Vernurable.

The story behind this is a little bit more complex. Hellmuth knew, that Matusow had only one bullet for this session and he exploited that, he just did not want to go broke in this hand. Very simple case of being money-scared.

7:35 I love how laak has 500$ ready :D

Although Doug did a great job of breaking down this vid. The most important part of this is that Mike is not only playing with scared money, he's usually playing with other people's money! He laid those kings down because he was broke and didnt want to have to leave the game! Playing in games that YOU can comfortably buy into is very important!

this fold made my eyes bleed

Shocked you didn't comment on the fact that Hellmuth knew Mike was on one bullet for the cash game. Absolutely critical information here IMO.

Wow.. It's insanely cool to see such complex thought processes from one of the best in the world. I wish I could always think this way when I'm in a hand.

Love these videos, keep up the great content Doug

I got to talk to Mike about this hand in 2009. He told me he folded because he was on his only buy in. He also told me Phil knew it was his only buy in, which to me, makes this an easier call because it becomes more obvious that Phil wants a fold.

This is a legendary hand. Everything about it hits. Matusow's talking and showing his cards, the fact that it was Hellmuth bluffing, the reactions of the other guys at the table, the commentary by Gabe ("turns the Kings over, throws 'em away, and here it comes!"). Just perfect.

Such great content. Doug is a living legend and a great professional, an inspiration for us all.

Hey Doug, not sure if you read these but I'm absolutely loving this series! Fantastic idea and really great to hear all of your insight. Keep up the good work, I'm really enjoying it.

love Antonio's constant needles and people don't even see hes needling them lol

Glad to see these old videos are back!

Thank you alot Doug for all your work ! I watch all your videos with total attention and concentration. Your videos give me a much confidience and skill level in my game) Thank you !!! God bless you)

I think after this hand Phil said that he knew Mike only had one bullet for the game.

Great videos, really interesting to hear your view on those "classic" hands.

@6:39 vurnerable? lol Thought this was a brain fart then he said it again a couple seconds later. Seriously Doug? Vurnerable?

The turn analysis is what has me so interested in poker again....i love all the layers of detail and doug presents it so effortlessly. This is why it makes me laugh when danielle negreneau aka ManChildPoker says jCarver is tops on twitch...only by audience..for now...Doug is immensely more erudite has better elocution and way more affable. Your pal, Mao

I love how every commentator is automatically a poker pro when they can see everyone's hands. Meanwhile, Doug is a great player that I played against online, and he is completely right on everything he said. basically, bad fold by matusow's point, relying too much on reputation vs the current situation. Best rule of poker is to forget about any previous hands and focus on the one you have. Too many people remember the big losses vs the wins. Which is exactly what happened here. Gutsy out of character playing by Phil and his "reputation' caused Mike to fold a hand because of the past, not the moment.

How many R's in the Word vulnerable ?? Oh & its Skeletons in the closet & Monsters Under the bed . good work tho

Can you please review Antonius vs Lederer AA vs AA

I did a simular bad fold with kings. Now i understand better what i did wrong. Great video, many thanks!

Antonio wearing an Ed Hardy shirt.

Matusow's not only "out of it" in this hand, he's "out of it" in general if you read his support for Trump on twitter

Best series ever. Keep it up.

seems like scared money situation

It was like 2008 dude, no chance in hell Matusow opens from EP with 86s. And he seems "out of it" because he's doped up on mood stabilizers (I think Depakote when this was filmed) and antideps. They screw with logical processes. Matusow made a lot of questionable decisions during this season, even by his own standards.

The first channel i subscribe and The first coment i do , really good channel, very interesting and funny thanks doug

But doug my reads and instincts...... LOL at the needle at the end "broke dummy"

Something that wasn't talked about is this was early in the session and Mike only had one bullet. I'm sure he didn't want to go broke this early in the session so he played scared with this hand.

great great analysis

I kept hearing Massuw

Cool Ed Hardy shirt Antonio

pls more hands! u are even better than The Poker Guys although they are really good and entertaining!

Matusow folded because he believes he's unlucky at poker when in reality he's not very good.

on the flip side let's say phil has AQ and is value betting. What is he getting value from? KQs? Basically just KQs right? Which depending on your suits, much of KQs might be blocked.

Who supplies you with hair gel?

Alright. I don't really comment on that, but this I gotta ask, Doug. You mentioned that Phil is pretty tight, and that is true for what we can see on the internet. You also mentioned that we sometimes should forget about reads that we have on some specific players and go for their range and pos flop play. So, my question is, considering Phil Helmut's 3betting range against the UTG player, which I believe is something like [AK,AQ,AA,KK,QQ,JJ], if Phil is not bluffing too much, and we know that he's NOT, so Matusow is really only beating AQ from Helmut's value range. Don't you think that overall this is actually a pretty good fold? Even though his hand is disguised, He blocks AK and pocket kings, so that can't be that many hands that he beats on Phil's range at this board/river. Except, of course, 72! lol

where is the link for the hand with eastgate? cant find it on your profile

great video

The best part of this is that right before this hand mike said that " phil is the biggest fish"

Good video, Doug. :)

2:00. But doug the thing is ,even if you get $500 from each player , the pot is usually tens of thousands so i think it,s the pride factor waay more than the money.

