he didn't want to put his pole in a hole shared with every side hustle john a chick like that makes extra green from.....poker don't always come through lol
Martin Landau was such a great and underappreciated actor. Glad he got the recognition he deserved towards the end of his career though. Sleep in peace.
Worst thing about this scene is that any decent poker player would understand that you can beat anyone in one hand. That doesn't really mean anything. You could only prove yourself against Johnny Chan by beating him in multiple games, not one hand.
Yeah this is stupid. I've played in tournaments and beaten several pros. There really isn't much difference between a decent poker player and a pro. If you get a good run you can beat anybody. It's not hard to bluff pros often either and it happens all the time with average players bluffing them over multiple hands. He bluffed him once and thinks he's the best lol
@Super Wario lol no there is a massive difference but any day the right cards can come but over 100s of tournaments you won’t mistake the pros from the amateurs.
@@TRivera13 I was thinking 78.2% chance. I've seen Phil throw a huge fit about a guy with J 9 suiting call his 9 7 offsuit. Its like dude, if you can bluff with trash then we can call you.
Wow, you got to see the best of the best play as classy as it comes. I bet you cherish that memory of Phil. To be called a trash player by Phil Hellmuth, what an honor. In front of his wife no less.
With the board pairing, kgb would not have made a huge bet after hitting on the flush draw, he wouldn’t get paid. Micheal would’ve seen a value bet. 2 pair on the flop against a set happens. Micheal should’ve considered it if he was any type of player. Better players fish with 2 pair hoping to boat up. KGB would’ve been within his rights to think micheal was fishing for and hitting his flush. Therefore micheal was foolish to raise. But, that’s what makes it a movie.
@@chevy4x466 this movie was almost 20 years ago now though. All the modern day poker theory wasnt discovered even at the pro tables at the time that they filmed this.
@@sidmahasuverachai3722 good point Sid. I deal at a casino. These days most 2-5 players r pretty solid. With the internet and television 📺 I suppose the skill level is a bit higher. Having said this, I think the poker at the higher levels was played well back in the day. No doubt, it is a fun movie. Have fun playing, I would play myself but I brig myself to look at a casino once I have spent all day in one.
@@chevy4x466 sets are pretty rare, and the situation in which you can consider sets as a major part of the range on the flop basically never happens. So the following logic is best against set: Play against opponent range, don't be scared of opponent having nuts all the time - in that case, you should really go home. Make good decisions based on the range and in the long run getting stacked in a setup like that does not even matter if your decisions are constantly mostly correct. Of course, this requires bankroll management and not sitting at the table for the whole roll (or a significant amount of it)
It depends. Everybody is 'just giving their money away', playing like the civilized people their grandparents wished they were, nobody's playing with his pecker, you could last an hour with a raise or two here and there. But you're right, the minute somebody thinks they have something going the kid would have blinded out in a beat. People get weird when a star is playing. You get a table full of fanboys instead of a real poker player and you can make your monthly bills off it.
Live poker limit game he might see 25 hands at best in an hour considering when this came out everyone still played 10 handed so worst case scenario he was the BB 3 times but probably only twice so out of the 10 bigs he sat with he would have 7 left. The hand history is ridiculous obviously because Chan would just never fold but to say he would be out in 25 minutes is just as dumb as the hand history.
Is he talkin about 3/6 limit or no limit....bc well lets say its limit chan makes it 12...matt makes it 18...chan makes it 24...matt makes it 3k (600 raise)...so now we got 6k in the pot and Chan folds for the 600 raise? Hell he'd call w 72 off gettin 10-1 preflop at that point...I just don't understand is this no limit and matt made a huge reraise w rags? Even so lets say matts at 7k be4 the hand itd basically be a 4600 raise allin to chan who would now be callin 4600 into a pot of around 11k...now at 2 1/2 to 1 if he had any ace hed call bc he has the odds to outdraw any hand but pocket aces...this would have to be the stupidest/luckiest bluff of all-time that somehow caught chan w a 72 or something but anyways I dont even know whether they're talkin limit or no limit...maybe chan broke his oreo the wrong way and matt caught him 😅
@@LucianDevine Well whatever its a movie and a great scene...only way it could've been better is had they cast hellmuth and he showed his rags...but then itd been a 30 minute tirade scene so ya know.
