Love D’negs but that’s like saying to a surgeon, the way you cut that heart out and replaced it with another is wild. Impressive still, absolutely. Even amazing in its own right? Yes. But it’s what they do. It’s their whole life. Sooo ya know.
@@jamesquattrone I have a math degree and that shit seems impossibly fast also it's not like he's calculating the equity, he's just used to seeing these situations. There's not really much math involved. I mean think about it, what math is there? There are pot odds, which yes he should know to do. Every hand you should calculate pot odds. But the real "calculation" people are saying is calculating whether 88 will have positive expected value based on the opponents range and pot odds. That is where experience comes in. Professional poker players have analyzed hand ranges with solvers so many times they have a general idea of how each range fairs against each other. So yea, the only calculation he ran was the pot odds, there obviously isn't a way he could calculate equity by hand. He just knows from practice.
DN definitely one of my favourite players, he may not win every tournament, but I just love his style of play, his calmness in the face of huge decisions, just his overall persona is very nice to watch, and the fact he is analysing and breaking down his plays really helps up and coming players. Thank you Daniel, and best of luck on the tables.
@@rjdavidr They're doing 2 runs. The first run he made trip kings (2 kings on the board) but Daniel made a full house on the river. Those 2 kings are no longer in the deck and will not be available for the 2nd run.
@Daniel Negreanu Daniel, these videos are great! Really enjoying these hand breakdowns, thanks a lot for doing them. Really interesting, really instructional. Just wondering, could you possibly do a breakdown where you perhaps lose the hand, or at least not quite get it right, and then explain what went wrong, and how you could have improved your play for the next time. Maybe? I think that might be quite interesting. If that's even possible of course.... Again, brilliant videos, really enjoying them.
Thank you again for the quality content Daniel! If you put the bottom of Toms range as suited wheel draws, would you have played pocket 6’s and 7’s the same way?
Pocket eights is 1 hand lower than the borderline hand that should have called here (99). The reason is there is almost no difference between 66, 77, 88 here (all averaging around 41.2-41.4% equity) . 99 has a 43.1% equity. 1.5% difference edge is huge and that's why 99 is the borderline hand and not 88 hand here. because if you're calling with 88 here, then you should "theoretically" be calling with 66 and 77 as well.
This hand is a good example of something I've been turning over for a while. Objectively JJ or QQ is just barely less than AK (overall win % especially in all-ins) , BUT they are favored against opposite groups of hands. JJ is crushing a whole bunch of hands that are a coin flip against AK (pairs) while AK destroys A-something and similar K -something hands that are fine to even against JJ. Which leads me to JJ must be played as much like AK as you can manage (including the big pushes) because it introduces doubt. Here, I think you are saying JJ isn't quiet as likely because he went all-in (which is something AK can do with minimal fear). In theory, JJ is pretty much the same, but it looks worse when you run into that overpair. And of course, if he had been jamming with JJ you were in trouble.
@truely True enough, but isn't the converse also true? If you have AK, your opponent(s) are less likely to have a hand you have a real advantage over (one you dominate). You gain a little protection on the worst case, but take a hit on your best case, and you are still slightly down against a pair. JJ is touch more volatile, but the idea is to force someone calling that big bet to reckon with both. AQ could be a coin flip or a dog, same with 10 10. Making an A suited call because "there are only 3 other aces ergo he has the jacks", seems a good way to make AK pay off more often.
Fascinating overview! The only thing I don't quite understand is why someone with a lower pair would want to run it twice, since pretty much everything you'd expect to be up against is only going to improve with more cards turning up.
His spot isn’t that great given that he’s flipping so it helps the results end in a split pot far more often. One of those cards could turn up in the first pot and he would just lose everything. Very common to run flips twice
@@nickchesney7254 Thanks for the reply, Nick! You make an interesting point about increasing the chances of a chopped pot, but here's my perspective on it: The person who is going to most benefit from running it twice is the person who has the worst hand pre-flop, and pocket 8s is ahead of everything except a higher pair. Even if the opponent has only 1 over card, multiple run-outs is going to increase their chances of pairing it (and all the more so if they have 2 different over cards). Same with hitting a flush if they have suited cards or a straight if they have connectors or even just 2 close numbers. I just don't see a lot of cases where it's beneficial for the 8s, but I'm just a casual player and could definitely be missing something!
This is why live old school poker is king. All Daniels talk really just comes down to player dependent. I've snap called people in this spot and snap folded all dependent on the player.
Studying and playing for the headsup challenge has turned you into a monster. You are 100 times better than before. Easily current most terrifying player from those at the top in the early 2000s!
