The most impressive part of this fold isn't even that Doug was able to correctly work through the problem, and realize he needed to fold his hand. What made it really impressive is having the stones to fold a straight on live television, knowing if he called nobody would fault him, but if he folded and was wrong, he'd get excoriated.
People don't care if you make a fold like this and are wrong. Phil Ivey has made a couple folds similar to this and been wrong (KK against a donkey shove by Brad Booth, a set against a random guy recently who was just going crazy with nothing etc) and nobody says anything.
@@Stockhandle123 Which one? No one cares about the fold to Brad Booth and I didn't hear much about the fold to the crazy donk on the turn with the set. But I don't read as much poker discussion these days.
Doug did break this hand down in a stream somewhere towards the end of the challenge. I remember being very interested in his thought process. In short he said Phil bet into 2 players that are strong a lot in these positions, and bet too much money at that. Knowing Phil, he certainly has the nuts. The "blockers" talk was the last nail in the coffin. Doug made it sound very easy too. Doug also adressed the table talk from the other guys with the side bets. Said he didn't paid attention to them and even called one a fish. Fish said "If he had Q10 he has Q10, pay the man. Easy bet here" (can't remember his name). Doug in the stream break down said "who cares what a fish thinks".
Losing that million to Doug is paying off for Daniel, he's really really caught up and is thinking on a really sound level now... but that million loss will result in multiple millions in EV
I agree with you to some extent. When Daniel first started playing Doug online it was very evident that he was simply trying to do something which other people had told him to do. He wasn't able to deviate or adjust. For example his cbet sizing didn't work at all. He was betting way too little to bluff doug off a better hand or a draw, while at the same time he wasn't building the pot enough so that when he had a good hand he could have gotten paid. So what actually was the point of making those small cbets? This was something he should have been able to fix after like 10 mins of play, but since Daniel simply wasn't able to adapt he just continued with it. I agree with Daniel coming off as a better player from the match, but you can clearly see that he is not there yet. He is trying his best to incorporate this new knowledge, but I just often see it as a kind of overadjustment. For example AQ has now become a very tricky hand for him to play. He is putting way too much emphasis on the fact that it blocks AA/AK/QQ and it leads him to assume he is getting bluffed everytime someone 3bets him and he is holding AQ. A good example of this is played in 25k high roller tournament. Daniel opens with AQ oop and gets 3bet from the button if I remember correctly. Flop comes T high and is checked. Turn brick and again check-check. River is K. Daniel check-calls it reasoning that he blocks AK and KQ. While this is true he just completely ignores the fact that if the guy has nothing on the river, he had nothing pf, nothing on the flop and nothing on the turn. If he had nothing pf and chooses to go for a bluff, why didn't he try to bluff the flop or at least the turn when it was already checked twice by Daniel? Also another example from the same tournament. Daniel has AQ on the button and something like 30bb effective stacks. Utg opens, Daniel chooses to 3bet, immediately gets into trouble and folds to a shove. Why exactly was he 3betting there? It clearly wasn't for value since he folded. If he assumed the other guy was opening lightly, why not just call and play AQ from position against a perceived bluffy range? With the line he chose to play there a fold pf would have been the best he could have achieved. So why not just pick another hand for that from the beginning. So in conclusion, Daniel is making an effort to improve and has improved a lot already. At the moment he is just struggling a bit in figuring it out and his though processes are excessively affected by solvers, combos, blockers etc. It will be interesting to see how he can play in a year or so.
Love the newer two part analysis on your channel. While playing with a solid foundation (GTO) is very important, it is also important to understand the extra information available in live poker, and the thought processes of players who aren't versed in the GTO portion of the game.
I think the table talk served to make Doug more comfortable with the laydown, it didn't dictate it. I'd bet that even if Phil had kept his mouth shut, Doug would have laid it down.
@@iamamish It would've been way more of an impressive fold if that was the case. Hellmuth was giving off tells so strong that just about any decent live poker player would be able to spot them.
Hey Daniel! Doug did do a hand review on this spot on his channel. Doug's line of thinking matches up well with what you are saying in the new school analysis. He went a little more into the math on his review but overall it does make this a fairly trivial fold. Still pretty sweet that he did it on live TV on High Stakes Poker though lol. I think he even mentioned in the moment that it would suck to make this kind of fold and be wrong on TV.
It is clear most of these hand review videos have been scripted by Daniels mentors. I've been watching Daniel play for years, he doesn't do any of this "new" stuff
@@GutyG damn I am not gonna lie I can’t find it...? I know that he did a review of the hand and went fairly in depth... perhaps it’s embedded in one of the live stream videos of Daniel v Doug? I’m gonna have to keep searching
Only Phil Hellmuth can flop the nut straight vs the 2nd nut straight and NOT either stack his opponent or win a huge pot! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ That being said, many high stakes players are paying him off which is why he continues to play the way he does.
Yeah because sadly, high stakes players think they are good because they play high stakes. They think theres a direct relation between money you put in and actual skill.
I'm moving my first steps into GTO and man it's like training your brain to a completely new game. It's hard...very hard. I envy people like Polk who can use modern poker theory real time at the table. I hope I get the hang of it...some day in the future.
I'm actually super curious how much Doug limited Phil's range. You can oddly put Phil on a lot of non-QT hands and still be forced to fold just because sets and semi bluffs all have something like 30%-40% equity while against QT he has exactly 3 out to split the pot so effectively 6% equity.
