I doubt Daniel had 32 OR AA

[sxz18 0]

Hi everyone, I'm new to this forum. I usually just read what people write but this hand, I had to sign up and give my thoughts on. I usually post on Cardplayer.com.Given all the information in Daniel's post, I doubt he had 32 suited nor rockets...here's why...With Johnny Chan in BB, Daniel is smart enough to respect his play. I highly doubt Daniel would risk $55k in chips just to buy the blinds with 32 suited especially with someone like Chan in BB, who is well aware of blind stealing.As for rockets, I would think Daniel wants action when he gets those kinds of hands. I can see him raising small or an inordinate amount to try to instigate action. However, 55k just doesn't feel like rockets to me. If Daniel really had rockets, he would have played the later streets differently.I personally think the only two possible hands Daniel had was A3 or deuces, with the latter to be more likely. The preflop raise suits deuces perfectly, a little higher than normal to buy the blinds, easy to fold if reraised, and if called, able to represent a legitimate hand. With the flop coming 3 3 2, Daniel has to be doing cartwheels in his mind. The flop bet was $12k, a standard raise. It could be interpreted by Chan as a standard bet for information. This would allow Chan to come along for the ride.Now the turn is when it gets juicy. Chan bets out, Daniel raises with his full house and Chan reraises, BUT not all-in! Chan has got to think he has the nuts, but he does not reraise all-in. Given all this information, I would think Chan can only have two hands: A3 or 88. Daniel was probably thrown off a little bit by the small inordinate reraise. On the river, Daniel could have given up on the hand and put Chan on pocket 8s, but I think part of Daniel wasn't quite sure if Chan had pocket 8s or A3. Daniel never wrote in his post that he "went into the tank" which I think means he called pretty fast and easily. With deuces, the only POSSIBLE hand that has him beat is 88 (33 is very unlikely and 99 is equally so due to action on the turn).After reviewing his play over and over again, I think Daniel had to have deuces and Chan either had 88, overpair, or A3. However, I doubt Chan would have played his hand the way he did on the turn with an overpair. Therefore, 88 or A3 are the only possibilities. Tough luck on Daniel's part, I think it was a coinflip call.

[pfelon 0]

I'm inclined to agree that he had deuces and put Chan on a three. Daniel would not call off that many chips at the end without having a full house, and his betting on the flop shows his tendency to bleed chips off his opponents when he hits a hand.

[bigedjr17 0]

There's a thread already made (2 of them actually) about this. Let's try and keep it organized fellas

[sxz18 0]

I realize there are already two threads on this topic. However, both threads are posting on different views of the hand. One thread believes Daniel held rockets or A3. Another thread believes Daniel held 32 suited. This thread was started because I believe Daniel held none of the hands from above. I think this helps keep the forum organized because there are three different posts with three different views

[grass Da 55 0]

judging from the way the hand went down, negreanu musta had ace-8 or king-8. he musta tought johnny was making a move on him w/ 2 overs and when johnny reraised him he probably put johnny on the same strenght in hands.hope we get an answer soon. ( can't predict my style if i don't have one ) Grass Da 55

[grass Da 55 0]

if u think negreanu called w/ a full house, i'm 100% possitive that u are wrong. not just wrong but on the wrong side of the track. hehe( can't always be right but u can always be wrong ) Grass Da 55

[offmandh 0]

He had 10-10 or J-J. That's why he was frustrated. He wouldn't have been frustrated if he had 22 and Chan out drew him. Notice how he says he made a bigger raise than usual because he respected chans preflop play. He wouldnt make that big of a raise with AA and he woudltn raise with 32, Chan being two to his left. 10-10

[Glitch29 0]

oh, c'mon guys, isn't it obvious that he had 83?

[randomization 0]

It's clearly impossible for us to know what Daniel had. We've got no more information than his opponents had. But a lot of these people are some of the best poker players out there, so anything we can figure out, they could too. What would Daniel gain from not telling people his hand if it were still possible for them to figure out what he had? The best we can do is guess. Someone might have it right, but it's not because they figured it out, they just took a reasonable shot and got lucky.

[theKAbag 0]

he really had T-7o and was too emabarassed to tell us. i mean, who loses with that hand. i never have

[stealfromblind 0]

There's a thread already made (2 of them actually) about this. Let's try and keep it organized fellas

[Kendren 1]

WTH, random bump of the day?

[zimmer4141 0]

Do we need to keep digging up 8 month old useless threads? I think not.