Thank you for your thoughts and modern understanding of poker. Even if you spin the board once, you still make a big plus call! It was great... although as you say, it was not difficult for you, in terms of mathematics!)
But he played it bad and made the narrative suit his decision, do you not see that? It’s like hellmuth coming on and talking about his brilliant Q-4 call and making trips
I think Tom raises if the opener weren't Koray. Since he appeared tight either you dominate him or he dominates you and the blinds are less likely to call multi way with a straddled raised pot. Raising from the BB screams squeeze so if Tom makes it 35k to go either you call and lose (he bets the K high flop) or he takes it down. Strange how everything had to line up perfectly to get it all in.
I think Dwan has AKo here mostly, maybe some small chunk of overpairs, lets say 3 combos of JJ, if that's true then 88 is printing at 52.16%. But if we add in all JJ then it drops down to 43.03%, slightly losing so it doesn't take much to tip the scales. If Daniel thinks he has 15 combos of overpairs (JJ, QQ, KK 50%) then Dwan needs to be finding all AK, all AQ and some low suited Ax to make it breakeven again. Assuming all those overpairs is fine I guess, doesn´t feel very likely, but in my mind the bluffs feel even less likely so it just becomes kinda marginal. Daniel mentioned TT/99 liking to call and see a flop in position. The same can be said about any of Dwan's potential bluffs apart from maybe AQo, suited aces are just going to want to see a flop. And Dwan probably puts a lot of weight on his postflop skill edge, especially in position, so he won't be shoving hands that play smoothly post.
The only thing is that you also have to squeeze with suited broadway to balance your range otherwise it's too call heavy. Hands like JTs through to AJs should be in there as 3-bet folds while 66+, AK+ can be 3-bet calls, with AQo a certain fold and AQs being the hand which is right on the border between 3-bet fold and 3-bet call. Or possibly you can build your range in a different way and have hands like KQo, ATo-AQo as 3-bet folds while those suited broadway hands along with hands like 66-TT are removed from your 3betting range entirely and become calls. I've not run this through a solver but I'm pretty sure it would at least loosely agree with constructing your 3betting range either of these ways.
Maybe I'm just way off but I feel like Phil, Doyle, and Patrick know exactly what's going on (plus GK in the booth) and everyone else is scratching their heads. Brutal 1st runout for Dwan....great hand Daniel!
Yes modern poker theory says that he can have Ace wheel suited hands, but modern poker theory also says that you don't make that play every time you get an ace wheel suited hand or you will end up over bluffing in these spots. If you just count the statistical occurrence Ax suited you are overweighting his range towards those hands. I'm sure Daniel understands this but his explanation makes it sound like Ax has the same weight in the calculus as JJ or QQ.
Daniel spent lots of time talking breaking down Dwan's possible range, obviously to offer a broader lesson about ranges pot odds, and did an admirable job. The fact is tho that this is Tom Freaking Dwan, who's range is really MUCH wider including lots of utter garbage, and in this spot, its a snap-call- moonwalk-around-the-table-and-high-five-the-dealer spot
I ran the numbers in Equilab and I come out with Dwan being ahead 52% vs 48% based on the range you assigned him - Even as high as 55%. While he does have some overpairs here, he never has any under pairs here like 66s-77s, which means you are only beating a segment of his range that is shoving light, like A5s but it is not enough to offset the times you think you are crushed by JJs or QQs here. With pot odds of 43% you are marginally ahead by 2%-5%. If we remove A5s then Dwan is sitting on 60% equity, and you are -3%.
I think Daniel is top 3 players of all time, but all this guessing of what Dwan could have feels like defending from making a bad play, AK is the only hand ur in good shape against. So he got lucky twice, 1st time Dwan having that hand, and 2nd wining 2/2. Cuz the outcome was positive, people actually belive he made a good call.
That's how you play poker using GTO and modern theory. Its a game of incomplete information but you use maths and intelligence to try and bridge that gap. Your comment means you have no idea how to play poker.
@@lloydchristmas1086 My point is he looks both young and old at the same time, because he hasn't changed anything about his style or demeanor since he looked like a little kid.
Daniel really didn't discuss table image as much. Dwan used to have a rep for spewing chips with all manner of foolishness, which sorta makes this a snap-call without bothering worrying about combos.
Hi Mr.Negreanu, can you do this hand reviews in different slangs? would be so nice :) I heard you can do a good Filipino slang and im half Filipino, half german. Love your content, gl!
I have a question. Why do you think Tom Dwan goes all in in this spot? As a bluff, or as a value bet? He knows that you are in a better shape and try to make you fold, or just hope that you have like AQ and did it for value?