@@shemkigen639 I’m not saying Polk put him on a set and folded anyway. I’m saying that he might not have limited Phil’s range to just QT because even if there are a decent percentage (I don’t recall exactly how much since it has been a while since I did the math but it was something like well over 50%) of set and the combo draw he still does not have enough equity since the bet is so large compared to the pit he needs close to 50% equity and he is not favored enough against the semi bluffs to counter being basically dead against the only value hand Phil could be representing here. For what it is worth in Polk’s interview with Garrett he seems to imply that he thought Phil had 0 bluffs because the line made so little sense. I just find it interesting that he doesn’t even need to go nearly that far. Plus I did not have that information 10 months ago so I was honestly curious.
Speaking of Rounders, how about an Old School/New School analysis of the hand where Johnny Chan checks the nut straight three times to Eric Seidel to induce an all-in on the river with what I believe was 2-pair, giving Chan the WSOP Main Title.
Nice vid/series Daniel, I really don't know what Phil was thinking that's a play you see at the micros... was funny that Doug even showed the table his laydown, that's really letting Phil know what's up... It seems you and Doug have a new found respect for each other.... unless i am missing something. All the best dude keep up the great content
It's a credit that you have taken to study and evolve your game! Meanwhile other old school players have refused to do so and have no idea how far they are behind.
Great fold but somewhat a textbook fold? Hellmuth does that with (12) Q10s, (3) JJs, (3) 99s, (3) 88s, and, maybe (2) A10 and K10 of spades. Even assuming that these have equal probability (and they do not-Q10 seems more likely) there is no equity for a 90k call?
At 3:08, that is the first time I have ever heard the Canadian in you come out! Love ya Dnegs, learned a lot from ya. Helped turn me from a break even rec to a winning rec!
It’s cool to see that the game has evolved past people playing or keeping bad hands, so the amount of bluffs and in turn variability has reduced enough to somehow make a luck game even more skill based
In this case, it makes little difference if it is old school or new school. You bet $7000 and facing $90,000 raise. Even if you put Hellmuth on Flush draw, or a set, you are still facing about 40 percent chance of losing $90,000 in a cash game...!!!..No matter how you cut it, it is a smart fold.
One question: If GTO Philbot knows that Nodelocked Dougbot will always fold everything but QT to this sizing, could he profitably bluff shove QQ and TT, the nut blockers?
From a GTO perspective, also if Doug folds all his T7 and call only with the nuts, including the factor the pot is 3way (and the 3rd player could call with QT himself), by folding anything other than the nuts Doug is still not exploitable.
Question for all: Person in a tournament walks away and is getting blinded out. Eventually causing him to be all-in. Does the hand still get mucked since they're not at the table or tabled because you can't muck an all-in hand.
I've seen it done both ways. The casino I used to play tournaments at, finally settled on folding the hand because their hand is dead when the last card hits, before the action starts.
Great analysis, as always. However, the amateur/low/mid stakes players should take this with a grain of salt. Because, 1-3 or 2-5 or even 5-10 player would absolutely go all in with a top or mid set in this position (1-3 player even with a bottom set). Therefore, it is true: Polk could narrow Phil's value range to just the nuts. That is, because they were playing a top pro high stakes cash game. In more low stakes/softer games, the correct way to play 107 off in this spot is absolutely to call all in. Otherwise, in the long run you'd just be overfolding and losing money.
I completely agree. 5-10 is tricky as I've personally lost big pots with flopped straights against sets. It's still a very tricky spot it all goes back to bankroll management if you can afford a downstreak. Some people are just lucky and luck is definitely a factor in just one hand.
This hand was incredible to watch! An amazing fold from one of the greatest player ever. Such a misstep from Phil tho, extremely fun to see Phil being Phil and shooting himself in the foot
Daniel on the next old school vs new school can you do Dwans heads up match vs hellmuth when they played at Caesars palace? I know its kinda throwback but classic match and banter to say the least. Thanks for making these!
I read from a comment from somewhere I can't remember that: Phil cannot stack Doug because he was playing the way he did against whales in his private games. Those games are so soft that Phil can jam 20x pot with the nuts on flop and still get looked up by one pair. But he can't get any value playing that style against people that use more than 2 brain cells playing poker.
I know Doug Polk is a big GTO guy, but I still wondered how on earth he folded the second nuts to the nuts on the flop when I saw this for the first time a while ago. It’s really cool as always to see your analysis on a hand like this. Thanks Daniel :)
With that flop, holding 0 spades. What are you improving to on the turn and river? You're only getting more annihilated the more cards you see even if you call a minclick reraise. He's not even holding a heart card, so has no backdoor outs, has no bluffs. But you just gotta take your coolers most times. But against Hellmuth who can't keep his mouth shut when he's in a hand, it's pretty easy fold even without all that.
Raising all in with the nuts is suboptimal. That's exactly why Phil may have done it. Knowing it's suboptimal, other players would not put him on the nuts. I think raising all in with the nut flush draw is a sensible move in that spot, and that's exactly where other players may have put Phil.
Maybe Phil was attempting to balance his appearance at the table that day. But since we rarely see Phil jam on a wet flop like this, its easy to narrow his range down.
Small pairs generally prefers barreling on more disconnected flops aswell as not as much multiway. You have more natural bluffs on connected boards and hitting a set w the underpair is less valuable on a connected board.
Yeah, you can tell Daniel's praises for Doug here are legit, and after their match I heard genuine praises from Doug as well as to how much Daniel improved at heads up.