Joey was absolutely right to turn him down. The guy cares more about his ego then about being a solid poker player. As Chris Ferguson once said, Kinnish is the hero of this story, not Mike.
Knish explains his responsibilities. Mike has none. His snubbing of knish for having kids, paying child support and feeding them is unconscionable. But nobody sees that. Mike has forsaken all responsibilities. To school, to his sweetheart. It’s easier that way.
They're just of different generations. Of course Knish is under no obligation to help Mike, but I can understand how both guys are thinking. And if I was a wealthy Knish I'm only helping if he's the next Phil Ivey. Wannabes have to deal.
I get it’s a film, but 300-600, playing for an hour and folding mostly means he might be on like 3 grand (at the very most if he wins couple hands) so how he raising, reraising to a 4 bet? He would be all in on the reraise and chains like “I’ll call with my 9’s, it’s only 4 blinds more” Damon: welp, fuck
The only differences now are (a) poker sims that can apply machine learning to almost every situation you can come up with in poker and predict not only the best play, but also tell you the probability of winning in each choice, and (b) the ability to play multiple tables simultaneously on-line which can give kids in their 20s more poker "experience" in a few years what older folks had to get over decades. When everyone starts using the same playing algorithms the game goes from fun & relaxing way to spend time to something where you're just playing a game of variance, much like throwing money away in a slot machine. We're not they're yet, but poker is headed in that direction unless you're lucky enough to constantly find weaker pepole to play against.
But what about the real life tournaments where you can't use all your computer things (even hidden) ? The only decision making thing you will have then is just your brain and nothing more.
@@stanleyconnor6898 you can very easily break down the nearly infinite number of situations to a core grouping of under a 100 common situations in which you can employ machine learning to tell you what is the best approach. To narrow this down farther, then you want to be frequently isolating each hand to just two players by the turn.
@@stanleyconnor6898 You can break down the near-infinite hand situations to groupings of well under 1000 common situations where you could narrow this down farther based on how much information you apply to it; and then to optimize a strategy through machine learning for each. You can also significantly narrow this down through betting to isolate a given hand to a simple hero / villan. Example, you can say one common broad example is I have an over-pair to a under-handed board. You can expand this to The board is wet or dry which can then be expanded to wet or dry with two suit cards. You can expand this to I am playing in cut-off position with two callers before me. You can expand this to I am playing in cut-off position with two callers before me where I know that one of whom has been playing pretty loose or will call with a lot of marginal hands. The thing is that you don't need to memorize these specific situations -- you just need to mentally group them enough so that you can then go to a probability solver to simulate out a workable strategy. If you keep your strategy too simple -- people can figure it out quickly. If you optimize for more variables, then it will take hundreds of hands for someone to determine your stragey and thus make it more difficult for people to create bluffs against you. Then you can evaluate your betting strategy. All in all the role of AI is to simply break down what seems to be infinite problem to something that is compartmentalize and more able to extract correlations to. The good thing with live play and tournament play is that you have the time to employ some sort of logic to poker. On-line play the clocks usually don't give you adequate time to formulate a strategy, even if you are recalling it and not forming it up on the spot. Just my humble opinion.
@@jeffreysmith8977 Except that's not what a GTO strategy does. You will have to play similar hands in different ways to protect your ranges. Thats the essence of being unexploitable. If you scope in like you say (which is just looking at a solver), many hands show a mix of fold, call, raise at different frequencies. If it was a solved game like chess it would be very different. On top of that, if you just play straight GTO your leaving a ton of money on the table. That's where exploitative concepts come into play, and engines won't help you there.
He was talking about being good enough for the WSOP. The only think WSOP was only $10k to enter, and he clearly had the money at the time, so why didnt he just enter?
Mike treated Kanish poorly. He was nothing but helpful. Mike chose stupidity and Worm over listening to his advice, multiple times, and racked up debt and gets in trouble. And because Kanish won't bail him out he acts like he's an asshole. Ok, Wor...err..Mike.
I watched this Movie last night for The First Time, it was really good. Really liked the final Duel too. "This fucking guy just sat there the entire time, 'Check-check-check'." 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Great fucking movie.