Matusow's hand was shaking at the end....as he fidgeted going back and forth to chips and cards. You could see the physical manifestation of his vacillation.

Yeah I agree not to play with scared money but I have seen Mike play well on many occasions. They usually only show him when things are going bad 4 him.

Here’s how to play the 7/2 game… cheerfully throw money at anyone who wants to go to the mat with 72. From there, play a normal game and you will more than get back whatever money you had to pay to people.

idk Dougie, first of all love your channel. it is really interesting and also addictive and distracts me from from my math studying. About the hand Mike played it so awful i personally think it was a set up for like tv audience. Second there is no instance or position anywhere on all of the 5 streaks that mike should fold. Actually he could raise or shove the river 99 times out of a hundred and win. But your awesome but i would like too see you analyse the hand between Dwan and Melzer on HSP season whatever when he made the call on the river with Kings. I am still confused about that hand.

One thing you are forgetting Doug. Phil knew that Mike only had 1 bullet in this game if I recall correctly. That is huge in Phil's play and Mike's decision.

Can someone explain Doug's comment at the end about needing to continue about 55% of the time to not allow someone to bluff when they bet 40k into 50k?? I thought at this sizing because we'd be getting more than 2 to 1 on a call we only have to have the best hand (continue) 33% of the time to be profitable??

Why Mike could only have 88, 86 in his value range after calling 3bet utg? He could also flat qq, jj, tt, 99 and he could easily check flop call turn with the intention raise or bet river.( at least some times, especially with his stack size)There is nothing to be afraid of on such flop(4 outs max).

Doug, you're hair has never looked better than in this video. Secret?

There is so much bad play on that programme if you watch it back. I wonder if they played that way just to generate action after it aired.

What is vurnerable?

I feel like I gotta be missing something here. Why is 10,9 never mentioned as a hand that Phil is repping? Is 10,9 suited just never going to take that line pre-flop? Seems like a real chance at that hand once he checks the flop(somewhat trapping the draw?) and raises the 8 on the turn, which wouldve hit the straight for him. If I was Mike, I feel like the only reason I fold is because i think he has the straight Maybe I just play 10,9(s) way too much tho..?🤷🏼‍♂️😂

This is a combination of Hellmuth having a super tight/trappy reputation (and playing up to that reputation with his line) and Matusow being on scared money. He was on one bullet, and I know in other seasons he actually had sold big chunks of his action, maybe even been staked in the game, by others. Matusow was (is?) a very good player, but his bankroll management, especially at this time with FT still going and him blowing his roll on online poker every other week, he really shouldn't have been playing nearly this big. I've played on scared money before, and I can say from experience that there's always an opportunity for someone bluff you off of even your biggest hands if they take the right line.

So fk'n BOSS.

Love your videos Doug but sorry you're completely off on this one. Mike even said 'turns a 2-outer on me' and then folds the kings. You're over analyzing way too much when it's simply 2 nits playing straightforward lines and thinking (not saying they're not good players but in this case they were both playing straightforward lines).

1,000,000% a call. Beats like 80% of the value bets and the counterfeit. The real reason he didn’t call was because he only brought one buyin to the game. That’s it. He mentions it later in the ep. otherwise that’s a call every time.

I think Matusow was mimicking a Hellmuth tilt because Hellmuth has a tilt-after-losing tilt history.

Are you sure it is pronounced "vernerable"... it might actually be "vulnerable" lol... 6:39 6:43 LOL...

Mike did play the hand poorly, but he knows it is very uncharacteristic of Phil to run a big bluff like that. Phil also says later in that episode that he knew Mike only had one bullet (buy in) so he knew Mike had to be cautious.

@Doug Polk 13:05 Sometimes a high stakes player can say one line which makes me lose all respect for him. In this case Mike proves he is an idiot by saying "He hit a fucking 2 outer on me" when a 2nd 6 hit the river. The entire hand Mike had been cautious with KK facing Helmuths reraise. It already started pre flop with Mike saying something like ''you always have it when you look at me''. The only hand Mike was worried about was AA at that point, and maybe QQ which is really the bottom end of Hellmuths value reraise range. Hellmuth has stated many times that he never plays big pots with JJ and everyone knows he flats that pre. So on the flop Mike really only worries about AA and QQQ. The turn bricks and so does the river 6 which pairs the board. Should be a blank for anyone who understands poker. I try to follow Mikes process and when he tanks the river I think ''Mike is putting Helmuth on AA''. But then when he mentions a 2 outer I realize that Mike is a fish and has no idea about hand reading. The range he worried about pre flop and on the flop is 100% inconsistent with his river read. Hellmuth never has a 6 with this line, which is a read that even a micro stakes player can make. Agreed?

One thing tho is that Hellmuth is definitly never 3-betting AQ PF in BBvsEP so Mattusow has a pure bluffcatcher on the river (he should probably still call, yes...).