My thoughts as well. Even mid way through their challenge you could see a pretty drastic shift in their respect for each other. I found it interesting that they spoke as much as they did privately while the challenge was happening with what seemed like Doug almost helping Daniel at some points. Also interesting how Daniels luck box criticism of Doug stopped real quick after he ran way + ev for a bit too lol. But certainly good for poker to see those two getting along well.
@@barthk3640 Daniel has the exact opposite relation to Doug than he has to Phil... With Doug: all respect, no friendship. With Phil: all friendship, no respect. 🤣
The old school analysis is great and I enjoyed it. The new school seems too lazy to call it new school "maybe, some frequency, probably, I think" it should actually put into a solver if it's new school analysis eh?
Daniel the way you break down this hand is superb. I also used my Omaha strategy of "What Would You Be Happy With" I Always look forward to the Pokercast. Cheers👍
It's like Daniel pointed out - if you're in a tournament, you want to take down the pot and not give flushes or even higher straights (or boats, etc.) a chance to get there, even if it's not as high EV long-term. Phil's mistake here was approaching a cash game (perhaps the fact that it's televised is a factor) the way he would approach a tournament. Yeah he sacrificed value, and yeah it's not the optimal play, but Hellmuth doesn't think that way. He's trying to win the hand in front of him. And, despite how you may think about it, that's been quite a successful approach over the years.
what I absolutely love is the way he dumbs down the 'old school' analysis which, when you think about it, undermines not just all the players who play that way, but his own masterclass and the trillion video analyses he's done in the past. GTO play is something he learned 5 minutes ago, so was he just thinking like a fish all this time before then?
Yeah it’s sad to see really! Gone from GOAT to… GTO obsessed average guy who gets sponsored. He had his success with his natural talent. Not this “ranges” bollocks which doesn’t win you tournaments
So first of all, I really like the format of this video Dan. Good job, cool break down. Been a fan for a long time. ( I’m also a HUGE Doug Polk fan, ha however I just wanted to say. I understand gto.. but I think the point you just really missed here is that it’s Phil. You are forgetting to talk about two spades on the board. Phil did EXACTLY what he wanted here. Win the 11k profit and move on. There are two spades on the board! He has the best hand that can be obliterated with TONS of cards on the turn. All boats and spades, and even other mixtures like K 10 of spades, etc. he wants the win, or to charge you a boatload to gamble. Just my opinion, on why I would have done the exact same thing if I were Phil.
This is actually a point that could speak to Daniel with his terrible luck on HSP. Daniel flopped the nuts so many times only to lose on turn/river because of trapping or playing more customary vs. taking profit at the peak time. In the long run yes, playing that way isn't winning, but I don't think you can fault playing that way if there's a flush draw and potential boat could beat you as well. With the wide range Doug has and him checking and then raising, he's probably not bluffing which means with pretty much any great hand other than what he had, Phil wouldn't be in tremendous shape, just good shape. Where Phil went wrong was when he opened his mouth.
Hey D-Negs.. I used to be a fan of Doug Polk, and now I've become a fan of you. The reason is because he quit on making poker analysis videos, and you keep coming out with excellent poker content. Thanks for what you do, highly appreciated.
Would say there’s one other combo possible A/Q spades but very unlikely to jam with that, but Phil only jamming bluff with combo draw and AQ has 10 to the gut shot spade to the flush, and he holds the Q of spades!! so 3 maybe combos v 12
@@DKFX1 wrong! Flush > straight therefore it’s better to win the pot there and then, than let your opponent cheaply see cards, hit a flush then you’ve lost.
The thing you omitted was that either Polk or the Button,, could easily be raising with AxSS🤔 . Either of those bets could have been standard bets from the nut flush draw.
can u do the hand against esfandiari where he folds st.flush.......board was A2354 all spades . we couldn't see ur cards so i have guess of ur holdings. FYI....if u need the hand video i can send it to u......tnx
You cant judge ppl on one hand but PH pretty much shows why he is criticized for not being much of a cash gamer here. Against a world-class dude like Polk, I am not surprised at all that Polk finds a route to fold. Astute play, excellent read, hats off
Alot of the rational behind folding relies on "Helmuth would never do that". If this happened in an online game or something where you have 0 information on your opponent, is it still a fold? I would think the "right" move is to call.
I think the *whole* conversation would've went differently, if Helmuth would have told Polk that he "could easily have ... you know ... QueenTen" & just shut up after that one-liner, instead of what he actually said: Everyone including Polk would've heard that cheeky statement, thought about it and then continued on with speculations like "Wait, he also could have pocket 8s, he raised preflop from an early position!" and on and on about all the *weaker* hands he could have... I am almost certain that a strategy like this ( - _do it cheeky like Helmuth did, but then tell him you _*_could_*_ have the nuts and just shut up_ - ) would have convinced Polk to call Phils insane overbet. Done like that this could've been the best bait move by Helmuth so far 😏
Think you could give another player KQ suited. But Phil's snap shove is almost always super strong. Curious how Polk reacts if Phil goes for 37k. Leaves an interesting spot on a turn card for pair plus draws.
One thing I have learned studying the Pads post flop program is that when we polarize, we do not do it with the nuts. Consider a rank of our hands from 0 to 10, 0 being complete garbage and 10 the best hand possible. We won't overbet and polarize with a 10 or a 0, because a 0 has no redraws or backdoors etc., and the 10 needs no protection, but instead understand the maximum bet we can make that our opponent could call losing. Considering this, it would be wise to do so with JJ for instance. And even so, if we understand that the opponent does not have the nuts. I've been studying poker for a few months only, and it baffles me how Phil makes elementary mistakes that even beginners who study hard are probably not making, or at least reducing step by step
One thing we should consider is that maybe Phil panicked and wanted to try and just end the action, considering how deep they are, and playing deep is not his forte. But still, he's a pro right? I believe that a guy with his credentials cannot make as many elementary mistakes as he often does. Also, he's a prick.
