Dn's Call Against Gus Hansen, Bad Call?

[tilllttt 0]

I have really been thinking about DN really had to call Hansen's check raise all in on high stakes poker when DN had sixes full of fives nad Hansen had quad 5's. (to recap, DN had 66, GH had 55 with a board of 96558)Did he really think Hansen would have made that play with a straight? I don't think so, and to that point DN only had $100,000 invested in the pot. He had to call an additional $167K to call Hansen's bet. The only possible hands Hansen could have made that play with would be 55, 88, or 99, all of which had DN beat. The funny thing is that DN knew it and paid him off anyway. He justified it saying it would be a cooler, which it was, but why couldn't he get away from it? It is the same principle people use when the call an all in preflop with KK WHEN THEY ARE SURE THEY ARE UP AGAINST AA. I am not saying you should always fold full houses, or KK preflop to an all in raise, but as always, you have to evaluate each situation separately based on the information available to that point. In the hand against Gus, everyone knows he is a wild man, but he doesn't get all his money in unless he has the nuts or very close to it. If you seriously think about how the hand played out, the only possible hand that DN could beat that Gus could have is (board was 96558) 7, 10 for the nut straight. Did he really think Gus would check the river and then reraise another $175K with a straight here? Hansen had shown strength earlier in the hand by raising pre-flop, check raising the flop and then betting the turn. I just don't think he makes these plays with 10 7. My real question here is this: Why isn't folding an option here? DN could have folded to the reraise when he was almost certain he was beat and saved an additional $167K on the hand. To that point, he had only invested about $100K. At least in the KK vs. AA scenario you still have about a 15% chance of winning the hand if you get it all in before the flop. In this case, all the cards are out, and DN had to believe he was beat based on how the hand was played, yet, he couldn't fold a full house. The justification is made because Gus is a madman or DN's hand is so big, but I believe that if you are truly the very best, these are the hands that you can lay down, ONLY if you are CERTAIN you are beat.Thoughts? Do you think DN's play was correct here? Do you think folding was really an option? I hear successful players say all the time that they should have followed their initial instinct, and in this case DN did not feel good about his hand when Gus said all in. The possible hand he called out that he thought Gus could have was 55. If he went with his first instinct he would have made a huge (and correct) laydown.I would love to get DN's take on this...

[SSPadawon4 0]

I have really been thinking about DN really had to call Hansen's check raise all in on high stakes poker when DN had sixes full of fives nad Hansen had quad 5's. (to recap, DN had 66, GH had 55 with a board of 96558)Did he really think Hansen would have made that play with a straight? I don't think so, and to that point DN only had $100,000 invested in the pot. He had to call an additional $167K to call Hansen's bet. The only possible hands Hansen could have made that play with would be 55, 88, or 99, all of which had DN beat. The funny thing is that DN knew it and paid him off anyway. He justified it saying it would be a cooler, which it was, but why couldn't he get away from it? It is the same principle people use when the call an all in preflop with KK WHEN THEY ARE SURE THEY ARE UP AGAINST AA. I am not saying you should always fold full houses, or KK preflop to an all in raise, but as always, you have to evaluate each situation separately based on the information available to that point. In the hand against Gus, everyone knows he is a wild man, but he doesn't get all his money in unless he has the nuts or very close to it. If you seriously think about how the hand played out, the only possible hand that DN could beat that Gus could have is (board was 96558) 7, 10 for the nut straight. Did he really think Gus would check the river and then reraise another $175K with a straight here? Hansen had shown strength earlier in the hand by raising pre-flop, check raising the flop and then betting the turn. I just don't think he makes these plays with 10 7. My real question here is this: Why isn't folding an option here? DN could have folded to the reraise when he was almost certain he was beat and saved an additional $167K on the hand. To that point, he had only invested about $100K. At least in the KK vs. AA scenario you still have about a 15% chance of winning the hand if you get it all in before the flop. In this case, all the cards are out, and DN had to believe he was beat based on how the hand was played, yet, he couldn't fold a full house. The justification is made because Gus is a madman or DN's hand is so big, but I believe that if you are truly the very best, these are the hands that you can lay down, ONLY if you are CERTAIN you are beat.Thoughts? Do you think DN's play was correct here? Do you think folding was really an option? I hear successful players say all the time that they should have followed their initial instinct, and in this case DN did not feel good about his hand when Gus said all in. The possible hand he called out that he thought Gus could have was 55. If he went with his first instinct he would have made a huge (and correct) laydown.I would love to get DN's take on this...

