Jump to content

Analysis On Dn's Final Table


Recommended Posts

I typed this up in the sick thread originally, edited a part or two, and got convinced to toss it into general. I was watching the final table last night really interested to see how the meta-game FT strategy that Hachem appears to have perfected conflicted with DN's style of play, and I was not disappointed. Mark Hanna was the unexpected star, proving to be a very tough player and creating a tough table.Daniel's play last night was a textbook case of a LAGy player not recognizing that the other players at the table had lost all respect for his raises and bets and were calling him down with less-than-strong hands, and him not adjusting at all. Hachem played his strategy of being slow and very cautious early on, playing 2 large pots with QQ aipf and QJ where he called a large bet with top 2 on a non-suited QJTxx board on the river.Up until hand 38, Daniel was playing his game, playing several pots each round, keeping them small, and winning the majority of them. His call with AK was sketchy at best, although I feel like he had most likely 12 outs, it was easily as likely to have fewer than that. He was only getting 2:1 on his money and for someone who isn't willing to get his money in preflop by 3betting AK, why is he waiting until the turn of a QQT4 3 heart board to get his money in with AsKh?Hands 38-40 versus Andersen were fairly standard, although calling 10 BBs against an UTG jammer in the BB with A9o is probably the very bottom of the range of callable hands.In my opinion, hand 44, where Hachem called a turn bet after a checked flop with King high, a gutter, and 2 overs, and Daniel lucked his way into winning the pot with Ace high, was the defining hand of this match. Hachem showed here that he was willing to call with weaker hands and play pots where he wasn't the agressor versus Negreanu, letting Daniel get the money into the pot. If I am Daniel and I see this hand flipped up, I start checking against Hachem more frequently when I have air and betting significantly when I pick up a hand or two.In hands 45 and 66, Hachem calls a flop bet from Negreanu, checks down on the turn and river with 2nd pair, and picks up what was now becoming sizable pots due to Daniel pretty much never checking behind.In hand 55, we see the first Hanna-Negreanu matchup, where Daniel calls a preflop raise of 300k with K9o, check-calls a standard continuation bet of 350k on a 77h6h board, and then checkshoves for 1.5mil on the Kh turn. The thing that baffles me on this hand isn't the check-shove (which isn't nearly as terrible when I re-look at it as I initially thought due to chipcounts) but the check-call on the flop. I guess Daniel feels like he can represent a hand here by calling on the flop and checking to him again on the turn. I just feel like this is a spot where on the flop, with the other player betting 20% of his stack, calling is pretty much the worst possible option.In hand 56, Negreanu leads out in a raised pot for 300k on a 832r board, and then flatcalls Hanna's raise of 1.2 mil. He checks the 7 turn to Hanna and Hanna shoves, and DN folds. At this point there is 3.3mil in the pot, and Hanna has ~2.5 mil behind. I guess I struggle to see a hand that is capable of calling that flop and then check-folding to what is basically a guaranteed shove on the turn. This is truly the hand that baffles me over any other...I just cannot see this line being taken for any reason, with any hand.At the end of hand 65, Negreanu's 9mil stack has shrunk to 2.3mil while the other two have slowly bled off all of his chips to stack themselves close to 8mil. He bled off a few more chips, shoved KT for 9 BBs on a button raise, got called by 44, and that was that.As I was "watching" this all unfold on Cardplayer, it just felt like every hand was taken with one raise, or it was Negreanu betting, someone else raising, and him folding.Just overall, several lines that make pretty much zero sense to me, and several spots where clearly he wasn't getting respect and was getting called down by weak hands. Sometimes, you just have to slow down and not force your way into winning every pot. I feel like DN realized this, but it was a little too late by that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As the consensus view is now, DN got lucky a few times in 2004, but he can't keep up with the young guns.
Completely disagree. I just felt like Hachem was a player positioned to take perfect advantage of DN's style at this FT, and for one super-small-sample-size tournament, it happened.I was really hoping JC would reply here, hopefully he didn't open up a window and decide it wasn't worth his time. As a whackjob he has a better idea on how to handle your image going to hell than I do :club:.