"Show the deuce-seven and collect five hundred!"

we did this online on pokerstars it was fun we actually played for 6 hrs straight it was fun

Over-analysis. It's quite simple: Mike's playing on scared money and thinks that Phil has QQ or (less likely) JJ. This was 2006 (maybe even 2005) so there's almost no chance Phil is re-raising Mike's UTG raise with anything less than JJ, and - in fact - probably only QQ+ (or, in this game, 72); in fact, in 2006 even re-raising an UTG raiser with QQ was not considered the standard play which is why Mike only calls with his KK, especially against a tight opponent like Phil. During this era of poker there's almost certainly no way Matusow is ever raising UTG with 86s.

mike folded because he had 1 bullet. phill knew that , that's why he made that bet

I seen a cash game where Matusow was up big & Phil lent him cash to get in, then Phil went broke & told Mike he wanted his money & that he was leaving. I kinda thought that was rude in front of everyone.

Should be more like $5000 per player at these stakes. $500 a person isn't even 1 5k chip.

mike is tight passive

ph never is this ballsy but he does it cuz its matusow.

great info but this really only came down to hellmuths image,. he's such a nit that when he bluffs it works most of the time and coupled with Phil's preflop action Mike was sure he had it,. easy for me to say but Phil looked super uncomfortable betting on the river. Mike should have seen that,,. he was squirming trying to talk himself into betting,,. unless Mike thought that was a reverse tell

this line of checking flop and potting turn doesn't look to me as a set

Mike's thinking process should be something like when he 3bet and check the flop, Phil have a pair JJ+, so he can't beat any of those. And also, he only has one bullet, that's why he folded.

Phil almost never 3bets hands like AQ and/or KQ, especially against a tightass like Mike, who he knows so well. Basically: Phil isnt the 3bet kinda guy. So he really is only repping AA, QQ and maybe JJ here. So when he makes the bet on the river, it really is either a monster or 27. So I dont really blame the fold. It's a good bluff by Phil, though.

Every time you call a deuce a "two" I get a little triggered

I don't think Matusow beats a lot of Hellmuth's value bets when he chooses this sizing.

Nice chalkboard

why are your eye circles so dark?

i think mike was very scared of his value hands being aa qq jj and didnt think hellmuth had almost any bluffs. i dont think he puts aq and ak so much in his 3 betting range. most likely that was his train of thought imo. if thats his thinking then mike really beats nothing.

write a book

seven-deuce not seven-two... common doug what would doyle brunson think of you :P

This is when Vanessa was real af

couldn't hemulth be repping pocket sixes?

Verna able?

Matusow only brought one bullet for the game. He had just sat down and didn't want to bust the game right away. Hellmuth knew that Matusow did not have enough cash to rebuy.

Why can’t Doug say vulnerable

Doug, is Hellmuth value betting QJ not reasonable here?

I disagree that a river call is as clear cut as the video and comments make it out to be. Matusow raised under the gun, so Hellmuth's 3-bet looks stronger than it would if Matusow was, say, in the cutoff. Would 7-2 be a profitable 3-bet if he's risking being 4bet by Matusow? It's not so clear, as Polk points out himself in the video. This makes 7-2 less likely as many would choose to smooth call with 7-2. There are 16 combinations of 7-2, and 24 combinations of AA, KK, QQ and JJ combined (I have done out the combinations of one such pair at the end of this comment). So the nominal probability of 7-2 is actually much smaller than that of a top 2% hand range. The BIGGEST consideration I feel the video did not properly weigh in on was the fact that Hellmuth checked the flop, followed by a turn overbet. YES, in a vacuum, AQ and KQ could still value bet river given how weak Matusow's line was, but this rationale largely ignores how unlikely it would be for Hellmuth to check the flop with AQ or KQ. His range is polarized to AA, a set, or 7-2, because ONLY THESE HANDS WOULD BE COMFORTABLE GIVING A FREE CARD. So, Matusow's decision basically came down to how likely Helmuth is to 3bet his UTG raise and then pull a two street bluff with exactly 72. Combinations of AA: Ac Ah / Ac Ad / Ac As / Ah Ad / Ah As / Ad As (six in total for each pair)

Cha'alt!

vernable lol

Doug Polk - would you call if you in Matusow's position. I am not sure if you would call with one pair! Personally I am not sure what we can learn from this video - we already know that Phil can bluff!

Vernerable?

If they weren't playing the 72 game Mike may have never been winning against Hellmuth in that situation. Perhaps a great exploitative fold except for Mike forgot to factor in the 72.

One of the worst folds in poker history

why is he not trying to sell 9,10?

Skip the talk and just show us the whole clip

Hey Doug, great stuff. I'd like to see your thoughts on the hand Ivey vs Esfandiari at Aria recently where Ivey flopped set of 2s vs Esfandiari's flopped straight. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Y8B6a7l0vtWVd2g.html I think its a very rangey situation (as opposed to physical reads) for both players, and given how aware Ivey is of his situations, I found it a very interesting call down. Thx

What's up with your hair tho