Actually that was tough and brave call but hey your Kid Poker and im not so that was epic call to be honest. Your analysis makes sense. Daniel did you know who is on my profile picture?
This is one of those situations where the results turned out so well that you convince yourself it was a good play. Calling off 120 straddle/big blinds pre-flop with pocket eights is a winning play? Even if Dwan's range is what you say it is, (some KK, QQ, JJ, AK + AQ suited) that leaves you with 3 combos of KK, 6 of QQ, 6 of JJ, 16 of AK, and 4 of AQ suited. So 15 combos have you crushed (21% equity) and then the other 20 have you flipping (54%-46% roughly). So across time, if you keep stacking off with eights, even given the money in the pot, this can't be a profitable play. 15 out of 35 combos have you in rough shape. That's 42% of his hands. Meaning, 42% of the time when you make this call you will be a huge dog. And then the other 58% of the time you're just flipping. How is there enough in the middle to make those odds worth taking on? I don't like Tom's play either. If he thinks Daniel is light, what's wrong with a small 4-bet? What does an all-in achieve that a 4-bet doesn't achieve with less on the line?
using your math, which is btw incorrect because you excluded a A-wheel card suited combos that Daniel mentioned, his equity is about 40% and he has to put in about 43% of the money. So even without those bluff hands its close to even. In short, Dwan needs to have A-small about once every 30 times this situation happens to make this play profitable, and thats assuming that Dwan will never 3-bet right away with QQ or JJ, which is quite an underbid IMO.
He failed to heavily discount AK and suited wheel aces in the same way that he discounted the hands that dominate him. Dwan will definitely be mostly 3betting AK and probably mixing in some wheel aces. You can't just give him all of those hands in full combos facing the back 4bet shove
the point you are missing is, Tom Dwan, of all poker players there, IS CAPABLE of 4 betting shove bluff with even stuffs like suited connectors, factoring the point that he HAS position and can slow play but still decide to shove may show that he'd rather Daniel fold than calling which not many premium hands would have wanted especially on a heads up with both players deep.
@@catbuikhang6482 pretty dangerous logic there to assume big bets in position mean someone mainly wants you to fold. It can also mean they want to stack you now before you are let off the hook by scare cards. Daniel was offered a poor price and Dwans shove has to work very often to be profitable. Folding 88 is certainly close imo but probably a fold. I wonder what you'd suggest to do with AQo, AJs? Does he have enough suited connector bluffs to call off with these hands too?
Jealous of your bankroll, but this analysis I strongly disagree with. The immediate flaw is considering all combos of AK/AQ/QQ/JJ were in play. We are not describing simply his 4bet shoving range, but instead his button back jamming range after calling. So I think the considerations to be made about how to develop that range: 1) Tom is not the theoretical player that most winning mid and high stakes online players are so that means he will have a larger button flatting range, but he still has the basic understanding of what hands should be three bet button vs highjack. 2) There are more reasons in a deepstack live game to trap with big hands, especially with a straddle in play 3) I think like you said it is very fair to assume he will take a flop with the majority of 99-TT hands with JJ-KK becoming more likely incrementally to be jammed (KK should always jam, JJ probably jams 50%). I would also add that AQs is a mandatory just call type of hand. 4) I'm actually stunned that he had AKo here. That is a hand that typically is a little too weak to play as a trap at these stack depths while too strong to not use it in his 3betting range. The same could be said for QQ which I believe fits this same category. 5) You mentioned that theoretical players like to use A2-A5s as part of their 4/5betting ranges, this is somewhat true, but as I am sure you know the majority of the 4/5bet bluffing range is built around A5s and some A4s. So when constructing combos that he is backjamming with, this would be my best effort (the small amount of combos illustrates this simply does not happen often) 99- 1 combo TT- 2 combos JJ- 3 combos QQ- 1 combo (much more likely he 3bets) KK- 1 combo AA- 3 combos (AA serves as a dramatically better trapping hand than KK/QQ) AKs- 1 combo AKo- 1 combo (truly is shocking to me that he ever has AKo off here to be honest, but there is always some room for some live randomness). AQs- 0 combos AQo- 4 combos (this is the hand against a tight HJ opener that makes the most sense to me) randomness- 3 combos- like you talked about in your video, this is far from an exact exercise in precision. Unlike very good online players who stick to a system and are used to taking lots of bad beats, live poker has far more randomness to it. For purposes of this exercise, I will give him 2 A5s and 1 extra QQ. I have a total of 20 combos in his backjamming range that has a 65.6% range advantage over you, making this truly a very close decision. Of course with incomplete information, a few assumptions in either direction changes everything. If we went with your assumption that he rarely if ever has AA (we really disagree on that because I think he uses it as his trapping hand a lot), well with nothing else changing you become a 59% underdog and its a clear call. If anyone is reading this and wondering what to get out of this insanely longwinded post, it's simply that in poker it is very easy to justify your own plays as great, especially when they work. I personally think Daniel made a small mistake when folding was better, and he thinks he made a rather clear cut good play. There is no right or wrong answer because the decision is close, but I do think he made some combo analysis.