Link to post
Share on other sites

good post. sadly, even though i was in bellagio the whole time, i didn't see a hand of the final table, but from what i hear, your analysis of the play is spot on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your analysis is very good overall. Yet this tournament was live obviously and DN would probably explain some of his "mistakes" in a very different way. His read on the table and especially on Hanna surely played a big part in the way he played some of those hands. My point is, all we can analyze without seeing the play itself is betting patterns. This is valuable but not the whole package.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Your analysis is very good overall. Yet this tournament was live obviously and DN would probably explain some of his "mistakes" in a very different way. His read on the table and especially on Hanna surely played a big part in the way he played some of those hands. My point is, all we can analyze without seeing the play itself is betting patterns. This is valuable but not the whole package.
I'm hoping there was more, but seriously, what hand do you call a 900k raise with and then check-fold on the turn on a 8327r board? That's the one that really sticks out to me.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I typed this up in the sick thread originally, edited a part or two, and got convinced to toss it into general. I was watching the final table last night really interested to see how the meta-game FT strategy that Hachem appears to have perfected conflicted with DN's style of play, and I was not disappointed. Mark Hanna was the unexpected star, proving to be a very tough player and creating a tough table.Daniel's play last night was a textbook case of a LAGy player not recognizing that the other players at the table had lost all respect for his raises and bets and were calling him down with less-than-strong hands, and him not adjusting at all. Hachem played his strategy of being slow and very cautious early on, playing 2 large pots with QQ aipf and QJ where he called a large bet with top 2 on a non-suited QJTxx board on the river.Up until hand 38, Daniel was playing his game, playing several pots each round, keeping them small, and winning the majority of them. His call with AK was sketchy at best, although I feel like he had most likely 12 outs, it was easily as likely to have fewer than that. He was only getting 2:1 on his money and for someone who isn't willing to get his money in preflop by 3betting AK, why is he waiting until the turn of a QQT4 3 heart board to get his money in with AsKh?Hands 38-40 versus Andersen were fairly standard, although calling 10 BBs against an UTG jammer in the BB with A9o is probably the very bottom of the range of callable hands.In my opinion, hands 44, where Hachem called a turn bet after a checked flop with King high, a gutter, and 2 overs, and Daniel lucked his way into winning the pot with Ace high, was the defining hand of this match. Hachem showed here that he was willing to call with weaker hands and play pots where he wasn't the agressor versus Negreanu, letting Daniel get the money into the pot. If I am Daniel and I see this hand flipped up, I start checking against Hachem more frequently when I have air and betting significantly when I pick up a hand or two.In hands 45 and 66, Hachem calls a flop bet from Negreanu, checks down on the turn and river with 2nd pair, and picks up what was now becoming sizable pots due to Daniel pretty much never checking behind.In hand 55, we see the first Hanna-Negreanu matchup, where Daniel calls a preflop raise of 300k with K9o, check-calls a standard continuation bet of 350k on a 77h6h board, and then checkshoves for 1.5mil on the Kh turn. The thing that baffles me on this hand isn't the check-shove (which isn't nearly as terrible when I re-look at it as I initially thought due to chipcounts) but the check-call on the flop. I guess Daniel feels like he can represent a hand here by calling on the flop and checking to him again on the turn. I just feel like this is a spot where on the flop, with the other player betting 20% of his stack, calling is pretty much the worst possible option.In hand 56, Negreanu leads out in a raised pot for 300k on a 832r board, and then flatcalls Hanna's raise of 1.2 mil. He checks the 7 turn to Hanna and Hanna shoves, and DN folds. At this point there is 3.3mil in the pot, and Hanna has ~2.5 mil behind. I guess I struggle to see a hand that is capable of calling that flop and then check-folding to what is basically a guaranteed shove on the turn. This is truly the hand that baffles me over any other...I just cannot see this line being taken for any reason, with any hand.At the end of hand 65, Negreanu's 9mil stack has shrunk to 2.3mil while the other two have slowly bled off all of his chips to stack themselves close to 8mil. He bled off a few more chips, shoved KT for 9 BBs on a button raise, got called by 44, and that was that.As I was "watching" this all unfold on Cardplayer, it just felt like every hand was taken with one raise, or it was Negreanu betting, someone else raising, and him folding.Just overall, several lines that make pretty much zero sense to me, and several spots where clearly he wasn't getting respect and was getting called down by weak hands. Sometimes, you just have to slow down and not force your way into winning every pot. I feel like DN realized this, but it was a little too late by that point.