I think you could eliminate Phil having QsTs which he doesn't need to jam, and probably a loose UTG raise with Ts7s or Th7h. I don't think Phil would play this way with a set though I wouldn't completely rule it out. Same with AsTs or KsTs. However, I can totally see him trying to shut down all draws with AA, KK and QQ. And with QQ there is also a gutshot to nut straight, unless Polk specifically had KsQs and wanted to gamble. As an aside, would you gamble Hellmuth's all-in with KsQs? Anyway, I hate the play of moving all in with the nuts here, but I would like to know how Polk eliminated AA-QQ from consideration. Because if you throw those overpairs into the mix, I think you have to call the all-in. Thoughts?
Hmmm. What about 10 8 of spades. Granted that is only one more hand... but that is a hand he could play this way. Willing to get it all in with a massive draw and a pair..... Might not change much, because the draw has so much equity against Doug. Phill Helmuth would definitely consider this... given his tourney history and the fact he can't be dead to any hand. This would particularly be more relevant if he put Doug on a flush draw. He would want to force the issue because of the risk of flush over flush. Interesting analysis though.
KT of spades is a coinflip, AsTs is almost a coinflip. Wouldn't say it's the best fold ever, but Phil blundered too much allowing Doug to get away easily.
Diamond Flush draw also on Flop...Perhaps Hellmuth could have had an A high flush draw as well...Obviously we see the Cards so he does not...Polk has multiple scenarios why to fold...This is still a GREAT fold but with Hellmuth you would assume he has a BIG hand and with Equity left to Bust Polks lower straight...
Huge fan Danielle, and always thought Doug was a bit of a narcissist. That being said, this is one of the best poker reads on TV, I have ever seen. I know you don't Doug, but just give credit where credit is do... Let's all ask ourselves...if Danielle was in the exact position, with the same hand...would he fold?? Never, ever ever. And DN's reading ability is amazing...so my guess is the hand would go like this...DN breaks it down, figures Phil must have the nut str8.......but then still call anyway lol Facts
It's 1000000% easier in hind site. I think it was one of the great folds but not the greatest. I would say 99.95% of pro players can't make that fold in real time. Just my opinion.
![[UNCENSORED] Phil Hellmuth STORMS OFF THE SET Losing $286,000 Pot](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KmsXQk6Pj74/mqdefault.jpg)
The most impressive part of this fold isn't even that Doug was able to correctly work through the problem, and realize he needed to fold his hand. What made it really impressive is having the stones to fold a straight on live television, knowing if he called nobody would fault him, but if he folded and was wrong, he'd get excoriated.
People don't care if you make a fold like this and are wrong. Phil Ivey has made a couple folds similar to this and been wrong (KK against a donkey shove by Brad Booth, a set against a random guy recently who was just going crazy with nothing etc) and nobody says anything.
@@EGarrett01 yeah I think that’s right, at least among those who are in the know.
@@EGarrett01 the problem is that Phil Helmut is not bluffing 😂 so Doug wasn't worried about that
@@EGarrett01 ivey got killed for that fold online.
@@Stockhandle123 Which one? No one cares about the fold to Brad Booth and I didn't hear much about the fold to the crazy donk on the turn with the set. But I don't read as much poker discussion these days.
"Honey he called me with Queen Ten!"
ive seen this reference a lot. wheres it from?
@@chaitanyangulhane wsop main
ruclips.net/video/gYK6U_T1A70/видео.html
lolol good one mate
hahahhaah
Doug did break this hand down in a stream somewhere towards the end of the challenge. I remember being very interested in his thought process. In short he said Phil bet into 2 players that are strong a lot in these positions, and bet too much money at that. Knowing Phil, he certainly has the nuts. The "blockers" talk was the last nail in the coffin. Doug made it sound very easy too.
Doug also adressed the table talk from the other guys with the side bets. Said he didn't paid attention to them and even called one a fish. Fish said "If he had Q10 he has Q10, pay the man. Easy bet here" (can't remember his name). Doug in the stream break down said "who cares what a fish thinks".
The fish in question is Brandon Stevens
@@darrenang7742 The second he said that I knew he had to be a businessman
Losing that million to Doug is paying off for Daniel, he's really really caught up and is thinking on a really sound level now... but that million loss will result in multiple millions in EV
I agree with you to some extent. When Daniel first started playing Doug online it was very evident that he was simply trying to do something which other people had told him to do. He wasn't able to deviate or adjust. For example his cbet sizing didn't work at all. He was betting way too little to bluff doug off a better hand or a draw, while at the same time he wasn't building the pot enough so that when he had a good hand he could have gotten paid. So what actually was the point of making those small cbets?
This was something he should have been able to fix after like 10 mins of play, but since Daniel simply wasn't able to adapt he just continued with it.
I agree with Daniel coming off as a better player from the match, but you can clearly see that he is not there yet. He is trying his best to incorporate this new knowledge, but I just often see it as a kind of overadjustment. For example AQ has now become a very tricky hand for him to play. He is putting way too much emphasis on the fact that it blocks AA/AK/QQ and it leads him to assume he is getting bluffed everytime someone 3bets him and he is holding AQ. A good example of this is played in 25k high roller tournament. Daniel opens with AQ oop and gets 3bet from the button if I remember correctly. Flop comes T high and is checked. Turn brick and again check-check. River is K. Daniel check-calls it reasoning that he blocks AK and KQ. While this is true he just completely ignores the fact that if the guy has nothing on the river, he had nothing pf, nothing on the flop and nothing on the turn. If he had nothing pf and chooses to go for a bluff, why didn't he try to bluff the flop or at least the turn when it was already checked twice by Daniel?