Umm no gus would make that play with for say 75 or 710. If he has 88 guess is a suicidal sick so realistically only 55 and 99 can beat him. gus could of had 65 or 95 too. If DN folds there he is sick.

[Guest_ 0]

1

[Andr4w 0]

no way i could have folded, i doubt there are many players that could playing at their usual level with a few hundred dollars on the table. You have to remember this is the USUAL level for DN. So its the same as me losing say $1000 of my 22k bankroll. No way I'm folding for that amount!

[Guest_ 0]

my 22k bankroll is bigger than your you peons!

[budfox427 0]

With Gus' range of hands he plays, there is no way to lay it down there, especially with the pot odds at that point.

[WVUCarter 0]

Don't think any of us are good enough to get away from that one

[blakheart 3]

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-jour...&ucat=&Here is Daniel's blog about the hand. I think against a Guy like Gus you have to make the call.

[Mercury69 3]

Very tough to put someone on quads, sir.

[Guest_ 0]

it must have been a punch in the stomach

[CrazyJoe 0]

Very tough to put someone on quads, sir.

he didn't have to put him on quads to be beat, but that fact remains that check-raising the river is soooo tricky in that spot 5s full is FOR sure possible, maybe EVEN the straight, you gotta pay it off if you are beat, you can't go around folding full houses like that on the river.

[Nitro 0]

That hand was brutal..

[burgerman 0]

Although DN correctly surmised that Hansen had 55, 88 or 99 to beat him when he called, it would be most difficult to get off that hand in those particular circumstances. It's easy to know what to do when you see the hole cards and have 20-20 hindsight. I think DN considered the possibilities and at the end of the day, he could not fold a full-house against Hansen. It's probably a place where Hansen's reputation helped put a doubt in DN's mind.

[CrazyJoe 0]

Although DN correctly surmised that Hansen had 55, 88 or 99 to beat him when he called, it would be most difficult to get off that hand in those particular circumstances. It's easy to know what to do when you see the hole cards and have 20-20 hindsight. I think DN considered the possibilities and at the end of the day, he could not fold a full-house against Hansen. It's probably a place where Hansen's reputation helped put a doubt in DN's mind.

ya DN correctly surmised, no matter what happens in hand, DN always says " i thought that's what you had" or "that was the other thing i thought of" no matter what. Eli actually called him out on it last time and it was AWESOME, I've never seen a player do that so much as Negreanu, every time he loses at showdown, it's "ya i thought you had that", if what he says is true then he indeed is the ulimate "P.O.W." - Pay Off Wizard

[HurricaneKyle 0]

Gus is loose, but he isn't an idiot. Most likely he isn't check raising all in without either 55 or 99, and he DEFINITELY is not doing it with a straight. Its an incredibly tough laydown that I would not be able to make, but I wouldn't be in love with the hand given the action.

[sloshr 0]

and to that point DN only had $100,000 invested in the pot. He had to call an additional $167K to call Hansen's bet. To that point, he had only invested about $100K.

I like how you mention this completely irrelevant fact twice to make it seem important. It is how much is IN the pot that matters, not how much of it you invested. Here, he has great pot odds to call, considering Gus could have a smaller FH, the straight, or a bluff. After all, it is Gus. It is likely that Gus has him beat, but he is getting around 3-1 and I think he wins this more than one in 4. Also, if he lays this down and Gus shows a bluff, DN is finished. It is just a situation where he has to call, but dosn't have to like it.PS: +1 to make 500 WOOHOO

[mx957 0]

PS: +1 to make 500 WOOHOO

You Groupie.....

[loogie 115]

No one wants to fold a full house on national television.

[Balloon guy 158]

Don't think any of us are good enough to get away from that one

Gus had a simliar hand against Sheiky in the NBC Head's Up Tournemant, only Shieky had the quads and Gus paid him off.Maybe Chip Reese, or Phil Helmuth in a tournament (not cash game). But I think back to all the poker books and authors where they say things like, If it's set over set you're going to take your lumps, that's poker. Quads over fullhouse, I lose all the money at the table

[TB17 0]

I think if 5's full wasn't in the range, then its an easy fold, but it's Gus Hansen and he's capable of playing sick hands like 5-9, 5-6, 5-8 and 5-7. For that alone, you gotta call.DN's play that really mystifies me is the hand he played against Brunson. I can imagine a bet/fold there, but a check/fold when u hit the nut flush?