Very thorough and interesting breakdown Bizzle. I'm sure Daniel will respond to your analysis. Would be great to hear what he thinks of it.
As the consensus view is now, DN got lucky a few times in 2004, but he can't keep up with the young guns.
What the hell are you smokin' ??? :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
As the consensus view is now, DN got lucky a few times in 2004, but he can't keep up with the young guns.
booooooooooooo hisss boooooooo cough*usucknoonelikesu*coughi think he is one of the young guns
Link to post
Share on other sites
if not for two or three horrible beats Hachem would have 2 WSOP bracelets, a WSOP main event bracelet and now a WPT title....The guy is no doubt one of the top 5 tourney players in the world
Without a doubt Joe Hachem is a world class player and the best WSOP main event champion in years, but I feel that only a year and a half of being on the circut is not enough time to be able to give him a top 5 spot. I'm not taking anything away from his ability though, and I think he's great, the win only proves that, but i still think putting him in with this class of player is a bit premature.Just my opinion though
Link to post
Share on other sites
Completely disagree. I just felt like Hachem was a player positioned to take perfect advantage of DN's style at this FT, and for one super-small-sample-size tournament, it happened.I was really hoping JC would reply here, hopefully he didn't open up a window and decide it wasn't worth his time. As a whackjob he has a better idea on how to handle your image going to hell than I do :club:.
ldkskafhas;kldjhf;akjsdhI just wrote a loong *** reply and my explorer froze when I clicked send ...adlfkja;lsfja such a bad beaaaat. I was there and I saw everything go down so I guess I'll start all over again. For now though, I think u should change the title of the thread to something that DN might read so that he at least has a shot at defending himself (we all know he usually does)..."Analysis on DN's FT" ?
Link to post
Share on other sites
ldkskafhas;kldjhf;akjsdhI just wrote a loong *** reply and my explorer froze when I clicked send ...adlfkja;lsfja such a bad beaaaat. I was there and I saw everything go down so I guess I'll start all over again. For now though, I think u should change the title of the thread to something that DN might read so that he at least has a shot at defending himself (we all know he usually does)..."Analysis on DN's FT" ?
Weak.I have a mod on the title change.EDIT: Annnnd done. Thanks Keith.
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, here it goes again...I saw most of the final table and I noticed some things that you can't really just assume if you're talking about certain plays.First of all, that AK call was far from marginal, infact I think it was an instacall considering the circumstances...The player that pushed was BY far the worst player at the table, I actually know him to an extent and I've played with him several times in live tourneys. He was just waiting to make a horrible move and DN like everyone else just wanted a spot where this guy would hand over his chips, this was that spot. DN has a good shot at having the best hand here and if he doesnt, he for sure has quite a bit of outs.I think DN played perfectly till 3 handed, when, imo he steamed off his stack. Hachem and Hanna both played great "final table" poker as well, and stayed under the radar until it got 3 handed, knowing that if they hit a few flops dn would bet into them for sure. That's exactly what happened, hanna pretty much hit every flop and daniel seemed to get more and more frustrated. The key pot 3 handed came when daniel floated the paired board with K9 hoping to take the pot on the turn, basically it was just hooorrible situational luck in this spot and DN ended up spiking what looked to him as Gin, a 2 outer that will double up hanna most of the time. I can see exactly why DN made that play and I dont think its horrible at all (although I do think it wasn't necessary), the turn card just screwed him though. At this point DN seemed a little disturbed and started playing most hands, hanna kept hitting flops and DN kept betting/calling. I have always read what DN writes and listened to what he says in interviews and such, and I feel like we both share very similar theories on tournament poker so I am a big fan of almost never reraising preflop in the early/mid stages and raising min or close to min. however I feel that at the final table, and especially 3 handed, you basically have to play solid preflop poker raising and reraising a lot preflop. Daniel continued to play his small ball style during the final 3 and gave his opponents great odds to peal flops and try to hit, which they did. Daniel had a big enough lead 3 handed to let Hanna take a few pots while he waited to get a solid