Poker Quads Over Quads
- Posted by kid dynamite
- on July 5th, 2012
PokerListings.com’s Poker Odds Calculator is the fastest, most accurate and easy-to-use poker odds calculator online. It’s just like what you see when you watch poker on TV. Use it in real-time to know exactly what your chances of winning and losing are at any point in a poker hand – be it on online poker sites or playing live poker. Bad Beat Jackpot Odds Introduction 'Bad beat' is a term that can mean having an outstanding chance of winning a bet, only to still lose. The term can be used in any form of gambling but is most commonly applied to poker. In No Limit Hold'em, a player has about a 2% chance of having quads by the river while they hold a pocket pair. In No Limit Hold'em, a player has about a 0.001% chance of flopping quads without a pocket pair. Quads are beaten by just three types of hands: 1.
In case you haven’t heard, there was a $ 1MM buy in tournament at the World Series of Poker this year. This hand came up on day one, in the fourth blind level. The participants were businessman John Morgan and Russian businessman and frequent poker player Mikhail Smirnov. From poker forum 2+2:
“Phil Galfond just witnessed the unthinkable.
“I’ve never seen a fold like that, absolutely not,” the cash game pro said.
At around 5 p.m. local time during the fourth blind level, Galfond was present to see his table mate in the $1 million buy-in WSOP event, Russian semi-pro Mikhail Smirnov, fold quads on the river to an all-in bet.
According to Smirnov, the action started with Tom Dwan opening to 32,000. Smirnov called from the small blind with the 88, and businessman John Morgan called from the big blind.
The flop fell J87. Smirnov bet 50,000, Morgan called quickly, and Dwan folded.
The 8 hit the turn. Smirnov bet 200,000. Morgan called instantly.
Smirnov said Morgan looked very excited on the turn.
The K landed on the river, and Smirnov bet 700,000, which was more than the pot of 600,000. Morgan thought about it briefly and then shoved for about 3.4 million total, which was about the size of Smirnov’s stack. Smirnov folded the quads face up.
“For me, it was a very easy fold,” Smirnov said. “If he had two kings before the flop he would have re-raised Dwan, because he’s been active and raising a lot. So, two kings was impossible. Two jacks, in theory, was possible.”
Smirnov said that he thought jacks full of eights wouldn’t have been such a confident shove on the river. “He was like all-in, no problem. Before he had been playing very carefully and tight.”
According to his logic, Morgan would have the 109.
The size of the buy-in was not a factor in the decision, Smirnov said. He added that Morgan seemed visibly upset after the hand, giving more validity to the fold.
“I personally couldn’t have done it,” Galfond said. “I’d lose sleep. But, I think it was a reasonable fold actually. There are definitely very few hands John could have had that weren’t a straight flush. Jacks full was probably the one that made the most sense, other than a straight flush.”
According to Galfond, the table erupted once the quads were shown. Dwan left the table in disbelief.”
Now, a few more tidbits for you:
1) Morgan’s reaction, from WSOP.com:
“When pressed for an answer as to whether he actually had the stone-cold lock, a straight flush, Morgan smiled at first. Then, he paused. Then, he spoke.
“I’m not going to tell anyone,” Morgan said softly. “And the reason I am not going to reveal it is totally out of respect for my opponent.””
2) Smirnov’s reaction, from WSOP.com:
“Later, Smirnov was asked about the remarkable hand and his decision to fold a monster (Writer’s Note: English is not Mr. Smirnov’s first language – his comments to Nolan Dalla are printed verbatim):
“It’s hard for me to explain. It seemed like a very difficult call to make. But for me — I think that my read of the table and when you think about this hand and it’s very easy for me to fold. It was the right play. Sometimes it’s very difficult to fold top pair, but this time I don’t know what he should have. It’s impossible for him to have full house of Kings, impossible full house of Jacks, because he did not re-raise from button (pre-flop). He would have re-raised with Jacks and Kings (pre-flop). If he has full house of sevens, then he’d just call (the river bet). A bluff is impossible because he likes to play in the tournament and he is not a professional. I think I have no chance to win, plus he was so excited on the turn (when he made, what could be a straight flush).”
