phil helmuth hand of the week

[bourbenz 0]

I read this article on card player and got a huge kick out of it.card player articleIf any one saw this tournament phil got his ass handed too him the j9 vs j7 hand was brilliant, phil played this hand terribly, and acts like he played it perfect.he bet top pair with j9 hoyt corkins raises him on a bluff with j7 he smooth calls, turn card hoyt lands a 7 they both check gives a free card hoyt lands a set.no offense but when was it good poker to slow play one pair of 9s with a jack kicker, and give 2 free cards, I dont care if the guy has 29 os by letting him see the turn and river with out charging you are asking to lose.so what am I missing here?

[Suited_Up 2]

I didn't read the article but I remember the hand... It was hilarious.I guess the raise scared him, so he backed off.... not sure what I'd do either, but Hoyt got lucky, and Phil misplayed. I would figure if he actually had the instincts he thinks he does, he would have realized the re-raise was just a play back at him because hoyt figured he missed that flop. Then he would've bet out again. Maybe he wanted to CR the turn and missed his chance. Who knows... I don't like backing up Hellmuth... I just enjoyed laughing at it when he lost there.

[KDawgCometh 2]

Phil played almost every hand real cute in that tourny. With the J9 hand if he just bet the turn hoyt would've folded, instead he tried playing it "perfectly" and got nailed when it didn't work out. On the hand where he caught trip Kings he didn't bet when he had the best hand. Hoyt only bet that hand when he was ahead

[blakalicious 0]

this has no relevance to the post at hand... buuut i noticed suited_up's post count was at 666... and that sort of thing only happens once in a forum junkies carrer

[Suited_Up 2]

this has no relevance to the post at hand... buuut i noticed suited_up's post count was at 666... and that sort of thing only happens once in a forum junkies carrer

Yeah, I made a comment somewhere about it... it was like 5 minutes ago though so I don't remember! Now it's 669... pretty cool too.

[Guest XXEddie]

I love it when phil goes on tilt.....good TV

[uahphysics 0]

I just don't understand how Phil could have played it differently, I mean, you bet top pair, then get re-raised, I mean, hoyt could have anything, two pair, Ace 9, King 9, Queen 9, low pocket pair for a set, I think Phil's check on the turn was a good move, I mean, if Hoyt bets again, then Phil can either get away from the hand or he can come over the top, I mean...Please correct me if I'm wrong or a bad player, but if I have top pair and get re-raised, I'm gonna have to put some effort into figuring out what my opponent has. Knowing Hoyt as an aggressive player, if Phil bets the river, and Hoyt comes over the op again, then Phil knows even less about what Hoyt has, just my opinion

[bourbenz 0]

I just don't understand how Phil could have played it differently, I mean, you bet top pair, then get re-raised, I mean, hoyt could have anything, two pair, Ace 9, King 9, Queen 9, low pocket pair for a set, I think Phil's check on the turn was a good move, I mean, if Hoyt bets again, then Phil can either get away from the hand or he can come over the top, I mean...Please correct me if I'm wrong or a bad player, but if I have top pair and get re-raised, I'm gonna have to put some effort into figuring out what my opponent has. Knowing Hoyt as an aggressive player, if Phil bets the river, and Hoyt comes over the op again, then Phil knows even less about what Hoyt has, just my opinion

if you read the article phil says he knew hoyt had nothing , which if nothing else warants a reraise on the flop and definately a bet on the turn, if he thought he was behind then he shouldnt have bet the river , because it was obviously no help to him.

[piki 0]

Silly Phil. Just watched the tape today. He really made some suboptimal moves, seems to me he tried to trap and slowplay too much and got punished for it. And didn't handle it too well. I almost heard him screaming: "It's rigged! Rigged, I tell you, they don't want me to win!"