hand to shove him in preflop, or hit a flop and commit his stack. Trying to outplay hanna at this point, by floating flops and minraising etc.. is a theoretical mistake imo b/c you have enough chips and enough of an edge to protect just wait and bust Hanna or Hachem, even if hachem busts hanna DN is a favorite to win the HU match with 8 or 9 mil in chips. I am not a multi WPT winner though, so what do I know?When DN shoved K10 preflop it was pretty obvious that he had a bad hand because HE HADNT RERAISED PREFLOP. My freinds and I were saying how DN must have a bad hand right when he pushed, Hachem also came to the rail after the hand and told his wife that "the way he's been playing, I knew he didnt have much". Hanna said he folded 10's but I think he was lying or just very money motivated, hachem on the other hand was going to call with any type of a hand, DN definately got unlucky in that race as he lost as he flopped and turned every out in the deck. I doubt that Daniel will say that he messed up 3 handed regardless of how he truly feels, the way the final table played out it really seems that daniel just got outflopped every time because he did. In theory though, I think DN's mistake was not changing gears when the tourney got short handed. I saw Daniel chilling well after he busted and he seemed pretty bummed out, I think he knows he could have played better and won that tourney, and I can only imagine how he felt when he didnt take it down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this in a different thread in response to BizzleFace's comments. BizzleFace- That's exactly what me and my friend discussed last night. We talked about the hand where he called Hanna's flop bet, then folded to a turn shove. We thought he either had an overpair, and had a good enough read on Hanna to get away on the turn. That is absolutely ALL I can think of that makes even a half-whit of sense... Maybe he floated with A-hi, and realized Hanna was for real before mucking.I want to see the action on TV, because- even though I had the same thoughts last night- it really doesn't seem like Negreanu is capable of being so BADLY outplayed 3-handed. I mean, he just got demolished. Hachem is obviouisly a legitimately good player, but I also have no doubt Negreanu should be able to turn him into chopped liver with the sizeable chip advantage he once had. At the same time, it's quite clear Hachem and Hanna were more than willing to look him up with weakish holdings, and that Negreanu didn't start playing a style that could fade the action he was apt to get. He kept trying to chop away, bit by bit, giving Hanna and Hachem the chance to flop well or hit turns/rivers.I couldn't tell from the cardplayer updates, but it really seemed like Negreanu was just forcing the action too much, in some situations. It seemed like, as his stack started to dissapate, he just started getting involved in every hand, even though it was perfectly clear that Hanna and Hachem were more than willing to play with him after the flop, and play well enough to hold their own. My buddy and I figure it will either look a lot better on TV, and we'll see Negreanu get semi-cold decked and make a few strong decisions in marginal situations. Or it'll look a lot worse, and Negreanu just blew up. It's really hard to imagine the latter, but.../rambleWang

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, here it goes again...I saw most of the final table and I noticed some things that you can't really just assume if you're talking about certain plays.First of all, that AK call was far from marginal, infact I think it was an instacall considering the circumstances...The player that pushed was BY far the worst player at the table, I actually know him to an extent and I've played with him several times in live tourneys. He was just waiting to make a horrible move and DN like everyone else just wanted a spot where this guy would hand over his chips, this was that spot. DN has a good shot at having the best hand here and if he doesnt, he for sure has quite a bit of outs.I think DN played perfectly till 3 handed, when, imo he steamed off his stack. Hachem and Hanna both played great "final table" poker as well, and stayed under the radar until it got 3 handed, knowing that if they hit a few flops dn would bet into them for sure. That's exactly what happened, hanna pretty much hit every flop and daniel seemed to get more and more frustrated. The key pot 3 handed came when daniel floated the paired board with K9 hoping to take the pot on the turn, basically it was just hooorrible situational luck in this spot and DN ended up spiking what looked to him as Gin, a 2 outer that will double up hanna most of the time. I can see exactly why DN made that play and I dont think its horrible at all (although I do think it wasn't necessary), the turn card