I've seen it over 40xs. Every time I watch it I catch something that I had never before caught. It is worth multiple watches, in fact much of the film is muffled and not easily discernable. It makes better story as you pick up more of the script
@@waynelalonde6774 My friend, I just listened to this scene a dozen times trying to hear and understand what the last thing "Kanish" says to "Mike." Something like, you better run free Mike??? Can't stand when the dialog is muffled.
Every commenter on this has missed a single, but significant point - it's a movie! Whether it's a medical, war, western, whatever, there are details that just don't matter. Maybe to you, but not to the story. Do you really think the guy in the old Westerns kept shooting past the six in the gun? Do you really think Stallone can fly a helicopter, and beat an entire army with his knife and his bad-assery? Or, keeping with the actor here, do you really think Matt Damon solves complex math problems in between sweeping floors at night? Or that Mr Damon can take on the entire CIA by himself, and not just win but make them look lame? Or that he went to Mars, and survived all by himself for a couple of years? It's just *a movie*, and most of the movie-going public doesn't give a damn whether a full flush beats a straight house. Or that he only had $6k
What is the last thing "Kaniish" says to Matt Daymon? I've played it over a dozen times and can't understand it. Something like "You better run free Mike???"
@@jefferyrbrown Actually, if you are going to be a d*c, routing is the process of selecting a direction or path. Once you are taking it, you have routed.
@@simonletocq6175 I'm wondering why you are even grammar nacho'g...lol. I, clearly, stating that ROUTING was taking a direction...not "routed". You're just being semantic...which is generally just a way of being a tool. Either way, saying you're "routing" for someone instead of saying you're "rooting" for them is nonsensical.
A gambler won't ever stop until they have destroyed every relationship in their life because the odds are against you and somehow that's what they forget .the house always wins .that's how they can continue to build billion dollar empires with the money of suckers .
This is a cool scene for people that don't play serious poker. In reality, a rank amateur could sit down with a "world champion" and bluff him off of ONE hand, if he didn't care about the money he was putting at risk. BFD. A better scenario would be if he played against Johnny for an hour or so and felted him.
We can tell that you don't play ssrious poker. The whole point is that to be able to make the big bluffs, you have to NOT care about the money. If you're afraid to lose, you cannot win.
@@basedbear1605 That wasn't my point. My point was that beating someone on one hand doesn't prove that you are a good poker player. It is how you perform over the long run. If you were a serious poker player you would know that.
@@Jukkala And you completely missed the point of the scene. The point is, if he can make a move like that on Johnny Chan, then he at least is qualified to play in the WSOP. And that's a valid point. It was LIMIT poker... and getting Chan to fold a hand, instead of calling 2 more $600 bets... can't be done without any poker chops. He figured if his bluff is good enough to bluff Chan, then he's got a shot. It doesn't mean he's the best in the world, it means he QUALIFIES TO PLAY WSOP. Nothing more is implied nor said. But you keep on whining about a movie, I'm done with you and your nonsense. I bet you've never even played no limit.
@@basedbear1605 I don't understand why you keep acting obnoxious and insulting me just because I think a scene in a movie was unrealistic. I don't have anything to prove to you but I have played no limit for years. Am I a professional? No, but I have seen plenty of newbies sit down, play stupid but catch a lucky streak of cards. To keep from tilting, I just tell myself that if they continue to play that way, the law of large numbers will start to take over and they will eventually give away their stack. Oh, I have a Masters Degree in Data Analytics to boot. Now, what makes Mike a bad ass card player is in the last scene where he is essentially playing for his life. No way I have stones like that. I doubt you do either.
This is an interesting scene in that...if John had any kind of hand at all he would have called. So there was some luck there. One hand doesn't mean you beat the best.
I know right 😂 plays tight for an hour, mostly folding, but then has enough chips to 5bet a pot against a guy who is in all likelihood sitting 200-400bbs deep.
@@nathanwurtzel4346 There were pop-up banks around the big cities at that time, like western union and similar where you could cash a check, some of them were open 24 hours a day.
My Grandfather RIP was a successful professor at that time, but had I asked for over 10k that night it would have been difficult if not impossible for him to come up with the cash.
300 600. I'm assuming limit. So a raise would be 1200. Re-raise would be 1800. Re-raise would be 2400. Matt Dameon raises to 3000. So he has put in 4800 out of 6000. Johnny chan has put in 3600. Matt Dameon has 1200 left. ANY TWO CARDS SHOULD CALL THERE TO SEE THE FLOP. Honesly even if you hold 2-7, I'm not sure that going the rest of the way all in is even wrong.