I'm actually more confused about what Daniel is making dwans range to be so I can see what equity 88's has against dwans constructed range. AK, QQ, JJ. All the AQ? AQo included or only AQs? And then Ax suited wheel cards. How many? Only A5? All the A2s, A3s, A4s and A5s?
Absolutely awesome videos! I love all of them I think Daniel is top 3 poker players ever, but I do think it maybe time to change your wall color!! Cheers from Chicago 🤣
Salut Daniel! Unde putem vedea pe internet turneele tale din 2022? Mai ales high states poker de unde ai si pus secvente in acest clip? Pe pokergo nu vad si nici pe youtube din alte surse? De ce???
I'm a low stakes player and in this spot I would have put Tom on JJ+ and AQ+. I thought at the time it was a horrible call an even after your explanation I still think it was a bad call. I just see you flipping or a huge dog at best.
![Six Hundred Strike [EPIC: The Musical] Full Animatic](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zov6NXIAuow/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice breakdown of the hand man. The way you calculated all the odds that fast is wild.
Well, he is one of the best in the world
Love D’negs but that’s like saying to a surgeon, the way you cut that heart out and replaced it with another is wild. Impressive still, absolutely. Even amazing in its own right? Yes. But it’s what they do. It’s their whole life. Sooo ya know.
@@jamesquattrone can tell u never been complimented 😂 boy wrote a whole soliloquy… ya know?
@@jamesquattrone I have a math degree and that shit seems impossibly fast
also it's not like he's calculating the equity, he's just used to seeing these situations. There's not really much math involved. I mean think about it, what math is there? There are pot odds, which yes he should know to do. Every hand you should calculate pot odds. But the real "calculation" people are saying is calculating whether 88 will have positive expected value based on the opponents range and pot odds. That is where experience comes in. Professional poker players have analyzed hand ranges with solvers so many times they have a general idea of how each range fairs against each other. So yea, the only calculation he ran was the pot odds, there obviously isn't a way he could calculate equity by hand. He just knows from practice.
Is open heart surgery not wild?
DN definitely one of my favourite players, he may not win every tournament, but I just love his style of play, his calmness in the face of huge decisions, just his overall persona is very nice to watch, and the fact he is analysing and breaking down his plays really helps up and coming players. Thank you Daniel, and best of luck on the tables.
Snap call against Dwan... Snap fold against Hellmuth.
Hellmuth could have Q4o.
@@Goatboy451 HAHA! Not in this spot in a cash game
@@dnegspoker Dear Daniel. I try my luck. Maybe you read this. I would love to work for you. I need a job....
@@gernotg8480 What job do you want?? You want to be his dealer on every table or smth??
@@speedfastman i am serious
To lose his 2 kings/outs in the 1st run -- which was quite twisted, forcing Daniel to count his $$ -- was brutal
Why did he lose the 2 kings/outs in the first run? I don't understand this.
@@rjdavidr They're doing 2 runs. The first run he made trip kings (2 kings on the board) but Daniel made a full house on the river. Those 2 kings are no longer in the deck and will not be available for the 2nd run.
@@DoctorChained But how does this work? What happens if they both win 1? I've never seen this before and I don't like it.
@@mikeyforrester6887 they split the pot if they both win a run
@Daniel Negreanu
Daniel, these videos are great! Really enjoying these hand breakdowns, thanks a lot for doing them. Really interesting, really instructional.
Just wondering, could you possibly do a breakdown where you perhaps lose the hand, or at least not quite get it right, and then explain what went wrong, and how you could have improved your play for the next time. Maybe? I think that might be quite interesting.
If that's even possible of course....
Again, brilliant videos, really enjoying them.
Thank you again for the quality content Daniel! If you put the bottom of Toms range as suited wheel draws, would you have played pocket 6’s and 7’s the same way?
That was bottom of range given the jam, range is much wider when DN squeezes.
Pocket eights is 1 hand lower than the borderline hand that should have called here (99).
The reason is there is almost no difference between 66, 77, 88 here (all averaging around 41.2-41.4% equity) . 99 has a 43.1% equity. 1.5% difference edge is huge and that's why 99 is the borderline hand and not 88 hand here. because if you're calling with 88 here, then you should "theoretically" be calling with 66 and 77 as well.