3) Smirnov’s description of the hand, from ESPN.com:
“Tom Dwan from the button raised 32,000, his regular raise. I’m small blind. Call. The gentlemen [Minnesota businessman John Morgan] in big blind called. After this, 7s-Js-8c on the flop. I [bet] from first position, 50,000. [There was an] instant call from the gentleman, and Tom Dwan folded. Then, the eight of spades [on the turn]. Now it’s 7-8-J of spades and 8 of clubs. I bet approximately 200,000, approximately the pot. This gentleman instantly called and was very excited. [He looked] around like all cameras in the world are looking at our hand. I don’t know why, but it is looking for me like this. After this, the king of spades on the river. I bet 700,000, a little more than pot. I over-bet. Five seconds thinking and he is all-in for 700,000 and 2 million. For me, it’s an easy fold. But I maybe thought for two minutes. For me, in real game for example, [it’s an] easy fold.
“I had physical tells plus technically, if he has two kings, he’d raise before the flop because he is a very straightforward player and Tom Dwan raised from button. Only one hand possible in theory, two jacks, but if he has two jacks, I think first of all, he’d raise Tom before the flop, though that is not 100 percent, plus, he would think more on the river because with kings plus straight flush plus two eights, he has [with jacks] only the fourth-best combination. … He should be thinking more about the pot. He was so excited on turn, the king did not frighten him at all. My over-bet did not frighten him, plus before this, he played very straightforward … very tight. He likes to participate in tournament. He cares not about money. … All together, I think [it’s an] easy fold.
“He was very upset after the hand. I think he had a straight flush, but because he didn’t show the hand, someone else [asked] what he had and he wasn’t happy. Maybe now I’m free-rolling in this tournament.”
4) Description of Morgan’s eventual bust out hand, from 2+2 – doesn’t exactly seem like the kind of guy who only shoves with the nuts.
5) ESPN’s Gary Wise talked to Morgan later:
“Wise: Did you have the straight flush?
Morgan: I had a royal flush!
W: There was no royal flush on the board.
M: I had 7-2 of diamonds.
W: 7-2 of diamonds, huh?
Poker Quads Over Quads Videos
Morgan smiled.
W: What did you have?
M: He made a good fold.”
Now, you can read the massive 2+2 thread, with all of the poker hand range analysis you want, and you can spend all day analyzing the possible hand holdings, frequencies, etc etc etc. If you don’t know the players, as almost none of us do, it’s a moot point to some extent: we’re just guesstimating. But there’s one thing that I didn’t see mentioned at all in that entire thread: Smirnov was relying on his read of Morgan – but there’s a problem when you’re trying to get a read on an amateur. First of all, I’m not saying that Morgan is a fool, or a novice – I have no idea – but he is not a poker professional, and everything I’ve read about him points to him being a businessman who enjoys poker. One problem with non-professionals (can we just call them amateurs?) is that they sometimes misread the strength OF THEIR OWN HAND. Thus, as their opponent, you get a false read: you read supreme strength because your opponent is thinking on a different level from you and thinks his hand is stronger than it is!
I remember a very vivid application of this theory: it was a hand that Doyle Brunson played against Chris Monyemaker (I think it was a big televised cash game) where Doyle made a medium flush, and read Moneymaker for supreme strength. What happened is that Moneymaker had also made a flush – a tiny flush – but thought his hand was stronger than it was! I remember watching it, going, “oh no – you can see this happening – Doyle is reading Moneymaker’s overrating of his own hand!” So Doyle mucked the best hand, based on a twisted read: Moneymaker was clearly relaying strength, because he thought his hand was stronger than it was. Doyle picked up on that and concluded that his hand must not be good.
I think that’s key in discussing this Morgan-Smirnov hand…
I think that JJ is a very likely alternative (alternative to the stone cold nuts, Ts9s straight flush) hand for Morgan. I think that KK is certainly possible, although not as likely, since the Ks was on board. And yes, of course he would be more likely to re-raise preflop with KK, but he also may be trying to trap the uber-aggressive Tom Dwan who had been very active. The KK turn call is a little harder to rationalize. I think that AsTs is certainly a viable holding, and would explain Morgan’s “excitement” on the turn, especially in accordance with the Doyle Brunson story I told above about amateurs mis-evaluting the strength of their own hands. Same with 77.
Finally, note that Morgan and Smirnov hadn’t been playing together for days at this point – they’d only been playing together for a few levels.
I’m not folding quad 8’s here.
-KD
Amazon.com WidgetsKid Dynamite is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. If you click on my Amazon.com links and buy anything, even something other than the product advertised, I earn a small commission, yet you don't pay any extra. Thank you for your support.
The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.
View the discussion thread.blog comments powered by