[fleung22 1]

I think if 5's full wasn't in the range, then its an easy fold, but it's Gus Hansen and he's capable of playing sick hands like 5-9, 5-6, 5-8 and 5-7. For that alone, you gotta call.DN's play that really mystifies me is the hand he played against Brunson. I can imagine a bet/fold there, but a check/fold when u hit the nut flush?

I was confused for a second but then I realized you were talking about Todd.Yeah, that one was messed up...I don't think I could fold there myself. But Daniel's read was that TB (haha) had a monster. The check on the flop probably threw him off.

[tre 0]

It is likely that Gus has him beat, but he is getting around 3-1 and I think he wins this more than one in 4.

no.i think that daniel, now having had time to think about it, would disagree with this statement today if u asked him. to all of u who think gus could make this play with a straight, u need to get a clue. great players are NOT in the habit of sticking 167k into a pot that can only get called if u are beat and NEVER EVER EVER get called when ur ahead.and gus is quite certainly a great player.to the people who think he could do it with fives full, ur a little warmer. but ur still off because ur only thinking in one dimension. ur thinking "oh yeah he could do it with 95 or 65! those are other possible hands he could have."the problem is ur not going into the player's mind. gus is never gonna make that play unless he thinks that something inferior can pay him off.if gus thinks that daniel would muck a straight against this play, then he doesnt make the play with fives full. aaaaand, more importantly, if daniel believes that gus does think that daniel is capable of mucking a straight, then how does daniel not fold?daniel may have convinced himself that gus thought daniel would pay off fives full with a straight because daniel is known as a bit of a payoff wizard. but it's a stretch and dn knew that. i havent seen the hand on TV yet, so i dont know if he vocalized his thoughts. who knows - maybe the Todd Brunson bluff was still in his mind and he couldnt bear the thought of laying down a big hand on the river incorrectly for the second time.nobody ever said that every correct decision in poker is easy to make. some are agonizingly painfully difficult.[btw, just realized there is one situation that is favorable for daniel calling - gus having 95 hoping to get paid off by 65]

[HurricaneKyle 0]

no.i think that daniel, now having had time to think about it, would disagree with this statement today if u asked him. to all of u who think gus could make this play with a straight, u need to get a clue. great players are NOT in the habit of sticking 167k into a pot that can only get called if u are beat and NEVER EVER EVER get called when ur ahead.and gus is quite certainly a great player.to the people who think he could do it with fives full, ur a little warmer. but ur still off because ur only thinking in one dimension. ur thinking "oh yeah he could do it with 95 or 65! those are other possible hands he could have."the problem is ur not going into the player's mind. gus is never gonna make that play unless he thinks that something inferior can pay him off.if gus thinks that daniel would muck a straight against this play, then he doesnt make the play with fives full. aaaaand, more importantly, if daniel believes that gus does think that daniel is capable of mucking a straight, then how does daniel not fold?daniel may have convinced himself that gus thought daniel would pay off fives full with a straight because daniel is known as a bit of a payoff wizard. but it's a stretch and dn knew that. i havent seen the hand on TV yet, so i dont know if he vocalized his thoughts. who knows - maybe the Todd Brunson bluff was still in his mind and he couldnt bear the thought of laying down a big hand on the river incorrectly for the second time.nobody ever said that every correct decision in poker is easy to make. some are agonizingly painfully difficult.

I pretty much agree with this. Gus deserves tons of credit in this hand. I really believe he knew when DN flat calls the turn , that DN had a monster. There wasn't much Daniel could do. Nobody checks behind an overfull.

[keith crime 8]

I pretty much agree with this. Gus deserves tons of credit in this hand. I really believe he knew when DN flat calls the turn , that DN had a monster. There wasn't much Daniel could do. Nobody checks behind an overfull.

I tend to play quads really well too

[CrazyJoe 0]

the problem is ur not going into the player's mind. gus is never gonna make that play unless he thinks that something inferior can pay him off.

sorry, didnt realize you played with Gus Hansen so much.