Great videos Daniel. Thanks for doing this. I can see your game has evolved to a very high level!
I need to see this full episode. Too many legends at one table
Love the breakdown of the hands!!
Loving this format
Really like how you explained your thinking and the math behind it after he jams. I’d love to see more of that in your breakdowns.
You're amazing, Daniel! By the way, I love the explosion gesture u make everytime Phil H. Is about to to throw a tantrum lol
Lol 😂
This hand is a good example of something I've been turning over for a while. Objectively JJ or QQ is just barely less than AK (overall win % especially in all-ins) , BUT they are favored against opposite groups of hands. JJ is crushing a whole bunch of hands that are a coin flip against AK (pairs) while AK destroys A-something and similar K -something hands that are fine to even against JJ. Which leads me to JJ must be played as much like AK as you can manage (including the big pushes) because it introduces doubt. Here, I think you are saying JJ isn't quiet as likely because he went all-in (which is something AK can do with minimal fear). In theory, JJ is pretty much the same, but it looks worse when you run into that overpair. And of course, if he had been jamming with JJ you were in trouble.
@truely True enough, but isn't the converse also true? If you have AK, your opponent(s) are less likely to have a hand you have a real advantage over (one you dominate). You gain a little protection on the worst case, but take a hit on your best case, and you are still slightly down against a pair. JJ is touch more volatile, but the idea is to force someone calling that big bet to reckon with both. AQ could be a coin flip or a dog, same with 10 10. Making an A suited call because "there are only 3 other aces ergo he has the jacks", seems a good way to make AK pay off more often.
Did DNegs just do the Larry David:"Pretty pretty pretty good" phrase 😂 Beautiful 🤣
Must have seen him do it 50 times
i watch your videos sporadically, and I love how there is a red string through all of them.
long story: math and poker theory
short story: gamble
The man, the myth...the guy that takes your chips.
Incredible to see your hands hold up on High Stakes Poker.
It be a dream come true to sit at the same table as Daniel. One of the most entertaining players ever.
Fascinating overview! The only thing I don't quite understand is why someone with a lower pair would want to run it twice, since pretty much everything you'd expect to be up against is only going to improve with more cards turning up.
His spot isn’t that great given that he’s flipping so it helps the results end in a split pot far more often. One of those cards could turn up in the first pot and he would just lose everything. Very common to run flips twice
@@nickchesney7254 Thanks for the reply, Nick! You make an interesting point about increasing the chances of a chopped pot, but here's my perspective on it: The person who is going to most benefit from running it twice is the person who has the worst hand pre-flop, and pocket 8s is ahead of everything except a higher pair. Even if the opponent has only 1 over card, multiple run-outs is going to increase their chances of pairing it (and all the more so if they have 2 different over cards). Same with hitting a flush if they have suited cards or a straight if they have connectors or even just 2 close numbers. I just don't see a lot of cases where it's beneficial for the 8s, but I'm just a casual player and could definitely be missing something!
This is why live old school poker is king. All Daniels talk really just comes down to player dependent. I've snap called people in this spot and snap folded all dependent on the player.
Really enjoyed your analysis
Nice DNegs breakdown classroom as always. Did this influence your final hand 88 play in Event 12 against Ruan's AJ?
Studying and playing for the headsup challenge has turned you into a monster. You are 100 times better than before. Easily current most terrifying player from those at the top in the early 2000s!
Thank you for your thoughts and modern understanding of poker. Even if you spin the board once, you still make a big plus call! It was great... although as you say, it was not difficult for you, in terms of mathematics!)
But he played it bad and made the narrative suit his decision, do you not see that? It’s like hellmuth coming on and talking about his brilliant Q-4 call and making trips
@@rolandtomassi3486 lol the fuck you rambling about. Those two plays are absolutely nothing alike
@@rolandtomassi3486 dude what?
Thx daniel, easy explained, i love ur style👍
I think Tom raises if the opener weren't Koray. Since he appeared tight either you dominate him or he dominates you and the blinds are less likely to call multi way with a straddled raised pot. Raising from the BB screams squeeze so if Tom makes it 35k to go either you call and lose (he bets the K high flop) or he takes it down. Strange how everything had to line up perfectly to get it all in.
OMG, so scared!! 😱😱
We love you anyway! 🤩😍😄😄
Man, when that King flopped first time, I was already helping you push your stack Dwan-wards.
Patrick Antonius still looks the same after all these years!
daniel is a fricken genius!
4 minute explanation on what took him 4 seconds to make a decision at the table, hindsight is 20/20
Gotta bring the Big Game back!