Also another example from the same tournament. Daniel has AQ on the button and something like 30bb effective stacks. Utg opens, Daniel chooses to 3bet, immediately gets into trouble and folds to a shove. Why exactly was he 3betting there? It clearly wasn't for value since he folded. If he assumed the other guy was opening lightly, why not just call and play AQ from position against a perceived bluffy range? With the line he chose to play there a fold pf would have been the best he could have achieved. So why not just pick another hand for that from the beginning.
So in conclusion, Daniel is making an effort to improve and has improved a lot already. At the moment he is just struggling a bit in figuring it out and his though processes are excessively affected by solvers, combos, blockers etc. It will be interesting to see how he can play in a year or so.
@@henrikkantokoski4212how do you evaluate him now, 2 years later?
Love the newer two part analysis on your channel.
While playing with a solid foundation (GTO) is very important, it is also important to understand the extra information available in live poker, and the thought processes of players who aren't versed in the GTO portion of the game.
Love how Doug even got Phil with some tells and his table talk too 😂
I think the table talk served to make Doug more comfortable with the laydown, it didn't dictate it. I'd bet that even if Phil had kept his mouth shut, Doug would have laid it down.
@@iamamish It would've been way more of an impressive fold if that was the case. Hellmuth was giving off tells so strong that just about any decent live poker player would be able to spot them.
Hey Daniel! Doug did do a hand review on this spot on his channel. Doug's line of thinking matches up well with what you are saying in the new school analysis. He went a little more into the math on his review but overall it does make this a fairly trivial fold. Still pretty sweet that he did it on live TV on High Stakes Poker though lol. I think he even mentioned in the moment that it would suck to make this kind of fold and be wrong on TV.
Taylor, I'm 100% Daniel watched Doug's hand review before he made this video. FWIW.
It is clear most of these hand review videos have been scripted by Daniels mentors. I've been watching Daniel play for years, he doesn't do any of this "new" stuff
Can you share link to that video?
@@GutyG damn I am not gonna lie I can’t find it...? I know that he did a review of the hand and went fairly in depth... perhaps it’s embedded in one of the live stream videos of Daniel v Doug? I’m gonna have to keep searching
@@taylortryon7248 I can’t find it either lol. I remember watching that analysis you were talking about but now it’s nowhere to be found
Only Phil Hellmuth can flop the nut straight vs the 2nd nut straight and NOT either stack his opponent or win a huge pot! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
That being said, many high stakes players are paying him off which is why he continues to play the way he does.
Yeah, any other player at the table would have paid him off as was evident by what they said afterwards.
@@jorgeherrera1074 I think It brinn would also have folded.
Yeah because sadly, high stakes players think they are good because they play high stakes. They think theres a direct relation between money you put in and actual skill.
@@Devilfish6666 Unless they’re independently wealthy high stakes players are better players.
@@Stockhandle123 na I would’ve snap called
I'm moving my first steps into GTO and man it's like training your brain to a completely new game. It's hard...very hard. I envy people like Polk who can use modern poker theory real time at the table. I hope I get the hang of it...some day in the future.
I’m looking to use it in the future too. I agree it’s tough to learn man! Keep at it and you’ll get there. Good luck🤙🏼
Huge congrats for being voted the most iconic player of all time Daniel! Happy for you man!
2:23 The famed canadian Gabe impression came out! Great review of a sick hand! Hope you are having a good week!
DNegs showing some personal growth by showing Polk's game a lot of real respect here.
I'm actually super curious how much Doug limited Phil's range. You can oddly put Phil on a lot of non-QT hands and still be forced to fold just because sets and semi bluffs all have something like 30%-40% equity while against QT he has exactly 3 out to split the pot so effectively 6% equity.
If you put him on a set you call!
@@shemkigen639 I’m not saying Polk put him on a set and folded anyway. I’m saying that he might not have limited Phil’s range to just QT because even if there are a decent percentage (I don’t recall exactly how much since it has been a while since I did the math but it was something like well over 50%) of set and the combo draw he still does not have enough equity since the bet is so large compared to the pit he needs close to 50% equity and he is not favored enough against the semi bluffs to counter being basically dead against the only value hand Phil could be representing here.
For what it is worth in Polk’s interview with Garrett he seems to imply that he thought Phil had 0 bluffs because the line made so little sense. I just find it interesting that he doesn’t even need to go nearly that far. Plus I did not have that information 10 months ago so I was honestly curious.
Since the challenge, I've gained even more respect for Daniel and Doug. Very few on social media walk the talk.
Speaking of Rounders, how about an Old School/New School analysis of the hand where Johnny Chan checks the nut straight three times to Eric Seidel to induce an all-in on the river with what I believe was 2-pair, giving Chan the WSOP Main Title.
Nice vid/series Daniel, I really don't know what Phil was thinking that's a play you see at the micros... was funny that Doug even showed the table his laydown, that's really letting Phil know what's up... It seems you and Doug have a new found respect for each other.... unless i am missing something. All the best dude keep up the great content
It's a credit that you have taken to study and evolve your game! Meanwhile other old school players have refused to do so and have no idea how far they are behind.