[JFarrell20 1]

Coyt plays Phil so well. I remember this show, Coyt murdered Sir Phillip.I know his name is Hoyt Corkins. I also call Gus Hansen "Sug". No idea why. He looks like a "Sug".EDIT: After reading his article, and tapping into his "reasoning", I think I could kill Phil in a heads-up NL match. His reasoning is just plain awful. I do agree with his moving in with A6, but jeez, this guy is delusional! He's not that good!!!

[711Buddha 0]

Hoyt caught the only two cards that could beat Phil. It was a fluke.

[brando 0]

Coyt plays Phil so well. I remember this show, Coyt murdered Sir Phillip.I know his name is Hoyt Corkins. I also call Gus Hansen "Sug". No idea why. He looks like a "Sug".EDIT: After reading his article, and tapping into his "reasoning", I think I could kill Phil in a heads-up NL match. His reasoning is just plain awful. I do agree with his moving in with A6, but jeez, this guy is delusional! He's not that good!!!

Not really trying to flame, but HA HA HA HAand who are you?

[SportsW234 0]

Though I don't think Phil played the hand as well he thought he did, I think too many people have given Phil flack on how he played it. Phil limped from the small blind and Hoyt checked in the big blind. Now Hoyt will raise with any pair, any Ace with kicked of 9 or higher, KQ, KJ, K10, and maybe QJ and Q10. Hoyt consistantly used his position on Phil and go over the top on him. Phil floped top pair with a good kicker. The only hand Phil really had to worry about is an odd two pair or K9 or Q9. The check on the I bet was more of a safety check on the turn was more of a safety check than anything else. When Hoyt checked behind Phil, Phil rightly bet the river. His call of Hoyt's raise can be argued as bad. Phil's reaction is understandable because he suffered 989 to 1 beat.

[Funkii 0]

not a 989:1 beat, since there were 3 7s in the deck.

[Guest XXEddie]

Hoyt caught the only two cards that could beat Phil. It was a fluke.

no because there were three sevens. and I beleive he also had a runner runner str8 draw

[KDawgCometh 2]

I admit the beat was obviously rough, but if phil had reraised hoyt on the flop or bet out big on the turn hoyt would've folded, he even said that to phil after the hand.

[augmented 0]

i think that phil played the hand okay, but he should not be as upset as he was. there was pretty much no reason not to bet the turn there. phil thought he could trap Hoyt with just top pair of nines. the problem with this is that if a king, queen, or ten hits the river, Hoyt could easily win the hand if he had like Q6 in the big and checked it. i mean phil definitely had a good read on the hand, but i bet he did not think that Hoyt had J7. if he was positive Hoyt literally had J7, i would credit him for a really good trap that blew up on him. but Phil can't possibly assume Hoyt is drawing to 2 outs, so he should bet the turn, at least for value if nothing else. Hoyt was gonna call with sevens at least, so he might as well get more money out of it.phil didnt play it terribly, but he didnt play it great either. that thing just happens sometimes. i guess he was just pissed off that Hoyt had been raising and beating Phil to every pot. hes such a girl

[KDawgCometh 2]

phil's main problem is that he tries to trap too much. Phil is an excellent player, but he tries too hard too much of the time. He is obssesed with making the perfect play when maybe the most basic play is the best. Phil should be able to win tournies several times a year but has been dry for a while now. I know that a tournament player can go two years without a big win, but I really think that unless Phil stops trying so hard to play perfectly it might be longer than that for him. I have no clue as to what adjustments he needs to make, only he and those close to him would have any idea, but he does need to change something up. Maybe he just needs to cool it on the bad beats because I think that that makes many people want to take dumb shots at him, who knows

[JFarrell20 1]

Coyt plays Phil so well. I remember this show, Coyt murdered Sir Phillip.I know his name is Hoyt Corkins. I also call Gus Hansen "Sug". No idea why. He looks like a "Sug".EDIT: After reading his article, and tapping into his "reasoning", I think I could kill Phil in a heads-up NL match. His reasoning is just plain awful. I do agree with his moving in with A6, but jeez, this guy is delusional! He's not that good!!!