Wow Brunson Antonius Dwan Ivy and Negranu at one table fire!
I did subscribe MasterClass bc of ur lesson.
this pot helped me understand the power of pairs. thanks alot
I think Dwan has AKo here mostly, maybe some small chunk of overpairs, lets say 3 combos of JJ, if that's true then 88 is printing at 52.16%.
But if we add in all JJ then it drops down to 43.03%, slightly losing so it doesn't take much to tip the scales.
If Daniel thinks he has 15 combos of overpairs (JJ, QQ, KK 50%) then Dwan needs to be finding all AK, all AQ and some low suited Ax to make it breakeven again. Assuming all those overpairs is fine I guess, doesn´t feel very likely, but in my mind the bluffs feel even less likely so it just becomes kinda marginal.
Daniel mentioned TT/99 liking to call and see a flop in position. The same can be said about any of Dwan's potential bluffs apart from maybe AQo, suited aces are just going to want to see a flop. And Dwan probably puts a lot of weight on his postflop skill edge, especially in position, so he won't be shoving hands that play smoothly post.
The only thing is that you also have to squeeze with suited broadway to balance your range otherwise it's too call heavy. Hands like JTs through to AJs should be in there as 3-bet folds while 66+, AK+ can be 3-bet calls, with AQo a certain fold and AQs being the hand which is right on the border between 3-bet fold and 3-bet call. Or possibly you can build your range in a different way and have hands like KQo, ATo-AQo as 3-bet folds while those suited broadway hands along with hands like 66-TT are removed from your 3betting range entirely and become calls. I've not run this through a solver but I'm pretty sure it would at least loosely agree with constructing your 3betting range either of these ways.
That beard is on point today dude
Pretty, pretty good analysis
I think the craziest thing about this video is that Bellande is still playing high stakes poker 🤣
Maybe I'm just way off but I feel like Phil, Doyle, and Patrick know exactly what's going on (plus GK in the booth) and everyone else is scratching their heads. Brutal 1st runout for Dwan....great hand Daniel!
Thank you Daniel
Love seeing you beat Dwan Daniel! Woo hoo
Holy $hit!!!!! Its Daniel Negranue
Negs: would you consider doing some of these hand commentaries on some of your older hands when you played “Poker after dark”?
Time to revive The Big Game on poker go 🙏🏾
Yes modern poker theory says that he can have Ace wheel suited hands, but modern poker theory also says that you don't make that play every time you get an ace wheel suited hand or you will end up over bluffing in these spots. If you just count the statistical occurrence Ax suited you are overweighting his range towards those hands. I'm sure Daniel understands this but his explanation makes it sound like Ax has the same weight in the calculus as JJ or QQ.
great to see mr. dnegs get redemption on HSP after multiple seasons of brutal bad luck
Daniel spent lots of time talking breaking down Dwan's possible range, obviously to offer a broader lesson about ranges pot odds, and did an admirable job. The fact is tho that this is Tom Freaking Dwan, who's range is really MUCH wider including lots of utter garbage, and in this spot, its a snap-call- moonwalk-around-the-table-and-high-five-the-dealer spot
I ran the numbers in Equilab and I come out with Dwan being ahead 52% vs 48% based on the range you assigned him - Even as high as 55%. While he does have some overpairs here, he never has any under pairs here like 66s-77s, which means you are only beating a segment of his range that is shoving light, like A5s but it is not enough to offset the times you think you are crushed by JJs or QQs here. With pot odds of 43% you are marginally ahead by 2%-5%. If we remove A5s then Dwan is sitting on 60% equity, and you are -3%.
But Daniel only needs like 43% equity to call profitably.
@@johnphillips669 fair point factoring in pot odds for sure....so like a 5% edge then
@@CanadianLoveKnot It is crucial to note that I'm getting 1.3-1 on the call so based on your analysis it becomes a clear call.
@@dnegspoker Only if he has A5s in range there.
I think Daniel is top 3 players of all time, but all this guessing of what Dwan could have feels like defending from making a bad play, AK is the only hand ur in good shape against. So he got lucky twice, 1st time Dwan having that hand, and 2nd wining 2/2. Cuz the outcome was positive, people actually belive he made a good call.
That's how you play poker using GTO and modern theory. Its a game of incomplete information but you use maths and intelligence to try and bridge that gap. Your comment means you have no idea how to play poker.
@truely Maybe 15 years ago
@@alexandrevaz-filion783 Wow u really think u can judge my play from a comment, go write more "I m Einstein" replys
These are so helpful love watching them!
Man, seeing Tom Dwan after not seeing him in 10 years is a bit of a shock. Like a kid in old age makeup.
yes people age...fascinating I know.