just screwed him though. At this point DN seemed a little disturbed and started playing most hands, hanna kept hitting flops and DN kept betting/calling. I have always read what DN writes and listened to what he says in interviews and such, and I feel like we both share very similar theories on tournament poker so I am a big fan of almost never reraising preflop in the early/mid stages and raising min or close to min. however I feel that at the final table, and especially 3 handed, you basically have to play solid preflop poker raising and reraising a lot preflop. Daniel continued to play his small ball style during the final 3 and gave his opponents great odds to peal flops and try to hit, which they did. Daniel had a big enough lead 3 handed to let Hanna take a few pots while he waited to get a solid hand to shove him in preflop, or hit a flop and commit his stack. Trying to outplay hanna at this point, by floating flops and minraising etc.. is a theoretical mistake imo b/c you have enough chips and enough of an edge to protect just wait and bust Hanna or Hachem, even if hachem busts hanna DN is a favorite to win the HU match with 8 or 9 mil in chips. I am not a multi WPT winner though, so what do I know?When DN shoved K10 preflop it was pretty obvious that he had a bad hand because HE HADNT RERAISED PREFLOP. My freinds and I were saying how DN must have a bad hand right when he pushed, Hachem also came to the rail after the hand and told his wife that "the way he's been playing, I knew he didnt have much". Hanna said he folded 10's but I think he was lying or just very money motivated, hachem on the other hand was going to call with any type of a hand, DN definately got unlucky in that race as he lost as he flopped and turned every out in the deck. I doubt that Daniel will say that he messed up 3 handed regardless of how he truly feels, the way the final table played out it really seems that daniel just got outflopped every time because he did. In theory though, I think DN's mistake was not changing gears when the tourney got short handed. I saw Daniel chilling well after he busted and he seemed pretty bummed out, I think he knows he could have played better and won that tourney, and I can only imagine how he felt when he didnt take it down.very good assessment imo. Probally have been a whole diffrent story if hachem didnt hit that 1 outer and DN could continure to play his game against 4 stacks with between 1.5 and 3 mil
Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, that AK call was far from marginal, infact I think it was an instacall considering the circumstances...The player that pushed was BY far the worst player at the table, I actually know him to an extent and I've played with him several times in live tourneys. He was just waiting to make a horrible move and DN like everyone else just wanted a spot where this guy would hand over his chips, this was that spot. DN has a good shot at having the best hand here and if he doesnt, he for sure has quite a bit of outs.
I still think the call was marginal. When DN flatcalled behind the repop, it basically left his hand completely out in the open as being a big hand. When he checks that flop, it is most likely AK or AQ, and obviously since their are 2 queens on the board one of those is more likely than anything else. The turn shove from the other player could be pretty much any hand strong enough to fade a reraise, including Ah-x, any PP, a few tens, and the occasional queen. I really can't see him being ahead here more than 1/3 of the time.
I think DN played perfectly till 3 handed, when, imo he steamed off his stack. Hachem and Hanna both played great "final table" poker as well, and stayed under the radar until it got 3 handed, knowing that if they hit a few flops dn would bet into them for sure. That's exactly what happened, hanna pretty much hit every flop and daniel seemed to get more and more frustrated. The key pot 3 handed came when daniel floated the paired board with K9 hoping to take the pot on the turn, basically it was just hooorrible situational luck in this spot and DN ended up spiking what looked to him as Gin, a 2 outer that will double up hanna most of the time. I can see exactly why DN made that play and I dont think its horrible at all (although I do think it wasn't necessary), the turn card just screwed him though.
We both know the dangers of inserting yourself into spots where you think your opponent is deep enough to fold a hand like ace or king high by calling the flop and trying to take it away on the turn. I just feel like in this spot, with these chipcounts, it means a ton more to Daniel to keep Hanna down around 2mil and him over 8mil than it does to try to take away 650k from Hanna. (Btw I went broke in a 109 yesterday check-shoving a gutter/overcard combo on the turn-you woulda been so proud).
