sketchy1 0 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I recently had the chance to interview Hasan Habib. Many of you are probably familiar with him from his controversial situation with Tuan Le at the WPT Championship (he had 50% of Le). For the first time he speaks his mind about the situation and more. Check it out:http://www.pokertrails.com/interviews/hasanhabib.phpThanks.Jon Eaton Link to post Share on other sites
jayistheman 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 I would recommend checking out paul phillips' analysis of the whole Le issue. he pretty much sums it up Link to post Share on other sites
pokepoke1967 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 "I call....I'm allin." The call is binding. Le folds quickly after the turn even though most would feel pot commited there. Absolutely obvious. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 "I call....I'm allin." The call is binding. Le folds quickly after the turn even though most would feel pot commited there. Absolutely obvious. yea cause players can't possible slip up at all.think.. if he was INTENTIONALLY softplaying tuan, why would he fold face up and let everyone know??? Link to post Share on other sites
PocketBoat 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Wouldn't it be more financially profitable for Habib to take 100% of first and 50% of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc... than for Habib to take 100% of 3rd and get 50% of Le's first? In other words, there seems to be no sense in soft playing.Am I missing something here? Link to post Share on other sites
PoppinFresh 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Wouldn't it be more financially profitable for Habib to take 100% of first and 50% of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc... than for Habib to take 100% of 3rd and get 50% of Le's first? In other words, there seems to be no sense in soft playing.Am I missing something here?It would be most profitable for him to take 1st and for Le to take 2nd. So he would softplay him to avoid having him bust out early. Link to post Share on other sites
PocketBoat 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 but softplay him enough where Le could also win? I don't think so--- Link to post Share on other sites
adammc 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 If you would pay at least some attention you will notice that it is in fact more profitable for him to softplay Tuan no matter the situation. Habib had the chip lead, and they owned 50% of each other say. Then no matter who comes first/second they have the same amount of money. Considering the chip lead Habib had, it was 100% profitable for him to lay down almost every hand against Tuan until they were heads up. Use your head, tit. Link to post Share on other sites
PocketBoat 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Nice tact in your message...grow up. And you are working off an assumption that is not documented anywhere--that Le had a stake in Habib.If Habib is in 1st place with chip lead, his absolute priority #1 is to finish 1st. There is no other scenario that is more profitable....Le finishing 2nd-5th is small $ and negligible compared to making sure he gets first. Use YOUR brain-- Link to post Share on other sites
AC BillP 0 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Hassan is basically a "feel" player who weighs the opponents hands based on tells and patterns, not math. Paul Phillips is a math based player and technically he is correct. The flaw in the Philips statistical value analysis is not the it's wrong, it's that the arguement doesn't take into account any number of plays Hassan made against the player he staked. Many wre negative EV plays math-wise that were to the advantage of the third guy. Phillips doen't include those hands in coming to his conclusion. Link to post Share on other sites
Pokerghost2 0 Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 its one of those deals that looked really bad, but the truth is none of us will ever know his thought process on some of those plays. my view is this, i dont think it ever ever escaped his mind that he was at a final table with his horse and it must have affected his play, even if it was on a subconscious level. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now