This scenario definitely could happened, but the difference between pros and everyone else is consistency, you might be able to steal couple hands here and there, but if you sit down with them long enough, they will steal your lunch money , 401k, your wife and kids, well… maybe not your kids but you catch my drift.
It's been said that this bluff means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Mike plays tight then goes super aggressive. So of course Chan is going to believe him. The other problem with this is that hand could easily have gone the other way. Mike commits himself to this bluff without any thought that Chan may actually have a hand or have hit something on the flop. What was his plan if Chan called or 5 bet? How far was he willing to take this stupid bluff?
This scene woulda played better with Mike re-raising Chan, and that being the fold. Reraising a reraise when your short stacked and on a pure bluff is pretty dumb. Friggin love this movie though.
Most likely he got involved in other things. Its tough to sit there grinding out a few k and seeing morons win 10s of ks maybe even a lot more. But I wouldn't recommend poker to my kids unless they were obviously of equal or greater talent than the best players in the world. Even then, if they have other skills maybe not, but its hard to say no in that spot.
The worst fold in this movie was when Mike turned Petra down.
Mind reader!
Right?
You ain't lying.
Yep. His other girl was wound too tight for living.
he didn't want to put his pole in a hole shared with every side hustle john a chick like that makes extra green from.....poker don't always come through lol
These days Johnny Chan probably tells his friends he sat at a table with Matt Damon.
I'm sorry John, I don't remember
Martin Landau was such a great and underappreciated actor. Glad he got the recognition he deserved towards the end of his career though. Sleep in peace.
Is that something you might be interested in?
@@qcrew2938 I have a ramones script, is that something you might be intersted in?
Wrong, Martin Landau was a VERY appreciated actor.
Worst thing about this scene is that any decent poker player would understand that you can beat anyone in one hand. That doesn't really mean anything. You could only prove yourself against Johnny Chan by beating him in multiple games, not one hand.
Yeah this is stupid. I've played in tournaments and beaten several pros. There really isn't much difference between a decent poker player and a pro. If you get a good run you can beat anybody. It's not hard to bluff pros often either and it happens all the time with average players bluffing them over multiple hands. He bluffed him once and thinks he's the best lol
Both of you keep grinding out that rent money. It's noble work you're doing. 🤣
That's true of course. But if I bluffed Johnny Chan in just one hand I would still be telling the story for the rest of my life.
That's not the point. He's not saying he's better The point is there is no such thing as a bad beat.
@Super Wario lol no there is a massive difference but any day the right cards can come but over 100s of tournaments you won’t mistake the pros from the amateurs.
I bluffed phil hellmuth one time and he cried for 15 mins and ran to his wife for comfort telling her how bad I play...a true professional
This comment has an 65% chance of being true.
@@TRivera13 lol
@@TRivera13 I was thinking 78.2% chance. I've seen Phil throw a huge fit about a guy with J 9 suiting call his 9 7 offsuit. Its like dude, if you can bluff with trash then we can call you.
Wow, you got to see the best of the best play as classy as it comes. I bet you cherish that memory of Phil. To be called a trash player by Phil Hellmuth, what an honor. In front of his wife no less.
@@TRivera13 I believe it because of crying part lol
boat over boat isn't being outplayed....its being unlucky, it really is.
The difference is what is in the hole. Aces over Kings. Its a loss still.
With the board pairing, kgb would not have made a huge bet after hitting on the flush draw, he wouldn’t get paid. Micheal would’ve seen a value bet. 2 pair on the flop against a set happens. Micheal should’ve considered it if he was any type of player. Better players fish with 2 pair hoping to boat up. KGB would’ve been within his rights to think micheal was fishing for and hitting his flush. Therefore micheal was foolish to raise. But, that’s what makes it a movie.
@@chevy4x466 this movie was almost 20 years ago now though. All the modern day poker theory wasnt discovered even at the pro tables at the time that they filmed this.
@@sidmahasuverachai3722 good point Sid. I deal at a casino. These days most 2-5 players r pretty solid. With the internet and television 📺 I suppose the skill level is a bit higher. Having said this, I think the poker at the higher levels was played well back in the day. No doubt, it is a fun movie. Have fun playing, I would play myself but I brig myself to look at a casino once I have spent all day in one.
