Big one for one drop... Seiver and Renkemeier AA hand
Posted by FIVEbetbLUFF
Posted by
FIVEbetbLUFF
posted in
High Stakes
Big one for one drop... Seiver and Renkemeier AA hand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh0i-5-0ANc
So for anyone who saw this hand, why does seiver (and colman says something too) flip out about Renkemeier's fold? AA is not the top of his range there or anything i don't think.
Loading 20 Comments...
You have to add the fact it's like 12 bb deep with antes. Seems kinda weird to flat aces pre if you not are going to stack off on a board like this. He's very high up in his range. Think it's possible that Seiver value ships worse and bluff a bunch as well. I pretty much agree with Seiver, if he had like KQ or AQ it's a very disgusting spot, but don't think he can fold aces here.
yea i guess he's very high up in his range and are they that short? i think sever can be playing a lot of AcX like this as well kt t9 and he might even jam KcQx or any KQ,AQ
reinkemeier isnt very high up in his range at all
so then u think sever and colman are wrong for thinking its such a bad fold?
i didnt say that
well the reason they must think its a bad fold it that it is too high up in his range, am i wrong? what else could it be?
Only thing I can think of is that Seiver's chatplay threw Reinkemeier off somehow. Ridiculous fold if you consider Seiver's shoving range.
How can you say it's a 'ridiculous' fold? Do you even remotly picture yourself in their shoes?
I mean they're playing for big money, and trying to make the absolute best decision in every situation. This is live, this is a 1M tourney that surely doesn't run every week, obviously players will over-fold some spots. It would be quite bad to play hands according to GTO if you can make a correct exploitative fold / call. Simply because the situation won't happen again, so you should make your best to read your opponent on the actual hand they have, instead of their range.
This is definitely a tourney where you want to have soul reads. And they'll be wrong sometimes. Thinking players should play this tourney as if it was a random $100r online is ludicrous IMHO. Every decision is basically life or death, or close to it in terms of emotional intensity and weight. You can't expect players to just call because they're high in their range ; for sure they'll think twice about it, and if they belive they should fold, they will. That's what make them the best. Good but not excellent players can't make borderline calls / folds. They can only make 'correct' decisions. The best players are willing and able to take more risk in their decision-making ; that is they will occasionnally deviate from 'correct' based on reads. And obv they're not gods, so they'll be wrong sometimes.
You probably know the hand between Reinkemeier and Roland De Wolfe, where he called the river with air expecting De Wolfe to muck the winning hand. Reinkemeier is no fish, and is able to follow his heart. Scott Seiver just had the best of him in this hand : he made a good job at convincing the live fox that he had a monster.
you are neglecting the fact that it's seiver. first, seiver is smart and likely exercises good BR management, i.e. he likely has only a small % of his action here. second, seiver is smart and plays well and will generally punish you (either by intent or accident, doesn't matter) for making bad plays. just not the dude you wanna be making insane explo folds against, though i think what you're saying prolly has some merit vs. other players
Just saw the hand vs De Wolfe... pretty impressive, I've never seen anything like it.
Anyway, I didn't mean to suggest Reinkemeier is a fish, just that his line is, well, ridiculous. I don't play much live but if this was online I could never imagine myself folding, so I have to think that the chat had a lot to do with his decision.
Also, I don't see how the fact that it's a huge tourney is relevant. Do you think he would play differently if the tourney prize pool was smaller? He's still playing against Seiver, the board is still the same, he still has the same cards, etc. Even if it was for play money, he should be playing the same way as long as he's trying to play well. If he's not trying to play well due to apathy or whatever, he probably shouldn't be playing in the first place.
of course the fact that it is a one million dollar buy in tourney (again a ONE MILLION DOLLAR BUY IN)will greatly affect decision making. Every decision is completely unique because you will probably never ever be in this spot again for the rest of your life. I am sure they are playing as well as possible but I doubt you should risk going busto in a marginal spot like you might in a run of the mill tourney where you know the long run matters. I agree w/ Mr Sneeze above, and I also think this tourney falls outside of "the long run".
I don't get it. Why should we change our play when it's a more important spot? The goal should be to play as well as you can, given all the info you have. I mean, if you think Seiver's range is going to be different due to the size of the tourney, you can make your decision based on that, but to say the tourney buyin itself should dictate how you play makes absolutely no sense to me.
Ofcourse it does. Look at Ivey folding AK to a 4bet preflop. I doubt he's folding that in a 5k tournament.
You're still trying to play as best as you can but you're going to risk less on marginal EV-spots because like Arizonabay said every situation is so unique and will not happen again because there is no long run.
Let's say Reinkemeier has 1% more equity against Seiver's range than he needs to call. So theoretically he should call but because the edge is so marginal he could make an exploitable fold and wait for better spots.
I don't see a bigger tourney as being "outside the long run" but rather a part of it. If he's got 1% more equity against Seiver's actual range, then he should go for it, no? If he doesn't, you could argue that 2% more equity isn't enough either... what would be enough then?
I think playing explo is great, it's arguably the most interesting part of the game. However, I don't see how the prize pool should have to do with it. It should be dependent on your opponent. An explanation that makes sense to me is "I think I'm behind my opponent" rather than "the prize pool is so huge, I'm gonna wait for a better spot." The latter just sounds like scared money.
I understand what you're saying. They should play the same. But don't you think a lot of them are playing scared money? This tournament is a big swing for most of those players whether they lose or win.
Also, it's not all about the money. This is the most important tournament of the year. Everybody wants to win this. And if you have to give up on some marginal spots, then so be it. This isn't an average 5k tournament or even a 100k highroller.
considering seiver held a bluff, i think thats one of the douchiest reactions possible by him. its like the fact that he was forced to sweat the fold for 10 minutes actually made him incapable of enjoying the win. talk about fucking with someones reality! (renk 1 - seiver 0) imho
If seiver didn't say anything Reinkemeier would probably have called. That chat was world-class.
I dont think his reaction was due to his fold but rather that he didnt 3b pre.
My impression was seiver was half in disbelief because he didn't think AA could possibly fold and he played his reaction off as if he had AA beat. I haven't watched it in a while but he was projecting both disgust AA folded and disbelief he somehow survived that spot.
right, and then he threw his hand open like a douche.
Be the first to add a comment