@@lloydchristmas1086 My point is he looks both young and old at the same time, because he hasn't changed anything about his style or demeanor since he looked like a little kid.
To me, a lay person
Durr's range on the button on HSP=Every hand imaginable for all plays
Daniel really didn't discuss table image as much. Dwan used to have a rep for spewing chips with all manner of foolishness, which sorta makes this a snap-call without bothering worrying about combos.
Nice job 👍
Phil understood everything in a second. 🎉
where can i watch a full episode guys?
Hey awesome video Daniel
You haven’t even had a chance to watch it.
@@BrandonWestfall Point!🙃
Great flip
Hi Mr.Negreanu, can you do this hand reviews in different slangs? would be so nice :) I heard you can do a good Filipino slang and im half Filipino, half german. Love your content, gl!
I do have all kinds!
So crazy and sick simultáneously
@@dnegspoker After that video with the Jamacian slang, I’d probably just stick with Toronto Buddy… its 2022 and all…
WOW 8ball Benza is still around I’m shocked.
Tofu Scramble is going to be my new online poker name
I have a question. Why do you think Tom Dwan goes all in in this spot? As a bluff, or as a value bet? He knows that you are in a better shape and try to make you fold, or just hope that you have like AQ and did it for value?
Hey Daniel, when are going to give us hockey fans an update on your fantasy hockey league?
Is it +ev for Tom too - with the money already in the pot?
Actually that was tough and brave call but hey your Kid Poker and im not so that was epic call to be honest. Your analysis makes sense. Daniel did you know who is on my profile picture?
Factor in the fact players are less likely to jam against you makes it easier to call bluffs.
Why didn't the 3 kings win? Or did I miss something obvious?
Daniel hat a boat
yeah
@@leonf.7185 Oh jebus, I didn't think of that! Thank you!
DNegs got that Mel Gibson beard action going
Does that code still work for poker go?
Never in the world would Dwan jam 90 thousand on a bluff with Ace wheel suited.
Teach Us your luck Negs!!! ahahahha Love You my Idol!!!!
Bring back the big game
My friend I have a serious question is it ok to talk in a hand in a tournament when heads up
Playing so much better since playing doug.
Hey, I’m new to poker, can someone explain why Dwan didn’t win with three kings?
Now I understand, the two kings gave him a full house beating the three of a kind.
Dwan really not happy with your call. He saw it comming 😂
This is one of those situations where the results turned out so well that you convince yourself it was a good play. Calling off 120 straddle/big blinds pre-flop with pocket eights is a winning play? Even if Dwan's range is what you say it is, (some KK, QQ, JJ, AK + AQ suited) that leaves you with 3 combos of KK, 6 of QQ, 6 of JJ, 16 of AK, and 4 of AQ suited. So 15 combos have you crushed (21% equity) and then the other 20 have you flipping (54%-46% roughly). So across time, if you keep stacking off with eights, even given the money in the pot, this can't be a profitable play. 15 out of 35 combos have you in rough shape. That's 42% of his hands. Meaning, 42% of the time when you make this call you will be a huge dog. And then the other 58% of the time you're just flipping. How is there enough in the middle to make those odds worth taking on?
I don't like Tom's play either. If he thinks Daniel is light, what's wrong with a small 4-bet? What does an all-in achieve that a 4-bet doesn't achieve with less on the line?
using your math, which is btw incorrect because you excluded a A-wheel card suited combos that Daniel mentioned, his equity is about 40% and he has to put in about 43% of the money. So even without those bluff hands its close to even. In short, Dwan needs to have A-small about once every 30 times this situation happens to make this play profitable, and thats assuming that Dwan will never 3-bet right away with QQ or JJ, which is quite an underbid IMO.
Don't think I've ever won by going all in with AK preflop, not my favourite hand at all
man Burr looking old these days, and D negs looking great as ever!. :D
Also, AQo here is stronger than 88. I wonder if Daniel would have made this call with AQo
Merci Daniel top!!!!!
He failed to heavily discount AK and suited wheel aces in the same way that he discounted the hands that dominate him. Dwan will definitely be mostly 3betting AK and probably mixing in some wheel aces. You can't just give him all of those hands in full combos facing the back 4bet shove
the point you are missing is, Tom Dwan, of all poker players there, IS CAPABLE of 4 betting shove bluff with even stuffs like suited connectors, factoring the point that he HAS position and can slow play but still decide to shove may show that he'd rather Daniel fold than calling which not many premium hands would have wanted especially on a heads up with both players deep.