@@chevy4x466 sets are pretty rare, and the situation in which you can consider sets as a major part of the range on the flop basically never happens. So the following logic is best against set: Play against opponent range, don't be scared of opponent having nuts all the time - in that case, you should really go home. Make good decisions based on the range and in the long run getting stacked in a setup like that does not even matter if your decisions are constantly mostly correct. Of course, this requires bankroll management and not sitting at the table for the whole roll (or a significant amount of it)
Play tight for an hour and then played aggro, totally outplayed Chan on that one hand LOL.
To be fair, Chan really did mess up the hand, considering he reraised the guy who played tight for an hour.
300-600 with 6k. There’s no way he’s lasting an hour. He’s gonna get blinded out in like 25 minutes
It depends.
Everybody is 'just giving their money away', playing like the civilized people their grandparents wished they were, nobody's playing with his pecker, you could last an hour with a raise or two here and there. But you're right, the minute somebody thinks they have something going the kid would have blinded out in a beat.
People get weird when a star is playing. You get a table full of fanboys instead of a real poker player and you can make your monthly bills off it.
Live poker limit game he might see 25 hands at best in an hour considering when this came out everyone still played 10 handed so worst case scenario he was the BB 3 times but probably only twice so out of the 10 bigs he sat with he would have 7 left. The hand history is ridiculous obviously because Chan would just never fold but to say he would be out in 25 minutes is just as dumb as the hand history.
Is he talkin about 3/6 limit or no limit....bc well lets say its limit chan makes it 12...matt makes it 18...chan makes it 24...matt makes it 3k (600 raise)...so now we got 6k in the pot and Chan folds for the 600 raise? Hell he'd call w 72 off gettin 10-1 preflop at that point...I just don't understand is this no limit and matt made a huge reraise w rags? Even so lets say matts at 7k be4 the hand itd basically be a 4600 raise allin to chan who would now be callin 4600 into a pot of around 11k...now at 2 1/2 to 1 if he had any ace hed call bc he has the odds to outdraw any hand but pocket aces...this would have to be the stupidest/luckiest bluff of all-time that somehow caught chan w a 72 or something but anyways I dont even know whether they're talkin limit or no limit...maybe chan broke his oreo the wrong way and matt caught him 😅
@@casinodegen2024 I'm assuming 300/600 no limit. So 900 in the pot plus antes, but there is no limit to the max bet size.
@@LucianDevine Well whatever its a movie and a great scene...only way it could've been better is had they cast hellmuth and he showed his rags...but then itd been a 30 minute tirade scene so ya know.
if in for 6k...raise, get reraised, and raise again...your 6k is going all in
The whole movie was a joke of shit poker
It's limit holdem
@@StackerBA Some people are just morons who don't listen.
@@EldeLDorELLEN bit harsh. It was a movie to explain the basics of poker to people who don’t know
@@ashleyoneill304 if that was the aim, I’m glad I already knew how to play poker
My man Johnny Chan out here folding for 10 BBs, lmao.
saw him play live at the bike last year he was woeful
Just to finish the scene the Martin Landau character gives Mike ten thousand.
Joey was absolutely right to turn him down. The guy cares more about his ego then about being a solid poker player. As Chris Ferguson once said, Kinnish is the hero of this story, not Mike.
Chris Ferguson is playing penny slots now
This movie did a great job of making a frivolous activity like gambling into a powerfully serious human story.
That's cause poker isn't gambling ;)
@@gamblingbuddha8825 to 99% of the people who play it, its pure gambling.
Hollywood needs to give Turturro more roles
He has 114 acting credits
You'd better look at his IMDB page because dude has been in some very big budget Hollywood movies with some really big stars.
Knish explains his responsibilities. Mike has none. His snubbing of knish for having kids, paying child support and feeding them is unconscionable. But nobody sees that. Mike has forsaken all responsibilities. To school, to his sweetheart. It’s easier that way.
They're just of different generations. Of course Knish is under no obligation to help Mike, but I can understand how both guys are thinking. And if I was a wealthy Knish I'm only helping if he's the next Phil Ivey. Wannabes have to deal.
They needed to make rounders 2
This one scene inspired me to drive to AC and turn $300 in to just under $3000… true story!
