise is pocket quints
Did anyone ask Dwan what he thought he was beating there?
It wouldnt of been an issue for me in his spot coz I wouldn't be there with 94s! 😀
The river brings a brick so Peter now checks. For those saying that Dean should check they are ofc dead wrong. Peter can have over pairs and possibly ace-10 suited but obv he can also have sixes and pocket tens but could also have a busted diamond draw so Durr has to bet. Once he gets raised you have to take into consideration what type of raise it is and whether or not Peter is capable of bluffing in this spot with this action. None of us have played against Peter and I believe Dwan has but probably not enough to know if he is or isn’t capable of bluffing here. That being said the size of the raise(to me) screams a value raise so I would have folded but I can’t fault Durr bc he may have more knowledge as to Peter’s capabilities as to bluffing or value owning himself.
Well, the first problem is his playing 94. Its literally just slightly better than 7 deuce.
9-4H was a fold preflop. Not being results oriented, I would fold here because of the weak kicker. If I had A-4H I would probably find a call. Maybe I'm just a fish.
I love it when I see players get PROPERLY PUNISHED for playing crap like 94 suited!,
I would neither call or fold. I would go allin!! I have twips!!
I probably would have called too.
And that is why you fold the 94 on the button after a raise and a cold call...
Call
When you play garbage hands😂😂
the video title is a spoiler