The last hand: better than people think!

neo:

Thnaks for your well thought out post, most informative and instructional, and fun to read, much appreciated . . .

However, the final phase of the film comes in conflict with what the movie is really all about, and the two may not necessarily dovetail . . . as such, the ending card duel could be read one way, the film another . . . a matter of opinion . . .

aside from that it should be 12/44, great analysis.

I'd like to add some thoughts: when we think about what the initial raiser had (without knowing it), his bet is a bit of a give-away. as is the call. there are like 3 scenarios that would make sense: first he already has a Ten, then he'd valuebet a big hand vs unknown from the getgo but there should be few cards that call him with an eight shown (drawin to a pair is not too tempting when stakes are high). second he has something like JT or suits, meaning two overcards with draw potential vs the visible 8 of his opponent, which would be more of a steal bet, or third simply a bet with prolly the best hand so far, meaning a high card like an Ace or a King behind.

now if the opponent assumes that he is up against a pair of tens, then he obviously needs a little bit more than just a high card to his eight for a call. otherwise he'd draw to 3 outs of 48 cards left, which is pretty slim. with some juice his call makes sense tho. we therefore KNOW that he has two of a suit (great poker players are not great because they act completely random and crazy, but instead make use of their brain and guts).

second card brings a possible set (but not super likely) for one guy and a flushcard for the other one. it makes sense to bet an obviously improved hand, it is also quite common to semibluff a flushdraw with some overcard as an out too. so since he didnt believe in a set, he made the pot a little bigger just in case he could bluff him out of a better hand (odds play a role in bluffin too). so the bet and the call make both sense. Kid knew it was a bluff, and bluffin was legit (that is prolly why he knew).

now the Ace comes and the Kids hand seems pretty obv. a two pair. with the ten of diamonds on the other side it was rather unlikely he had the last ten, so back to theory one meaning two pair now at best. compared to a hand that obv could only have improved to a better draw if we discount the idea of two Q in the other hand, this seems the right kind of valuebet. u are right that the call is perfectly correct tho, especially if we are counting in the possibility of a big bluff at the last round.

that last card was quite unlikely on both sides, whether it is one of two aces left or that Nine of diamonds doesnt really make that much of a difference. would have been interesting if the Kid would have called a reshove at the last card, if he only held two pair. a crying call maybe, but since he must have known that the other guy was drawin to a flush all along, he would have had a hard time doing that.

The way it played out on the final card there was no need for such consideration, this was more like the Negreanu - Hansen incident where both are locked in on a big hand.

the fun part is that the final remark is rather off, it certainly doesnt make a great poker player to be stupid at the right time, quite the contrary. and that is not what happened here anyways. maybe to be aggressive and fight back in the right spots, that would be more like it. the both made the right decisions, with the older guy being the more aggressive and risktaking one surprisingly and it ended with a big bang like unprobable event.


PS: i think the ending would have worked way better if we have heard the players thoughts about their hand and what move to make next, not the viewers speculations about what they have. but maybe that is because nowadays poker is no exotic game to the public anymore as it used to be.


________________________________________
" People being stupid is not a plot hole " - by redwingjs