At this point DN seemed a little disturbed and started playing most hands, hanna kept hitting flops and DN kept betting/calling. I have always read what DN writes and listened to what he says in interviews and such, and I feel like we both share very similar theories on tournament poker so I am a big fan of almost never reraising preflop in the early/mid stages and raising min or close to min. however I feel that at the final table, and especially 3 handed, you basically have to play solid preflop poker raising and reraising a lot preflop. Daniel continued to play his small ball style during the final 3 and gave his opponents great odds to peal flops and try to hit, which they did. Daniel had a big enough lead 3 handed to let Hanna take a few pots while he waited to get a solid hand to shove him in preflop, or hit a flop and commit his stack. Trying to outplay hanna at this point, by floating flops and minraising etc.. is a theoretical mistake imo b/c you have enough chips and enough of an edge to protect just wait and bust Hanna or Hachem, even if hachem busts hanna DN is a favorite to win the HU match with 8 or 9 mil in chips. I am not a multi WPT winner though, so what do I know?
Completely agree with this analysis. This analysis might not be right if they each had 500 BBs, but in a shorthanded situation where the average stack is anywhere between 20-40 BBs, the stronger preflop players are going to win out over the stronger postflop players. And it's not even close. The ability to smash down weakness preflop and take anywhere from 5-20% of someone's stack becomes extremely important, because postflop there just aren't many decisions to be made.
When DN shoved K10 preflop it was pretty obvious that he had a bad hand because HE HADNT RERAISED PREFLOP. My freinds and I were saying how DN must have a bad hand right when he pushed, Hachem also came to the rail after the hand and told his wife that "the way he's been playing, I knew he didnt have much". Hanna said he folded 10's but I think he was lying or just very money motivated, hachem on the other hand was going to call with any type of a hand, DN definately got unlucky in that race as he lost as he flopped and turned every out in the deck. I doubt that Daniel will say that he messed up 3 handed regardless of how he truly feels, the way the final table played out it really seems that daniel just got outflopped every time because he did. In theory though, I think DN's mistake was not changing gears when the tourney got short handed. I saw Daniel chilling well after he busted and he seemed pretty bummed out, I think he knows he could have played better and won that tourney, and I can only imagine how he felt when he didnt take it down.
The one hand that still eats at me is the 8327 board...I just cannot see a hand that could be played that way. Do you?As always, awesome analysis JC.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I posted this in a different thread in response to BizzleFace's comments. BizzleFace- That's exactly what me and my friend discussed last night. We talked about the hand where he called Hanna's flop bet, then folded to a turn shove. We thought he either had an overpair, and had a good enough read on Hanna to get away on the turn. That is absolutely ALL I can think of that makes even a half-whit of sense... Maybe he floated with A-hi, and realized Hanna was for real before mucking.I want to see the action on TV, because- even though I had the same thoughts last night- it really doesn't seem like Negreanu is capable of being so BADLY outplayed 3-handed. I mean, he just got demolished. Hachem is obviouisly a legitimately good player, but I also have no doubt Negreanu should be able to turn him into chopped liver with the sizeable chip advantage he once had. At the same time, it's quite clear Hachem and Hanna were more than willing to look him up with weakish holdings, and that Negreanu didn't start playing a style that could fade the action he was apt to get. He kept trying to chop away, bit by bit, giving Hanna and Hachem the chance to flop well or hit turns/rivers.I couldn't tell from the cardplayer updates, but it really seemed like Negreanu was just forcing the action too much, in some situations. It seemed like, as his stack started to dissapate, he just started getting involved in every hand, even though it was perfectly clear that Hanna and Hachem were more than willing to play with him after the flop, and play well enough to hold their own. My buddy and I figure it will either look a lot better on TV, and we'll see Negreanu get semi-cold decked and make a few strong decisions in marginal situations. Or it'll look a lot worse, and Negreanu just blew up. I doubt the latter is the case./rambleWang