"$10 or $20... idk I'll let you peasants figure that out" 🤣
Great fold but somewhat a textbook fold? Hellmuth does that with (12) Q10s, (3) JJs, (3) 99s, (3) 88s, and, maybe (2) A10 and K10 of spades. Even assuming that these have equal probability (and they do not-Q10 seems more likely) there is no equity for a 90k call?
At 3:08, that is the first time I have ever heard the Canadian in you come out!
Love ya Dnegs, learned a lot from ya. Helped turn me from a break even rec to a winning rec!
Daniel did Gabe as a leprechaun for a split second there. Solid impression, bro.
It’s cool to see that the game has evolved past people playing or keeping bad hands, so the amount of bluffs and in turn variability has reduced enough to somehow make a luck game even more skill based
It's also why I got used to playing with decent ppl and am absolutely clueless when a complete newbie comes my way.
In this case, it makes little difference if it is old school or new school. You bet $7000 and facing $90,000 raise. Even if you put Hellmuth on Flush draw, or a set, you are still facing about 40 percent chance of losing $90,000 in a cash game...!!!..No matter how you cut it, it is a smart fold.
One question: If GTO Philbot knows that Nodelocked Dougbot will always fold everything but QT to this sizing, could he profitably bluff shove QQ and TT, the nut blockers?
From a GTO perspective, also if Doug folds all his T7 and call only with the nuts, including the factor the pot is 3way (and the 3rd player could call with QT himself), by folding anything other than the nuts Doug is still not exploitable.
Daniel is a beast he has promo codes that he doesn’t even know about 😂
The table talk is what really gave it away.
Hey Daniel. How about calling it "Polker Hands"?!
I hate you
Question for all:
Person in a tournament walks away and is getting blinded out. Eventually causing him to be all-in.
Does the hand still get mucked since they're not at the table or tabled because you can't muck an all-in hand.
I've seen it done both ways. The casino I used to play tournaments at, finally settled on folding the hand because their hand is dead when the last card hits, before the action starts.
Cards must be tabled and the hand remains in play otherwise it would be unfair to other players not in the hand etc.
D-Negs. Michigander here. You are the man! P.s. - i am buying those blue eye glasses
I believe it is. I can't stand the guy but that is by far the sickest fold I've ever seen.
Great analysis, as always. However, the amateur/low/mid stakes players should take this with a grain of salt. Because, 1-3 or 2-5 or even 5-10 player would absolutely go all in with a top or mid set in this position (1-3 player even with a bottom set). Therefore, it is true: Polk could narrow Phil's value range to just the nuts. That is, because they were playing a top pro high stakes cash game. In more low stakes/softer games, the correct way to play 107 off in this spot is absolutely to call all in. Otherwise, in the long run you'd just be overfolding and losing money.
I completely agree. 5-10 is tricky as I've personally lost big pots with flopped straights against sets. It's still a very tricky spot it all goes back to bankroll management if you can afford a downstreak. Some people are just lucky and luck is definitely a factor in just one hand.
This hand was incredible to watch! An amazing fold from one of the greatest player ever. Such a misstep from Phil tho, extremely fun to see Phil being Phil and shooting himself in the foot
Hi Daniel, where did you get the t-shirt from?
Daniel on the next old school vs new school can you do Dwans heads up match vs hellmuth when they played at Caesars palace? I know its kinda throwback but classic match and banter to say the least. Thanks for making these!
Loved the ' really really really vs really really " good hand illustration.
I read from a comment from somewhere I can't remember that: Phil cannot stack Doug because he was playing the way he did against whales in his private games. Those games are so soft that Phil can jam 20x pot with the nuts on flop and still get looked up by one pair. But he can't get any value playing that style against people that use more than 2 brain cells playing poker.
I know Doug Polk is a big GTO guy, but I still wondered how on earth he folded the second nuts to the nuts on the flop when I saw this for the first time a while ago. It’s really cool as always to see your analysis on a hand like this. Thanks Daniel :)
With that flop, holding 0 spades. What are you improving to on the turn and river? You're only getting more annihilated the more cards you see even if you call a minclick reraise. He's not even holding a heart card, so has no backdoor outs, has no bluffs. But you just gotta take your coolers most times. But against Hellmuth who can't keep his mouth shut when he's in a hand, it's pretty easy fold even without all that.
Raising all in with the nuts is suboptimal. That's exactly why Phil may have done it. Knowing it's suboptimal, other players would not put him on the nuts. I think raising all in with the nut flush draw is a sensible move in that spot, and that's exactly where other players may have put Phil.
Maybe Phil was attempting to balance his appearance at the table that day. But since we rarely see Phil jam on a wet flop like this, its easy to narrow his range down.
this is by far the best analysis work by DN. thanks.
Small pairs generally prefers barreling on more disconnected flops aswell as not as much multiway. You have more natural bluffs on connected boards and hitting a set w the underpair is less valuable on a connected board.
Another great fold was Isaac Haxton vs Maria Ho on Shark Cage when they were heads up and both with full houses in season 2
GTO/solver says to shove with QsTx.
So happy that Daniel and Doug are on good terms. I got mad respect for both. Beefy Sausage techno remix!!
Yeah, you can tell Daniel's praises for Doug here are legit, and after their match I heard genuine praises from Doug as well as to how much Daniel improved at heads up.
