NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 Paul Phillips always has some interesting posts. FCP.com and his website are the only poker related forums I keep up with.Here is his latest post, in which I complety agree with. What do you guys think?http://extempore.livejournal.com/110018.html Link to post Share on other sites
Lavitz 0 Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 That is an interesting perspective and I understand where he is coming from. I saw that hand and the hand where the guy laid down the set. However, we actually did see the dude lay down the set which is just as unlikely as the 1010 lay down. I was more astounded by the 1010 lay down actually, the only hand that had him beat was a higher set or QK, yes both were possible but that was still a no brainer call/push. Therefore I believe it's very possible he laid down 1010. Link to post Share on other sites
AlexR 0 Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 I'd believe it if Jeff Lisandro came out and said he didn't have the tens, but I am not just going to blindly believe Paul Phillips. Link to post Share on other sites
NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 I'd believe it if Jeff Lisandro came out and said he didn't have the tens, but I am not just going to blindly believe Paul Phillips.I wouldn't blindly believe anyone, but Paul is an anlitical thinker and what he says makes perfect sense. Go back to his blog and click on the hyperlink(past efforts to expose it) and read the the Tony D simulation. It's both hilarious and disturbing at the same time. Link to post Share on other sites
breiten19 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I have to believe they made that up, I had forgotten that that was the hand where they couldn't actually see the cards. I see absolutely no way that Lisandro can believe he is actually fold in that spot. The way lisandro thought about it, I would guess maybe A-10 on a board where Ace high looks good. (and lisandro is not as dumb as the guy who laid down 3 tens..."Man, you did not lay down three tens") Link to post Share on other sites
NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 I have to believe they made that up, I had forgotten that that was the hand where they couldn't actually see the cards. I see absolutely no way that Lisandro can believe he is actually fold in that spot. The way lisandro thought about it, I would guess maybe A-10 on a board where Ace high looks good. (and lisandro is not as dumb as the guy who laid down 3 tens..."Man, you did not lay down three tens")I agree...there is NO WAY he lays pocket tens down there. NO WAY. Link to post Share on other sites
sketchy1 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 ok first of all, paul has made claim that they have faked hole cards before. they didn't necessarily "fake" them in the AK (scotty nguyen) v KK (another guy i can't remember) on the Kxx board in 2003 WSOP, because that was a non-feature table. same goes for dutch QQ v other guy i can't remember A7. that could have easily been "hey dutch what did you have" and they just go with their word--which is an absurd way to go about broadcast journalism to say the least.second, the tony d hand is likely to have been faked (if you read his analysis) but it could have simply been tony thinking that there's no way that hellmuth will raise him there without Jx where x is greater than his T kicker, or a full house.however, THIS HAND is definitely evidence to me they are making up hole cards. i didn't see the actual cards, so there's a very good possibility this was faked as well. for lisandro to fold, he has to believe ivey has a 4, JJ, QQ, KK or AA.let's think about this logically. ivey isn't the type of player to slowplay a big hand like that, even with position. i'm not putting it past him, but his tendencies of aggressive play call for playing big hands the same way he plays crap--fast. he will re-raise you all day with junk if he thinks you'll fold, and he opens a lot of pots with junk as well. therefore, typically an aggressive player, even with position, will play aces the same way he plays JT. there's little chance ivey is slowplaying, is what i'm saying.lisandro just can't fold TT on that board with as much as he had invested and what he knows about ivey. in fact, if i was lisandro and i lead at that flop and was called, i would check right to ivey because i would think he either A) has an underpair or B) is looking to steal the pot on the turn. i would check with the intention of putting ivey all-in, or possibly do what he did, which is a weak lead with the intention of calling an all-in. for him to lead a little weak and then fold, he almost definitely had to have held AT. Link to post Share on other sites
kevo 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 is t that true that they're just gonna show one hour of the main event? they showed two hours of that first circuit event. tv poker sux anyways Link to post Share on other sites
wildspoke 2 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 So what. It's TV.I wouldn't put it past them but their objective is entertainment. In fact, if you think about it, they're just like poker players.They lie too. Link to post Share on other sites
PokerFan 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I to felt the hand, full house vs full house was strange and I certainly feel ESPN edit's things to make better tv. An example is 2004 Main Event Raymer vs Williams heads up the last hand. Raymer said in his commentary that when the river card was dealt and Raymer called "All-in" he said Williams calls immediatly, however on the espn episode it appears Williams takes several seconds/moments to call, creating a more dramatic finish....this had nothing to do with the outcome of course however it does distort the facts of the event.. Link to post Share on other sites
NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 Now, that this has been brought to my attention it really makes me dislike TV poker even more.I e-mailed Paul Phillips a while ago about ESPN missing out on, probably millions not showing the small events and for sure the main event on pay per view. World Poker Tour as well. He agreed with my thoughts on that and I would hyperlink you back to that post but for some reason I can't figure out how to do it on this site.My point is that for the serious poker player who really wants to improve there game this would be so helpful. The two most exciting TV tournaments for me, were The Turning Stone Live Event and The Full Tilt Poker Live Event at the Wynn. I learned more from watching these tournaments than any WSOP of WPT show. Relating to Paul's post, they are not only cramming a 12 hour final table with commercials, commentary, and interviews into one hour, they are occasionally showing us false information. This just sucks!I understand that ESPN is not worried about improving my poker game by showing every hand. Although, isn't a 4 to 10 hour final table like Tourning Stone or Full Tilt more money because of advertising, or wouldn't you guys think lots of people would pony up $30 to $40 to watch a Pay Per View event? They could still show the same event 3 months later like they do now and still get close to the same ratings. Just like HBO makes a ton of money on Pay Per View Boxing and still runs it for free a week later! They still screwed up a players holdings on the Full Tilt Poker Live Event when they showed Clonie Gowen folding pocket Queens to just an opening raise. Luckily Howard Lederer was there to say that there was no way she had pocket queens there and folded. So it will never be perfect, but they either need to get to Live events, Pay Per View Events, or longer showings of final tables (at least 4 hours of play). They can show every single point,game, and set when Andy Roddick is playing in a opening round in a small tournament in Washington D.C. that will last 3 hours sometimes but can't do it for a final table of a major event in Poker. Link to post Share on other sites