Several of the things you mentioned I semi-responded to in my reply to JC, but there are some other things as well.I think TV is definitely going to clear up a lot of this. There is going to be an hour of television where it is going to be established that DN was either playing fairly well and getting unlucky, or just never stopped firing and the other players were taking advantage. One of the interesting things about this is the fact that DN's cards are pretty much independent of this scenario-it is going to be what the other players were firing and calling with that is going to show whether or not there was a lack of adjustment at the table. Based on the hands that reached showdown (middle pair a couple of times from Hachem, as well as a whiffed KJ, and the solo Hanna hand where he doubled) I am going to go out on a limb and say that it was possibly a little bit of both.JC covered the chopping away thing shorthanded, but I think the thing that gets ignored is Hachem's ability to chop away and take advantage of other players. Notice the fact that he went from 4.7 mil when it got to 3 handed to 6.7 mil when it got heads up without ever really legitimately showing down a hand in a significant pot (bets on multiple streets). He clearly had a ton of leeway with Hanna and was getting the best of Negreanu repeatedly, and I think that a lot of this was due to the fact that he wasn't forcing the action and betting at every single pot he was in. If I had to guess, if we went and tracked the number of pots that Negreanu bet at post-flop and got folds and the number of pots that Hachem bet at post-flop and got folds, the number would be fairly similiar, but the number of pots where they got calls/raises would be significantly tilted towards Negreanu. I think Hachem did a very good job of advertising that he wasn't betting trash (showing AK on a A-x-x flop where he bet and got a fold, showing the nut flush on a turn bet where he had checked behind on a flop where most people would turbo-bet a flush draw) and then using that image well to chip up without significant showdowns.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im kinda disapointed about he finish because I think Daniel was a big favorite going in and seemed untouchable with his confidence.There's no doubt he's disapointed also, he kept saying there was no way he could bust out but when he got to the $9M mark, he truly believed that he coulodn't lose. It's like lossing with a 3-0 lead in best of 7 playoff.He obviously made some critical mistakes but the problem is really why did he get out of his "zone" that he seemed soo focused in.Hoopefully he'll give us the break down of his break down. He still had a very good tourny and will dominate the entire next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BizHub-I agree that Hachem's approach to play in such a way as to guarantee (or improve the odds significantly) that other players would stay away from him, allowing him to chip up significantly w/o having to put too many chips at risk.From DN's perspective, however, this is probably a GOOD thing. The fewer pots Hachem is playing- the tighter, more solid he's playing- the easier it SHOULD have been for Negreanu to LAG it up, win blinds and small pots on the flop. Or bust Hanna, and get H/U with Hachem with a very sizeable chip a advantage. I imagine he thought to himself, "If Hachem's going to play soft and tight, I might as well get in there and try to get as many of those chips, as long as he'll let me. Let him try to let me hang myself. By the time he gets a chance, I'll have 3/4 the chips at the table, and he won't have a shot." But it didn't work out like that. Hanna ran well and played well. And Hachem picked his spots near perfectly. I thinkThen again, trying to get inside Daniel's head for me is like Bizzle trying to fit through a 6ft doorway without stooping.Wang

Link to post
Share on other sites
And Hachem picked his spots near perfectly. I thinkThen again, trying to get inside Daniel's head for me is like Bizzle trying to fit through a 6ft doorway without stooping.Wang
Bingo. Dude has pretty much unreal timing, which is why (I know it is being debated in that other Hachem thread) at least right now I'd classify him as clearly being one of the best tournament players in the world. My favorite testament to this is the live updates during the day before they hit the FT of the Circuit event that he took 5th in. He was in the bottom half of the stacks the entire day, never had more than 20 BBs until there were 12 people left, got 2 mentions in terms of large pots he played (both all in preflop with big PPs) and that was entirely it. Whaddya know, he picks up a massive hand with 10 players left, wins it, and is the chipleader going into the final table! He clearly has an innate sense that allows him to place himself in positions where he isn't at risk (like he said, he was only all in and called 1 time in the Bellagio tourney) and has the perfect image to cultivate this. I'm not sure if there is a metric that is fully capable of quantifying all of this, but he clearly has shown the ability to pick spots as well as anyone else I have seen play a significant number of hands.And I'm not super tall (6'0), maybe you were thinking of GrinderMJ? A more apt quote would have been "Then again, trying to get inside Daniel's head for me is like Bizzle swimming in a pool without Speedz giggling at his speedo."
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...