@@fedea82 yep, it's good positive energy amongst the poker community. That's what we need
My thoughts as well. Even mid way through their challenge you could see a pretty drastic shift in their respect for each other. I found it interesting that they spoke as much as they did privately while the challenge was happening with what seemed like Doug almost helping Daniel at some points. Also interesting how Daniels luck box criticism of Doug stopped real quick after he ran way + ev for a bit too lol. But certainly good for poker to see those two getting along well.
@@barthk3640 Daniel has the exact opposite relation to Doug than he has to Phil...
With Doug: all respect, no friendship.
With Phil: all friendship, no respect. 🤣
The old school analysis is great and I enjoyed it. The new school seems too lazy to call it new school "maybe, some frequency, probably, I think" it should actually put into a solver if it's new school analysis eh?
great analysis and I really liked that you took a couple different views on it.
I want that Worm T-shirt. Where can I find it?
This 21:23 video alone is, way way better and much more useful than your Masterclass Hahaha. Keep going!!
Daniel the way you break down this hand is superb. I also used my Omaha strategy of "What Would You Be Happy With" I Always look forward to the Pokercast. Cheers👍
Thank You for such amazing explanations!!! Helps a lot.
I don't understand how a pro like Phil Hellmuth can misplay a hand that much.
I guess he just wanted to end it there in case someone was on a flush draw.
Every time I flop the nut straight, I always lose on the river. So I don’t mind that play.
It's like Daniel pointed out - if you're in a tournament, you want to take down the pot and not give flushes or even higher straights (or boats, etc.) a chance to get there, even if it's not as high EV long-term. Phil's mistake here was approaching a cash game (perhaps the fact that it's televised is a factor) the way he would approach a tournament. Yeah he sacrificed value, and yeah it's not the optimal play, but Hellmuth doesn't think that way. He's trying to win the hand in front of him. And, despite how you may think about it, that's been quite a successful approach over the years.
what I absolutely love is the way he dumbs down the 'old school' analysis which, when you think about it, undermines not just all the players who play that way, but his own masterclass and the trillion video analyses he's done in the past. GTO play is something he learned 5 minutes ago, so was he just thinking like a fish all this time before then?
he also mentions twice Doug's ability against these two players. Always throwing small jabs at Phil, it's unbelievable.
Yeah it’s sad to see really! Gone from GOAT to… GTO obsessed average guy who gets sponsored.
He had his success with his natural talent. Not this “ranges” bollocks which doesn’t win you tournaments
So first of all, I really like the format of this video Dan. Good job, cool break down. Been a fan for a long time. ( I’m also a HUGE Doug Polk fan, ha
however I just wanted to say. I understand gto.. but I think the point you just really missed here is that it’s Phil. You are forgetting to talk about two spades on the board. Phil did EXACTLY what he wanted here. Win the 11k profit and move on. There are two spades on the board! He has the best hand that can be obliterated with TONS of cards on the turn. All boats and spades, and even other mixtures like K 10 of spades, etc. he wants the win, or to charge you a boatload to gamble.
Just my opinion, on why I would have done the exact same thing if I were Phil.
This is actually a point that could speak to Daniel with his terrible luck on HSP. Daniel flopped the nuts so many times only to lose on turn/river because of trapping or playing more customary vs. taking profit at the peak time. In the long run yes, playing that way isn't winning, but I don't think you can fault playing that way if there's a flush draw and potential boat could beat you as well. With the wide range Doug has and him checking and then raising, he's probably not bluffing which means with pretty much any great hand other than what he had, Phil wouldn't be in tremendous shape, just good shape. Where Phil went wrong was when he opened his mouth.
Hey D-Negs.. I used to be a fan of Doug Polk, and now I've become a fan of you. The reason is because he quit on making poker analysis videos, and you keep coming out with excellent poker content. Thanks for what you do, highly appreciated.
Shouldn't there be 16 combinations of A10 or K10? How are you reducing it to 2 combinations?
Great analysis Daniel. Arigato gozaimasu! 🙇♂️
Even playing some new skool music there at the end
Great contrasted analysis!
I really enjoyed this one. Thanks, man.
Would say there’s one other combo possible A/Q spades but very unlikely to jam with that, but Phil only jamming bluff with combo draw and AQ has 10 to the gut shot spade to the flush, and he holds the Q of spades!! so 3 maybe combos v 12
Could Phil have feared that Doug had a good flush draw? Eg. A 4 of spades.
Still a bad play. You don't want flushes to fold, you want max value by making them pay to see the last cards.
@@DKFX1 wrong! Flush > straight therefore it’s better to win the pot there and then, than let your opponent cheaply see cards, hit a flush then you’ve lost.
@@user-iu4uk2ty5e they have less than 25% to hit their flush and you can make them pay half pot or more to see it.
The thing you omitted was that either Polk or the Button,, could easily be raising with AxSS🤔 .
Either of those bets could have been standard bets from the nut flush draw.
What’s up Daniel,can you talk about prop betting at the poker table,how you do all the props thanks bro
can u do the hand against esfandiari where he folds st.flush.......board was A2354 all spades . we couldn't see ur cards so i have guess of ur holdings. FYI....if u need the hand video i can send it to u......tnx
What would you do here if you were up against a player you didn’t know anything about?
I think the argument is that GTO principles suggest folding
You cant judge ppl on one hand but PH pretty much shows why he is criticized for not being much of a cash gamer here. Against a world-class dude like Polk, I am not surprised at all that Polk finds a route to fold. Astute play, excellent read, hats off
The need to put a statue of Daniel in Las Vegas. This guy has made Vegas so money over the years with his personality.
Awesome video!!