Ow wow..that happens to me weekly...what's exciting about that
@@markhamblin1112 nothing to a degenerate gambler like you, but for the rest of us it’s motivating!
@@markhamblin1112 No it doesnt, you´re a fish and you know it. stop flexing on the internet. you lose more than you win. stop lying to yourself.
I get it’s a film, but 300-600, playing for an hour and folding mostly means he might be on like 3 grand (at the very most if he wins couple hands) so how he raising, reraising to a 4 bet? He would be all in on the reraise and chains like “I’ll call with my 9’s, it’s only 4 blinds more”
Damon: welp, fuck
"If it must be tonight...."
The only differences now are (a) poker sims that can apply machine learning to almost every situation you can come up with in poker and predict not only the best play, but also tell you the probability of winning in each choice, and (b) the ability to play multiple tables simultaneously on-line which can give kids in their 20s more poker "experience" in a few years what older folks had to get over decades.
When everyone starts using the same playing algorithms the game goes from fun & relaxing way to spend time to something where you're just playing a game of variance, much like throwing money away in a slot machine.
We're not they're yet, but poker is headed in that direction unless you're lucky enough to constantly find weaker pepole to play against.
But what about the real life tournaments where you can't use all your computer things (even hidden) ?
The only decision making thing you will have then is just your brain and nothing more.
@@stanleyconnor6898 you can very easily break down the nearly infinite number of situations to a core grouping of under a 100 common situations in which you can employ machine learning to tell you what is the best approach. To narrow this down farther, then you want to be frequently isolating each hand to just two players by the turn.
@@stanleyconnor6898 You can break down the near-infinite hand situations to groupings of well under 1000 common situations where you could narrow this down farther based on how much information you apply to it; and then to optimize a strategy through machine learning for each. You can also significantly narrow this down through betting to isolate a given hand to a simple hero / villan. Example, you can say one common broad example is I have an over-pair to a under-handed board. You can expand this to The board is wet or dry which can then be expanded to wet or dry with two suit cards. You can expand this to I am playing in cut-off position with two callers before me. You can expand this to I am playing in cut-off position with two callers before me where I know that one of whom has been playing pretty loose or will call with a lot of marginal hands. The thing is that you don't need to memorize these specific situations -- you just need to mentally group them enough so that you can then go to a probability solver to simulate out a workable strategy. If you keep your strategy too simple -- people can figure it out quickly. If you optimize for more variables, then it will take hundreds of hands for someone to determine your stragey and thus make it more difficult for people to create bluffs against you. Then you can evaluate your betting strategy. All in all the role of AI is to simply break down what seems to be infinite problem to something that is compartmentalize and more able to extract correlations to. The good thing with live play and tournament play is that you have the time to employ some sort of logic to poker. On-line play the clocks usually don't give you adequate time to formulate a strategy, even if you are recalling it and not forming it up on the spot. Just my humble opinion.
Dude yall say that but the level of play in low stakes is abysmal (live of course)
@@jeffreysmith8977 Except that's not what a GTO strategy does. You will have to play similar hands in different ways to protect your ranges. Thats the essence of being unexploitable. If you scope in like you say (which is just looking at a solver), many hands show a mix of fold, call, raise at different frequencies. If it was a solved game like chess it would be very different. On top of that, if you just play straight GTO your leaving a ton of money on the table. That's where exploitative concepts come into play, and engines won't help you there.
He was talking about being good enough for the WSOP. The only think WSOP was only $10k to enter, and he clearly had the money at the time, so why didnt he just enter?
Mike treated Kanish poorly. He was nothing but helpful. Mike chose stupidity and Worm over listening to his advice, multiple times, and racked up debt and gets in trouble. And because Kanish won't bail him out he acts like he's an asshole. Ok, Wor...err..Mike.
I watched this Movie last night for The First Time, it was really good. Really liked the final Duel too. "This fucking guy just sat there the entire time, 'Check-check-check'." 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Great fucking movie.
I've seen it over 40xs.
Every time I watch it I catch something that I had never before caught. It is worth multiple watches, in fact much of the film is muffled and not easily discernable. It makes better story as you pick up more of the script
@@waynelalonde6774 My friend, I just listened to this scene a dozen times trying to hear and understand what the last thing "Kanish" says to "Mike." Something like, you better run free Mike??? Can't stand when the dialog is muffled.
