Why Did Gus Check The River?

[sdnuol 0]

So Daniel, what would you have done had Gus bet out that river? Raise, or call.

or fold? would you consider that?jsut wondering because i got flamed for posting a hand where i laid down a FH because i thought the guy had quads, and he did. but i was still told it was the dumbest fold of all time

[zimmer4141 0]

I've thought about this hand, and I'm wondering what did you put him on that you called the river? I know it's an almost impossible hand to fold in the heat of battle. However, I just don't think he would play anything this way that you beat.This leads me to think that you felt he had a straight, possibly flopped a straight. But, would he checkraise a straight on that board? If he read you for an overpair, he would doubtfully raise after checking because there is no way that you call with even AA.I just am confused by the entire hand, and really think it's possible to fold on that river.

[gilbertology 0]

or fold? would you consider that?

I'm assuming Gus wouldn't bet out an amount that would cause Daniel to think about folding on the river, which would be going all-in.I understand that Gus said daniel would be more likely to bet than call with an overpair on the river, but if it were me I'd think dn would be more likely to call than bet with kk or aa. Very confusing hand. Maybe we aren't ever meant to fully understand it.

[sdnuol 0]

while your here daniel what do you think of my idea for a lowball mixed game tournament at the wsop next yearB.R.A.S.(B)adugi, ®azz, (a)ce to 5 draw, 2-(Seven) draw

[DanielNegreanu 141]

or fold? would you consider that?jsut wondering because i got flamed for posting a hand where i laid down a FH because i thought the guy had quads, and he did. but i was still told it was the dumbest fold of all time

Depending on the amount, I'd probably just call. If he made a smallish bet, though, I'd probably go ahead and raise him. If he re-raised that bet, I would seriously think about laying it down, and probably would.

[mrdannyg 274]

I've thought about this hand, and I'm wondering what did you put him on that you called the river? I know it's an almost impossible hand to fold in the heat of battle. However, I just don't think he would play anything this way that you beat.This leads me to think that you felt he had a straight, possibly flopped a straight. But, would he checkraise a straight on that board? If he read you for an overpair, he would doubtfully raise after checking because there is no way that you call with even AA.I just am confused by the entire hand, and really think it's possible to fold on that river.

seems like while DN figures he is beat, folding is almost impossible given that Gus could probably have 56, 58, 59 (its gus!), or maybe 57 or something like that. unlikely he'd check-raise a straight, but seems like a lower boat could well be played the same way.

[kakon2 0]

daniel, you didnt say what do you think about his check on the river (right/wrong) how can it be right? assuming you have aces, you will never bet on the river with this board i dont think anyone would, but maybe you will call a bet of like 35k, am i wrong here?

[bail3yz 0]

Where can I find this hand? I am sorry, I probably just missed it like 3 times!

[socalpoker_j 1]

Where can I find this hand? I am sorry, I probably just missed it like 3 times!

It was a HSP Season 2 hand played out between DN and Gus. Check out You Tube by searching for Gus Hansen and it should be one of the first videos on the list, hope it helps.

[mrdannyg 274]

daniel, you didnt say what do you think about his check on the river (right/wrong) how can it be right? assuming you have aces, you will never bet on the river with this board i dont think anyone would, but maybe you will call a bet of like 35k, am i wrong here?

DN said above that Gus likely felt that DN was more likely to make a value bet on this river with an overpair than call a bet.If Gus felt DN was unlikely to call a bet with an overpair, then Gus is better to induce a value bet. His check-raise almost certainly won't be called by an overpair, but he's still gotten more out of it.

[kakon2 0]

yeah thats what gus thought but i think he is wrong, cause value bet on the river with aces will be a big mistake, you wont get called unless youre beaten so daniel defintley wont do that, but he may call a bet on the river to see what gus got.

[mrdannyg 274]

yeah thats what gus thought but i think he is wrong, cause value bet on the river with aces will be a big mistake, you wont get called unless youre beaten so daniel defintley wont do that, but he may call a bet on the river to see what gus got.

yeah, you're right. that daniel kneegrannoo doesn't know what he's talking about. friggin dope.