My favorite hand is 6-7 suited. I somehow win over 50% of the time with it
I used to be a fan of Daniel but now he's in the class of Howard Lederer, Chris Fergusson and co.
Explain?
Alot of the rational behind folding relies on "Helmuth would never do that". If this happened in an online game or something where you have 0 information on your opponent, is it still a fold? I would think the "right" move is to call.
you forgot Ts8s, probably the most likely bluff. it doesn't change the decision significantly though.
Phenomenal content Daniel!!!
Your accent attempt at the beginning sounded like Mr. Doubtfire!
I think the *whole* conversation would've went differently, if Helmuth would have told Polk that he "could easily have ... you know ... QueenTen" & just shut up after that one-liner, instead of what he actually said:
Everyone including Polk would've heard that cheeky statement, thought about it and then continued on with speculations like "Wait, he also could have pocket 8s, he raised preflop from an early position!" and on and on about all the *weaker* hands he could have... I am almost certain that a strategy like this
( - _do it cheeky like Helmuth did, but then tell him you _*_could_*_ have the nuts and just shut up_ - )
would have convinced Polk to call Phils insane overbet.
Done like that this could've been the best bait move by Helmuth so far 😏
Think you could give another player KQ suited.
But Phil's snap shove is almost always super strong.
Curious how Polk reacts if Phil goes for 37k. Leaves an interesting spot on a turn card for pair plus draws.
Does anyone know what brand of glasses Daniel is wearing?
Love the shirt
Enjoyed this. The draws win over 40% of the time KsTs, As Ts
Daniel I love you man. You're so awesome.
I already have that shirt Daniel.
🐶 oh wow tuff spot.. give the man 10s 7s suited spades and he calls
One thing I have learned studying the Pads post flop program is that when we polarize, we do not do it with the nuts.
Consider a rank of our hands from 0 to 10, 0 being complete garbage and 10 the best hand possible. We won't overbet and polarize with a 10 or a 0, because a 0 has no redraws or backdoors etc., and the 10 needs no protection, but instead understand the maximum bet we can make that our opponent could call losing.
Considering this, it would be wise to do so with JJ for instance. And even so, if we understand that the opponent does not have the nuts.
I've been studying poker for a few months only, and it baffles me how Phil makes elementary mistakes that even beginners who study hard are probably not making, or at least reducing step by step
One thing we should consider is that maybe Phil panicked and wanted to try and just end the action, considering how deep they are, and playing deep is not his forte. But still, he's a pro right? I believe that a guy with his credentials cannot make as many elementary mistakes as he often does.
Also, he's a prick.
@@antoniomoraes3163 you calling him a prick - makes you a prick.
Also there was a flush draw out there. Phil took down the pot and won it. Easy.
After the Polk games Daniel, how has your game changed and has your view on game theory changed ?
Thank you for this.
I think you could eliminate Phil having QsTs which he doesn't need to jam, and probably a loose UTG raise with Ts7s or Th7h. I don't think Phil would play this way with a set though I wouldn't completely rule it out. Same with AsTs or KsTs. However, I can totally see him trying to shut down all draws with AA, KK and QQ. And with QQ there is also a gutshot to nut straight, unless Polk specifically had KsQs and wanted to gamble. As an aside, would you gamble Hellmuth's all-in with KsQs? Anyway, I hate the play of moving all in with the nuts here, but I would like to know how Polk eliminated AA-QQ from consideration. Because if you throw those overpairs into the mix, I think you have to call the all-in. Thoughts?
Hmmm. What about 10 8 of spades. Granted that is only one more hand... but that is a hand he could play this way. Willing to get it all in with a massive draw and a pair..... Might not change much, because the draw has so much equity against Doug. Phill Helmuth would definitely consider this... given his tourney history and the fact he can't be dead to any hand. This would particularly be more relevant if he put Doug on a flush draw. He would want to force the issue because of the risk of flush over flush. Interesting analysis though.
Im interested if Doug is calling with 7 10 in spades here (if hellmuth had different 10), what do you guys think?
Very cool fold from Doug in Js9s8h spot 👍
I hope you guys will do another podcast together soon
change shirt from white to black on the old school new school thing.. just a thought.. an eye catcher if ya will
KT of spades is a coinflip, AsTs is almost a coinflip. Wouldn't say it's the best fold ever, but Phil blundered too much allowing Doug to get away easily.
Diamond Flush draw also on Flop...Perhaps Hellmuth could have had an A high flush draw as well...Obviously we see the Cards so he does not...Polk has multiple scenarios why to fold...This is still a GREAT fold but with Hellmuth you would assume he has a BIG hand and with Equity left to Bust Polks lower straight...
Huge fan Danielle, and always thought Doug was a bit of a narcissist. That being said, this is one of the best poker reads on TV, I have ever seen. I know you don't Doug, but just give credit where credit is do...
Let's all ask ourselves...if Danielle was in the exact position, with the same hand...would he fold?? Never, ever ever. And DN's reading ability is amazing...so my guess is the hand would go like this...DN breaks it down, figures Phil must have the nut str8.......but then still call anyway lol Facts
It's 1000000% easier in hind site. I think it was one of the great folds but not the greatest. I would say 99.95% of pro players can't make that fold in real time. Just my opinion.
??
@@Zerradable ???
Super video DNegs and team
Doesn't really change anything, but 10s8s is another possible bluff combo for PH.
Hey Daniel, maybe if I get here early you’ll see this. What was the Chinese Tea that Phil Ivey was talking about? Could you ask him?
I love Gabe and AJ.
It just seems like impatience on Phil's part.