@@timishere1925 no he says well I’m rooting for u mike..
@@bbaseballusa1 Thank you so much! I was going nuts. I appreciate it.
@@timishere1925 not a problem but ur right it’s is muffled audio!
Every commenter on this has missed a single, but significant point - it's a movie!
Whether it's a medical, war, western, whatever, there are details that just don't matter. Maybe to you, but not to the story.
Do you really think the guy in the old Westerns kept shooting past the six in the gun?
Do you really think Stallone can fly a helicopter, and beat an entire army with his knife and his bad-assery?
Or, keeping with the actor here, do you really think Matt Damon solves complex math problems in between sweeping floors at night? Or that Mr Damon can take on the entire CIA by himself, and not just win but make them look lame? Or that he went to Mars, and survived all by himself for a couple of years?
It's just *a movie*, and most of the movie-going public doesn't give a damn whether a full flush beats a straight house. Or that he only had $6k
Dude wins one hand against the guy and thinks he is ready for Vegas :D
What is the last thing "Kaniish" says to Matt Daymon? I've played it over a dozen times and can't understand it. Something like "You better run free Mike???"
Well then I'm routing for you Mike
@@simonletocq6175 Thank you buddy! That was driving me crazy.
@@simonletocq6175
"rooting"
"routing" is taking a direction
@@jefferyrbrown Actually, if you are going to be a d*c, routing is the process of selecting a direction or path. Once you are taking it, you have routed.
@@simonletocq6175
I'm wondering why you are even grammar nacho'g...lol. I, clearly, stating that ROUTING was taking a direction...not "routed". You're just being semantic...which is generally just a way of being a tool.
Either way, saying you're "routing" for someone instead of saying you're "rooting" for them is nonsensical.
A high-powered judge "You know I'm not a wealthy man." Really? Must be some kinda shit investor HAHA.
He was a college professor
This was before poker became big. No one played poker. Now everyone thinks they're highroller.
Yep, just read the comments. Everyone thinks they're a pro.
Why haven’t I heard of this movie until today ?
Doyle would've called 6k.
poker players before the explosion in popularity were a jokw....chan included
300-600 blinds. 6k stack. Raise. Reraise. Reraise. Fold. LOL.. Chan is calling there with any 2 cards
Love the movie although this hand meant absolutely nothing lol
Martin Landau is such a good actor
I sat down with 10BBs, played tight, folded for an hour 😂 this shit is hilarious
1:50
Uhm no he didn't outplay him. Chan watched him fold for an hour and knew he was a nit. So of course he assumed it was AA or KK when he got 4bet.
If you can't include the audio, why bother posting the clip?
A gambler won't ever stop until they have destroyed every relationship in their life because the odds are against you and somehow that's what they forget .the house always wins .that's how they can continue to build billion dollar empires with the money of suckers .
Damn straight! (Flush ;)
This is a cool scene for people that don't play serious poker. In reality, a rank amateur could sit down with a "world champion" and bluff him off of ONE hand, if he didn't care about the money he was putting at risk. BFD. A better scenario would be if he played against Johnny for an hour or so and felted him.
We can tell that you don't play ssrious poker. The whole point is that to be able to make the big bluffs, you have to NOT care about the money. If you're afraid to lose, you cannot win.
@@basedbear1605 That wasn't my point. My point was that beating someone on one hand doesn't prove that you are a good poker player. It is how you perform over the long run. If you were a serious poker player you would know that.
@@Jukkala And you completely missed the point of the scene. The point is, if he can make a move like that on Johnny Chan, then he at least is qualified to play in the WSOP. And that's a valid point. It was LIMIT poker... and getting Chan to fold a hand, instead of calling 2 more $600 bets... can't be done without any poker chops. He figured if his bluff is good enough to bluff Chan, then he's got a shot. It doesn't mean he's the best in the world, it means he QUALIFIES TO PLAY WSOP. Nothing more is implied nor said.
But you keep on whining about a movie, I'm done with you and your nonsense. I bet you've never even played no limit.
@@basedbear1605 I don't understand why you keep acting obnoxious and insulting me just because I think a scene in a movie was unrealistic. I don't have anything to prove to you but I have played no limit for years. Am I a professional? No, but I have seen plenty of newbies sit down, play stupid but catch a lucky streak of cards. To keep from tilting, I just tell myself that if they continue to play that way, the law of large numbers will start to take over and they will eventually give away their stack. Oh, I have a Masters Degree in Data Analytics to boot.