[semaj550 0]

Okay, I'm not Daniel Negreanu or Gus Hansen but I can't, for the life of me, understand how Gus could reasonably believe Daniel would value bet AA after Gus' river check. What does AA beat in that spot? A bluff, that's about it, especially given Gus' penchant for playing cards that would at least give him a straight there.I seriously don't understand how Daniel and Gus can argue that if Gus put Daniel or AA-QQ that check is the correct play. It's -EV to value bet an overpair in that spot so Gus can't reasonably expect Daniel to make it. He could be giving Daniel an opportunity to bluff but that's way to risky given how likely Daniel is to actually follow through with the bluff. He'd have been better off just betting out and letting Daniel pay it off with his overpair (which isn't an unreasonable play).I still believe 1 of 2 things is true. 1) Gus played the river poorly or 2) Gus didn't put Daniel on AA-QQ.My feeling from watching the hand is that, on the flop, Gus put Daniel on 99 or *possibly* 66. Either way he knew Daniel was VERY strong and he knew that he could safely look for a check-raise on the river. I maintain that Gus knew Daniel hit the flop hard and played the hand accordingly.A check-raise on the flop with bottom set is a good move against an opponent who represented an overpair preflop. He was probably very worried when Daniel called. When the turn comes off, Gus' worry goes out the window and he's probably quite sure that his quads are getting paid off by Daniel's boat. There is no way that Gus doesn't think Daniel filled up on the turn. That's the only way he checks the river.I think Gus had Daniel on either 99 or 66 and played the hand flawlessly. I would really love to hear his reasoning for putting Daniel on a big PP and why he played the hand the way he did given that read. I really can't come up with a scenario in my mind where that line makes sense against a hand like AA.Edit: You know, the more I think about it, Gus' check raise makes no sense on the river either, if he puts DN on AA. Okay, so let's assume that he puts DN on AA and belives check-raising is the best move. Once DN bites and bets, is a raise of another $160k likely to get paid off? Not by AA, AA is a very easy laydown to that check raise in that spot. There is no way Gus is bluffing and DN knows it so he's not going to call off another $160k with AA because he can't beat anything Gus could be holding. Gus would be better off to put in smaller raise that has a hope in hell of getting paid off or inviting a reraise if DN thinks Gus is bluffing. The more I think about this hand the less I can believe Gus puts DN on a big PP. I really wish Gus would enlighten us, I would love to know his thinking.

[gilbertology 0]

Look at Gus's turn bet, it was I believe only 24k, less than half the size of the pot at the time. If he thought Daniel hit the flop with 66, 99, or 78, he wants to build the pot as large as possible before the river. Also, if he believed Daniel had one of these hands a larger bet on the turn could induce a raise by Daniel. Then Gus could've checked-raised all-in for a smaller amount on the river, ensuring a call, or reraised the turn. I believe Gus did put Daniel on a big pair, but I also think his reasoning of Daniel being more likely to valuebet a big pair than call a bet with it is kind of absurd. I can't see Daniel valuebetting the river there with AA, but I can see a call of a 30-45k bet.

[keith crime 8]

I agree with you Gus was really stupid to check and assume that Daniel would bet the river. The fact that this is what actually happened really has no bearing on your correct opinion.

[semaj550 0]

I agree with you Gus was really stupid to check and assume that Daniel would bet the river. The fact that this is what actually happened really has no bearing on your correct opinion.

It has no bearing if Gus actually put Daniel on a big PP, which Daniel didn't. A check with that read is incorrect there. Daniel happened to have a hand much bigger than AA and that's what got the bet out of him.Gus shouldn't be given credit for playing the river well if his read is that Daniel had a hand like AA. It's only a good check if he believes Daniel to be very strong.It's still quite easy to critique Gus' playing ignoring Daniel's actual hole cards and the results.

[keith crime 8]

It has no bearing if Gus actually put Daniel on a big PP, which Daniel didn't. A check with that read is incorrect there. Daniel happened to have a hand much bigger than AA and that's what got the bet out of him.Gus shouldn't be given credit for playing the river well if his read is that Daniel had a hand like AA. It's only a good check if he believes Daniel to be very strong.It's still quite easy to critique Gus' playing ignoring Daniel's actual hole cards and the results.

Gus got Daniel to bet and call his all in check raise who really gives a damn what he put him on - it's hard to fault his play when he won as much money on the hand as was humanly possible - maybe if gus played the hand a little smarter he would have won Lori too but given the result - i find it hard to criticize his playMaybe if he had bet 50K on the river and got flat called the 150k he left on the table would have been made up for by winning your respectI'll take the 150k

[semaj550 0]

Gus got Daniel to bet and call his all in check raise who really gives a damn what he put him on - it's hard to fault his play when he won as much money on the hand as was humanly possible - maybe if gus played the hand a little smarter he would have won Lori too but given the result - i find it hard to criticize his playMaybe if he had bet 50K on the river and got flat called the 150k he left on the table would have been made up for by winning your respectI'll take the 150k

Great results oriented thinking. But guess what, betting 40k into a pair of aces which are likely to pay off is more profitable long-run than checking and having the aces check behind you, which they are going to do every time.Sure it worked out pretty damn good for Gus this time but if you evaluate his decision to check using only the information he had at the time he made it, it's either a great check or a poor one and that depends entirely on his read. If his read was aces it was a bad check and he just got lucky that his read was wrong.