case ace 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. i would be AMAZED if tv poker did that. they would eventually get caught red handed and lose all creditbiltity. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by doing this. I mean they're already taking 15 hours of poker and putting it into 44 minutes; i'm sure they could find other interesting legit hands in that frame.PS, in other news, paul phillips is nucking futs Link to post Share on other sites
NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. Â i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. Â i would be AMAZED if tv poker did that. Â they would eventually get caught red handed and lose all creditbiltity. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by doing this. Â I mean they're already taking 15 hours of poker and putting it into 44 minutes; i'm sure they could find other interesting legit hands in that frame.PS, in other news, paul phillips is nucking futsWhy would they lose there credibility? What would they get red handed with? I don't understand...please explain. Link to post Share on other sites
bleacherbum3 9 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I never really thought about ESPN faking the hole cards until reading Phillips' post. I will admit while watching on Tuesday I didn't know the final results and as soon as Ivey went all-in with the nines, I was like "Oh crap, Ivey's out of a TV final table early again". It's really hard to believe Lissandro had 10-10 , I could see Jeff thinking his ace was good till the all-in, then he figured out Ivey had pocket pair. Link to post Share on other sites
bleacherbum3 9 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 is t that true that they're just gonna show one hour of the main event? they showed two hours of that first circuit event. tv poker sux anywaysI'm pretty sure they'll break down the main event into about 10 hours of ESPN TV. They'll have to spend an hour on each of the 3 "first days". Link to post Share on other sites
case ace 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. Â i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. Â i would be AMAZED if tv poker made up hole cards. Â they would eventually get caught red handed and lose all creditbiltity creating less ratings. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by faking hole cards. Â I mean they're already taking 15 hours of poker and putting it into 44 minutes; i'm sure they could find other interesting legit hands in that frame.PS, in other news, paul phillips is nucking futsWhy would they lose there credibility? What would they get red handed with? I don't understand...please explain.I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. i would be AMAZED if tv poker made up hole cards. they would eventually get caught red handed by the players and lose all creditbiltity creating less ratings. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by faking hole cards.ps, aren;t you the op? huh? Link to post Share on other sites
NEXTLEVEL 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. Â i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. Â i would be AMAZED if tv poker made up hole cards. Â they would eventually get caught red handed and lose all creditbiltity creating less ratings. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by faking hole cards. Â I mean they're already taking 15 hours of poker and putting it into 44 minutes; i'm sure they could find other interesting legit hands in that frame.PS, in other news, paul phillips is nucking futsWhy would they lose there credibility? What would they get red handed with? I don't understand...please explain.I LOVE TV POKER, but it is still boring, and i watch it cause i love poker. i think everyone watch's it because of that, not cause vince van patten is exciting. i would be AMAZED if tv poker made up hole cards. they would eventually get caught red handed by the players and lose all creditbiltity creating less ratings. they have alot more to lose than they have to gain by faking hole cards.ps, aren;t you the op? huh?Ok, I see what your saying now. Yeah I don't think they would do this in the majority of the hands because players would speak out, but isn't even the obvious times they have dont it questionalbe already? Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Blonde 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 When I first started reading this stuff about faked hands, I thought the posters were nuts. But the more I read abput this hand, and about ESPN's past history, I have to think the hand was faked. This reminds me of a hand in 2003 where the player actually had his cards face up at the final table and they had his hand wrong.Does Lisandro have a website?Does anyone think a barrage of emails to ESPN would do any good? Link to post Share on other sites
murmar 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 When you say Paul is nucking futs, what do you mean? (Not the letters being reversed; is he a little over enthusiastic for you or what?) Link to post Share on other sites
blinky 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 that reminds me of a hand in the 2003 main event, where one guy had pocket aces, the other guy had AK, king hit the flop, all the money went in, and they showed the AK guy as having a 24% (IIRC) chance of winning.there was no flush draw or straight draw or anything, he had 2 outs only... Link to post Share on other sites
happyjuggler0 0 Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 To say it as a fact without talking to Lisandro is a bit preumptuous. Paul (the other Phil) Phillips likes to stir controversy. This does not mean his "read" is wrong of course.One other explanation is that his gut told him that Ivey thought that he (Ivey) had a strong hand. If so, his gut was right, although his strong hand was not as good as Lisandro's strong hand. While it may not be too plausible that someone could get a tell on someone like Ivey, it is plausible that a "feel player" might feel like he "just knows".Lord knows that the vast majority of the time that my gut tells me my opponent has it but my head says I have the right pot odds to call, my gut is right and I wish I hadn't called. I'm getting better at it but I still don't seem to trust my gut enough. But Lisandro is a pro, and probably has a better sense of when to trust his gut than I do. :shock: Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now