Now, what makes Mike a bad ass card player is in the last scene where he is essentially playing for his life. No way I have stones like that. I doubt you do either.
@@basedbear1605 I promise you among the 2 of you, you are by far the worse player
This is an interesting scene in that...if John had any kind of hand at all he would have called. So there was some luck there. One hand doesn't mean you beat the best.
imagine if the movie just ended at 3:30
bluffs one hand against Chan and thinks it's proof of something lmao
They should make Rounders 3
That the pizza boss from spiderman 2?
Raise, then fold preflop against someone that holds only 10% of the chips you do? Anyone who knows poker knows this is some real BS.
Lol sample size
I mean how the fuck can he last an hour in a 300-600 table with 6k ? He has only 10 big blind.
I know right 😂 plays tight for an hour, mostly folding, but then has enough chips to 5bet a pot against a guy who is in all likelihood sitting 200-400bbs deep.
300 600 has blinds of 150 300, so 20 bigs, but your point is still valid.
20. If the table was full he'd blind off 1800 in an hour at normal pace of live play. But maybe he picked up a small pot or two.
15k shouldn't be a problem for a University professor even at that time.
On short notice, if it "had to be tonight", 10k is alot for most people to come up with in a few hours.
@@glennhagstedt and before online cash transfers...I'm wondering how Mike got the actual cash quickly in 1998
@@nathanwurtzel4346 There were pop-up banks around the big cities at that time, like western union and similar where you could cash a check, some of them were open 24 hours a day.
My Grandfather RIP was a successful professor at that time, but had I asked for over 10k that night it would have been difficult if not impossible for him to come up with the cash.
Chan had like k 10 off lol
Hey Mr. RUclips, why not just mute the foul language? It's really annoying to hear that beep.
300 600. I'm assuming limit. So a raise would be 1200. Re-raise would be 1800. Re-raise would be 2400. Matt Dameon raises to 3000. So he has put in 4800 out of 6000. Johnny chan has put in 3600. Matt Dameon has 1200 left.
ANY TWO CARDS SHOULD CALL THERE TO SEE THE FLOP. Honesly even if you hold 2-7, I'm not sure that going the rest of the way all in is even wrong.
He was lucky. It was Johnny Chan and not Scotty Nguyen because if he called it it will be all over baby.
The damn bleeping ruined the scene
How many lines are you going to bleep out, wow.
For 6k Johnny is calling with crap haha
This scenario definitely could happened, but the difference between pros and everyone else is consistency, you might be able to steal couple hands here and there, but if you sit down with them long enough, they will steal your lunch money , 401k, your wife and kids, well… maybe not your kids but you catch my drift.
BS if you ain’t already sitting on the table Chan sits down on you ain’t getting an empty seat.
Omg stop with the bleeping.
99% of Gamblers stop before they hit it big. Be the 1%.
Never watched this movie, dont know sheot about poker, so I would assume this would not mean much to me.
It's a film about life, not about poker.
Short stack, ratholing hit and runner. rofl
It's been said that this bluff means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Mike plays tight then goes super aggressive. So of course Chan is going to believe him. The other problem with this is that hand could easily have gone the other way. Mike commits himself to this bluff without any thought that Chan may actually have a hand or have hit something on the flop. What was his plan if Chan called or 5 bet? How far was he willing to take this stupid bluff?
This scene woulda played better with Mike re-raising Chan, and that being the fold. Reraising a reraise when your short stacked and on a pure bluff is pretty dumb. Friggin love this movie though.
@@glennmac33short stacked and playing super tight for an hour, but yeah I do think the movie is really good.
I once shot a basket over Lebron James. Now I’m ready for the NBA 😂
noice
Bye Mr Crypto
My brother was a gambling addict. Lost so much.
- but did he win ?
Most likely he got involved in other things. Its tough to sit there grinding out a few k and seeing morons win 10s of ks maybe even a lot more. But I wouldn't recommend poker to my kids unless they were obviously of equal or greater talent than the best players in the world. Even then, if they have other skills maybe not, but its hard to say no in that spot.
A pre flop bluff….. zzzzzzzzzzzzz
First
.
Stupid movie....not even close