Not really trying to flame, but HA HA HA HAand who are you?

I'll go up against Hellmuth anyday. As long as I'm staked, because I cannot afford to play at his level. You really think Hellmuth is that good??? He hasn't performed at a top-notch level in a loong time. He's good; not great anymore. Why do you think he's trying to sell books now?! He can't play!!

[uahphysics 0]

Coyt plays Phil so well. I remember this show, Coyt murdered Sir Phillip.I know his name is Hoyt Corkins. I also call Gus Hansen "Sug". No idea why. He looks like a "Sug".EDIT: After reading his article, and tapping into his "reasoning", I think I could kill Phil in a heads-up NL match. His reasoning is just plain awful. I do agree with his moving in with A6, but jeez, this guy is delusional! He's not that good!!!

Not really trying to flame, but HA HA HA HAand who are you?

I'll go up against Hellmuth anyday. As long as I'm staked, because I cannot afford to play at his level. You really think Hellmuth is that good??? He hasn't performed at a top-notch level in a loong time. He's good; not great anymore. Why do you think he's trying to sell books now?! He can't play!!

he won two bracelets and made a final table in the 2003 world series....I'd consider that pretty recent success....but I mean, if you're so great, you should probably go ahead and win your WSOP online qualifier then head out there and win the main event, it shouldn't be that hard right? :wink:

[SportsW234 0]

I agree with the argument that Phil traps a little too much especially against very agressive players like Hoyt and Toto. Sometimes you have to protect your hand.

[MikeR 0]

You really think Hellmuth is that good??? He hasn't performed at a top-notch level in a loong time. He's good; not great anymore. Why do you think he's trying to sell books now?! He can't play!!

He won 2 bracelets in the 2003 WSOP.

[fluxer 0]

Oh my god, I don't play back at my oponent and he wins every hand! When I finally get a hand, not only do I not bet, I allow my oponent to make his hand and then pay him off! How unlucky of me, I play perfectly!

[jack24bauer24 0]

Phil played the hand correctly...if anything other than the 7 comes off on the river, Hoyt bets when Phil checks, and Phil gets paid off. Its easy to say Phil misplayed the hand when Hoyt goes absolute miracle miracle to win the pot. Phil knew that if he checked the turn he was going to get a big bet from Hoyt, either on the turn or the river.As for saying that Phil could have reraised hoyt on the flop, well the way Hoyt plays he easily could have just gone all in making it nearly impossible for Phil to call. Fact of the matter is, Hoyt went perfect perfect to win the pot.

[Hutch 0]

Hey, this is my first post on Fullcontactpoker.com and its not going to be a long one. First off, Jfarrell20, you dont seem to know a whole lot about poker or recent poker histort for that matter, so I find your clain that you could beat Phil to be slightly on the impossible side. Phil Helmuth is a PROFESSIONAL poker player. He has seen more hands this year than you will most likely see in your entire life. While I don't think Phil made the right move on this particular play, he didn't necessarily make a poor one. He limped in With J-9 in the small blind and hoyt just checked, not giving Phil any information on what he had. When Phil raised to test the waters and Hoyt reraised, Phil was a little scared, which is why he hesitated to raise when the 7 came down on the turn. When a second 7 came down on the river, how could you expect him to read that Hoyt had caught a set? It was an OK move to bet the river, however, allready showing weakness by checking the turn, I would have been hesitant to make a bet in this situation. Now, to make things interesting, Hoyt raises Phil over the top. I think Phil let his ego get in the way here in calling this re-raise, but it wasnt a bad call. Phill could have been beat many ways in this situation, and I think he should have just laid it down and kept his money in his stack. Helmuth is a far greater playern than Hoyt Corkins, and barring some running card phenomenon, Phil would have taken Hoyt Corkins down in the championship style I've grown accustumed to seeing him play.