[Megabear 0]

I spoke to Gus about the hand, and he put me on an over pair the whole way. His check on the river had me baffled. The reason he did that, though, was because he thought I was more likely to value bet the river with AA than to call a bet on the river with AA.

lol, did you ever wonder if maybe he was lying when he told you that ? Good to know even the pros makes glorified asumptions of their own play ...

[Cue 0]

Yeah if Gus is saying he put Daniel on AA and expected a value bet then he is saying he thinks daniel is Weak aggressive. If AA is good then anything it beats folds so there is no value in the bet. If AA is beat it cannot call any check-raise and must fold even to a bluff.The only way AA gets paid is to check the river and hope to turn over the best cards.

[nutzbuster 7]

Why Did Gus Check The River?

...uh...because he's Gus?

[jooka 0]

Nothing personal bro, but your read couldn't be more wrong. Gus definitely put me on a big overpair. There is no way he thought I hit that board, no chance at all... ask him.

I got this from 2+2 which is gus' thoughts on the hand:

And here is what Gus Hansen was thinking during the hand:This exerpt is taken from a danish newpaper, that Gus writes for, and its translated by me, so count on some errors along the way:"Blinds and antes are 1700. I open in early position with a standard raise to 2100, and Daniel reraises with his two sixes to 5000. Daniel plauys a lot of hands and generaly likes to do small reraises before the flop in position. That way he feels he can control the the pot, and it makes it hard to put him on a hand. He can play sc, middle pairs or AK. His reraises are so small that its never a question of throwing my hands awaybefore the flop.The flop comes 965 rainbow. Even if I hit my set its possible that a man like Negreanu has me beaten.I decide to play the hand reverse to find out how glad aniel was about the flop. I check and he leads out with 8000.Now its time to test if he just has an overpair. i raise to 26.000 and Daniel chooses, after a brief time to pay. Now I'm sure that he has a hand, and I actually doubt that my hand is goodThen the dreamcard comes. The nuts. A 5! A lot of people wil think: why lead out when you have him in the bag? I leads with 24k, which is a small amount in comparison with the pot. My bet is a continuations bet, that shall signal to Danny I have a good hand, but that its not nessesarily got improved by the turn card. It shall give him the opportunity to trap, if he has hit his full house. I actually think Daniel would play the hand the same way, and maybe thats why it works.Now comes the last card. An 8, and I choose to check to signal: ok, I hit a good hand on the flop, but now I'm not sure its good anymore. From earlier matchups with Daniel I know he likes to valuebet the river when I check. That way I at least get a valuebet from him, and possibly all his money with a checkaraise.That he sticks out 65k i perfect. That makes it really hard for him to get away I move all in and the pot grows to more than 400k. After some time to think, Daniel calls his last 179.000.That - of course - was perfect for me, but if he had thought it through he should have concluded that it was a sick call. What hand could I have? 8-5? 6-5? 9-5? 8-7?I know that I'm known for playing hands like that, but in a cash gaime I would never (or rarely) raise with a hand like that before the flop in first position.Besides look at the action: Blinds is 300-600, with a 100$ ante.Raise-reraise before the flopp, check-raise-reraise on the flop, bet-call onthe turn, check-raise-reraise all-in on the river. With all that action – you better have the [censored] nuts."http://ekstrabladet.dk/poker/article189353.ece

[semaj550 0]

This makes way more sense to me, it's exactly what I thought Gus' thinking was during the hand and why a player of his calibur would check the river there.Thanks for translating that, I was really curious as to what Gus would have to say about it.

[kakon2 0]

yeah sounds reasonable to me too. gus also said in the show after the hand that he wasnt to happy on the flop and he sound honest. it just seem like such a bad play to check on the river when you think the other guy has aces so it strange that gus would do it.keith crime - the result dont matter, if somene go all in with 22 aginst kk and win alot of money are you saying you cant critisize his play? sure you can.

[keith crime 8]

yeah sounds reasonable to me too. gus also said in the show after the hand that he wasnt to happy on the flop and he sound honest. it just seem like such a bad play to check on the river when you think the other guy has aces so it strange that gus would do it.keith crime - the result dont matter, if somene go all in with 22 aginst kk and win alot of money are you saying you cant critisize his play? sure you can.

that's not what happened here he had quads and got paid off the most he could - you can't criticize that