Bubble Boy
Pauly and Otis say that bubble play is the most exciting thing at the WSOP. I didn’t realize they were such masochists. The hand for hand ran just under two hours while producing 13 hands. Such excitement carries the taste of treacle and is reminiscent of those nightmares when we were chased in our dreams and could only run in slow motion.
Steven Bartley describes the hand as follows:
Hamadani "pushed" all-in for his last 500, so perhaps it's more accurate to say he "dropped" it all in. That 500 was a just single ante and he'd been hanging on by his finger nails for a while. Reed Hansel raised to 17,000 and both blinds called for a Q♥6♥Q♦ flop. Hensel made it 20,000 to play, forcing out the blinds. Hensel showed 9♦2♦ to Hamadani's 4♣3♥. Hensel made a pair on the 9♦ turn and trips on the 9♠ river. It was all over.
I read this with disbelief. I reread it. And did it again and again. I even went over to PokerNews to see if Steven had got it wrong. Nope that was the play.
I have riled against the use of Donkament and Donkey so much in some peoples writing. I still think it is the cheap shot and can be categorized as page filler. But, I would agree if someone said that Hensel was the last, identifiable long-ear in the tournament.
My real question is: Was he trying to keep a friend in the tournament?
That's the only rational explanation. We all learn in that first book – Poker 101 – that you don't bet into a dry pot where an elimination is pending. That gets underlined and marked in bold print when you are talking the WSOP bubble.
For some reason this Hensel guy makes a hero play. He bluffs! He has a backdoor flush draw and from zero to two live cards. Poker 101 also talks about odds – that equates to luck versus skill. His bluff here is based on pure luck. He wants to gamble and it is a hand that sends the 647 remaining players looking for a rope or ax to use on this gentlemen if he fails in the luck department. The fact he was somehow ahead means nothing. 647 players want to kill this idiot. This was a WTF moment time 647.
Nice Hand Old Man! Well Played!
ADDENDUM:
Traffic is picking up a bit but is still down from what it was on the old site. The strange thing is that Alexa has rewarded that with moving me up almost 30% in ranking. I am almost in the top half-million sites. LOL. Amazon doesn't have to worry.
But, things are coming back. The spam is on the increase. Today's all came compliments of China. It covered dildos, bondage gear, and analysis of military air craft simulation. Not quite but almost eclectic.
No related posts.
That guy must be a complete beginner. What an amazing blunder.
You clearly don’t understand the concept of abusing your tablemates on the bubble. Hensel’s play is perfectly fine but it doesn’t susprise me that amateurs can’t comprehend it.
Hamadani’s main pot is 4,500. With the blinds at 2500/5000, Hensel can pick up 7,500 chips simply by raising and stealing the blinds. Should that happen, he still has 40% equity with his 92o against Hamadani’s random hand for the main pot.
Hensel raises and gets two callers out of the blinds, both probably expecting to check the hand down in hopes of eliminating Kia. With a pot of more 50,000 on the side, Hensel bets the flop on a bluff. He’s representing extreme strength and knows he’s not being called by anything but a Queen in this spot because his opponents don’t expect him to bet without a big hand. As expected, they fold and Hensel adds the 50K to his stack.
Why should he care about bursting the bubble? Hensel is playing to win this tournament and eliminating one player on the bubble is no different than eliminating a player after the bubble bursts. In tournament poker you look for any edge to pick up as many chips as possible. This was a great spot.
Hensel is a professional poker player, and a good one at that. The fact that you criticize his play here is hilarious.
Well, I do appreciate your being a reader going back to a July 12th post. That’s dedication!
Maybe you’re basing the comment based on results. Getting a set with a total crap hand is interesting. Don’t think I’d go as far as professional.
You laud his getting the other two out and going heads up with junk against a bubble boy. While it is great to win a hand as the dog, it is even greater to make the money at that point in time.
You are impressed with his aggression. Well, I like aggression but it has a place unless you are playing in luck box mode.
Sorry, we’re going to have to agree to disagree.
I’ve seen some real chip and a chair hands over the years. Even managed it a few times. Had he not been hit over the head by the deck, it might have been a massively different outcome.
I just watched the ESPN hour on bubble play. Yes, there was a lot of little steals tried for the blinds. There were also a lot of premium hands folded — hands that were superior to the one of their opponent. There were even pros in the mix.
I’m not a reader. I came across this while googling Reed Hensel and got a big laugh out of it.
Maybe instead of reading “Poker 101″ over and over you should pick up something more advanced. Like I said, Reed is a professional and doesn’t care about “making the money”. His play is completely standard on the bubble for winning tournament players. You bashed him because you don’t understand the play yourself. Read my post again and learn something.
Or, best of luck playing weak-tight poker the rest of your life.
Well, however you got here I do appreciate the page hit and fodder for today’s blog. You might want to give it a read too. I’m still down from the old sites page hits.