@@catbuikhang6482 pretty dangerous logic there to assume big bets in position mean someone mainly wants you to fold. It can also mean they want to stack you now before you are let off the hook by scare cards. Daniel was offered a poor price and Dwans shove has to work very often to be profitable. Folding 88 is certainly close imo but probably a fold. I wonder what you'd suggest to do with AQo, AJs? Does he have enough suited connector bluffs to call off with these hands too?
Finally a hand on hsp, and Canada a qualify for world cup
Daniel big fan
Question: Why did they run the cards twice, can someone clarify as I'm a little confused.
I need to see garret with these guys
Beard looking dope!
Haha he said dang Daniel you’re stubborn
I can only watch poker if someone is explaining as they go. Otherwise its too confusing as the announcers don't know your process.
How did dnegs win the first run? wasnt it trip kings over 8s?
Full house vs trips. DNegs had 888KK, 8s full of kings. Dwan had just the three kings.
duh, how'd i miss that. th x
Jealous of your bankroll, but this analysis I strongly disagree with. The immediate flaw is considering all combos of AK/AQ/QQ/JJ were in play. We are not describing simply his 4bet shoving range, but instead his button back jamming range after calling.
So I think the considerations to be made about how to develop that range:
1) Tom is not the theoretical player that most winning mid and high stakes online players are so that means he will have a larger button flatting range, but he still has the basic understanding of what hands should be three bet button vs highjack.
2) There are more reasons in a deepstack live game to trap with big hands, especially with a straddle in play
3) I think like you said it is very fair to assume he will take a flop with the majority of 99-TT hands with JJ-KK becoming more likely incrementally to be jammed (KK should always jam, JJ probably jams 50%). I would also add that AQs is a mandatory just call type of hand.
4) I'm actually stunned that he had AKo here. That is a hand that typically is a little too weak to play as a trap at these stack depths while too strong to not use it in his 3betting range. The same could be said for QQ which I believe fits this same category.
5) You mentioned that theoretical players like to use A2-A5s as part of their 4/5betting ranges, this is somewhat true, but as I am sure you know the majority of the 4/5bet bluffing range is built around A5s and some A4s.
So when constructing combos that he is backjamming with, this would be my best effort (the small amount of combos illustrates this simply does not happen often)
99- 1 combo
TT- 2 combos
JJ- 3 combos
QQ- 1 combo (much more likely he 3bets)
KK- 1 combo
AA- 3 combos (AA serves as a dramatically better trapping hand than KK/QQ)
AKs- 1 combo
AKo- 1 combo (truly is shocking to me that he ever has AKo off here to be honest, but there is always some room for some live randomness).
AQs- 0 combos
AQo- 4 combos (this is the hand against a tight HJ opener that makes the most sense to me)
randomness- 3 combos- like you talked about in your video, this is far from an exact exercise in precision. Unlike very good online players who stick to a system and are used to taking lots of bad beats, live poker has far more randomness to it. For purposes of this exercise, I will give him 2 A5s and 1 extra QQ.
I have a total of 20 combos in his backjamming range that has a 65.6% range advantage over you, making this truly a very close decision. Of course with incomplete information, a few assumptions in either direction changes everything. If we went with your assumption that he rarely if ever has AA (we really disagree on that because I think he uses it as his trapping hand a lot), well with nothing else changing you become a 59% underdog and its a clear call.
If anyone is reading this and wondering what to get out of this insanely longwinded post, it's simply that in poker it is very easy to justify your own plays as great, especially when they work. I personally think Daniel made a small mistake when folding was better, and he thinks he made a rather clear cut good play. There is no right or wrong answer because the decision is close, but I do think he made some combo analysis.
I'm actually more confused about what Daniel is making dwans range to be so I can see what equity 88's has against dwans constructed range.
AK, QQ, JJ. All the AQ? AQo included or only AQs? And then Ax suited wheel cards. How many? Only A5? All the A2s, A3s, A4s and A5s?
WTG Daniel!
Dwan = uber-shark in high stakes, probably only Ivey is slightly better.
Absolutely awesome videos! I love all of them I think Daniel is top 3 poker players ever, but I do think it maybe time to change your wall color!! Cheers from Chicago 🤣
Salut Daniel! Unde putem vedea pe internet turneele tale din 2022? Mai ales high states poker de unde ai si pus secvente in acest clip? Pe pokergo nu vad si nici pe youtube din alte surse? De ce???
Can someone explain why Daniel won the first run? Is it because both of his whole cards made the full house? Because Dwan also had it but Daniel won
I'm a low stakes player and in this spot I would have put Tom on JJ+ and AQ+. I thought at the time it was a horrible call an even after your explanation I still think it was a bad call.
I just see you flipping or a huge dog at best.
nice to see high stakes for a looong time!