Daniel Negreanu Sick Reads

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this before, but check out some super sick reads by Daniel Negreanu

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO8k47_lP0M[/media]

nice video, it was entertaining... but at the same time one really needs to take that with a grain of salt because it's edited for content completely. neg makes calls all day long and they aren't showing the 95% of them that he misses. still he is definitely much more talented than the next guy

daniel just ownes

Seen this before, but still glad to see it again, although I'd like to ask on the last hand why Daniel could only raise or fold there. Is anything weaker calling a bet? What's the purpose of that bet? It could easily be a bluff, set, 2-pair, so I would definitely call there, but I don't see what raising accomplishes. And then after the re-raise it was an easy lay-down, especially if he knew he was bluffing. The 3rd spade came on the river, why would he 3-bet with a hand like aces up (as he claimed he had) or a set? Even if he thought Daniel was bluffing he would have just flat called the raise. That wasn't exactly a great lay-down and I would question the river raise except for the fact that it's Daniel Negreanu who probably knows a bit more about poker than me lol. So instead of saying I think it's wrong I'd simply like to know why he's right. Why is that a fold or a raise and not a call?

Well after reading what you said zach i really thought the same to, so I watched again. It was very interesting that daniel said " I have the type of hand I can't cal you with". The only thing I can get from it is that he obv made a hand, since at first daniel said he had nothing or "squat" he can't just call, he has to raise, either to get the person to fold and not see what he was betting with(no information) or to get something less, like you said to call(possibly make it look like a bluff, a lot of fish would call it down)

This is the only thing I could pull from it, hope it helps, like you said Daniel knows a lot more so who knows really

Ah so you're saying that Daniel didn't really have the type of hand he couldn't call with, but he thought he was ahead and said that to attempt to induce a call from sets/2-pair hands?

That does sort of make sense and then further when he's actually considering calling the re-raise.

I don't understand what you are trying to say zach, are you asking why daniel re raised the river? Since isn't it fairly obvious why?? He is re raising to get action from 2-pairs, sets, maybe even top pair if villain thinks he is bluffing, you do know he has a straight right??

Then after the 3bet by villain, it isn't an easy laydown for Daniel, since villain could be 3 betting with a few hands, 2-pairs, sets, bluffs since he has no idea what hand Daniel has.

Edit : Forgot i had this tab open, so was writing this while zach replied above

Daniel couldn't just call, but I could have. Since it was a blind vs blind thing, and sb only completed, he could have completed with 74, making a bigger straight, along with the flush, big pair(s).

A str8 is a powerful hand in that situation. Where I sometimes miss the flush unless neon lights with big flashing arrows are involved, Daniel didn't miss that flush.

So I agree with his comments that HE couldn't call, he could either fold or raise, and his raise got him his info with that reraise. The guy is just a wee bit (like grand canyon wee bit) more daring than I.........

uh daniel's raise with the straight is mundanely standard. zach, i'm surprised that you'd even consider just calling. you do realize it's blind vs. blind unraised pot, i.e. they basically have two random hands. flop went check check, turn went check check. he has absolutely no reason to put him on a flush or 74 exactly. two pair is several times more likely, and he can easily get paid off. after the 3bet, i'd agree it's a pretty easy fold against all but the strangest villains because, if he has a clue what he's doing, you only beat a very weird bluff

Great stuff, but his reads are not clairvoyant, (except for the AA), I would have made the same read on the first hand... But, I'm Canadian too!!

This guy is only unbelievable good!!
The only exception I have seen was that highstack poker session
Fullhouse vs. Gus Hansons four of a kind

how is that an exception?? he tanked for 6s full??? god

daniel is unbelieveble !!! if i wouda played with him and he woulda told me my pocket cards i think i wooulda be sh.....g in my pants

I would have also had to change my diaper...

Daniel is so sick. He is prob the only player I wouldn't ever want to play against.