Peter Eastgate vs Ylon Schwartz - WSOP 2008 Main Event Final Table

[yonkydelpoker]

donkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

[atomisten]

wow u can just know schwartz is a good earner pro when he honestly says "nice call" after his floating all in failure.... typical behaviour is saying something polite with a dead red face while thinking "OMG THIS DONK JUST CALLED HOW UNLUCKY AM I."

[R088O]

EXACT same thing happened to me earlier in a tournament, i had raised preflop with JJ and got one caller, flop A42 we both check, turn A we both check, river 6 and I shove and he calls with 66. If he misses that 6, he's folding.

[atomisten]

@R088O why would u even shove on the river, a check would get u same results, only people who would call your shove are holding either ace, 2pair or just a set

[bigeights]

he had 30 blinds left, and he bluffed all in, the dumbest all in ever, what a retard. cost him over 4million for being so retarded!!!!.

[scatman57]

@bigeights You realize, of course, that if Eastgate doesn't river a 5, Schwartz picks up the pot?

[bigeights]

@scatman57

yes i understand this rules, which i happen to think is the most ridiculous idiot rule ever. but in this situation. with so much money on the line,why the risk. eastgates bets prior to allin 1.7m and 4.5m both after schwartz checked. schwartz weakness is so apparent at this point, again showing how ppl consistantly manage to mismanage their bankroll. and with eastgates history, you should know this guy isnt f-in around at the final table.

[scatman57]

@bigeights 3 points: 1) you're not using "bankroll" correctly 2)Yilon Schwartz is a pro with solid overall winnings both online and live 3)Ylon appears polarized here, not weak

[redhidus]

loved peter's manners after he sends him out... true class

[WillyMcWilliness]

@NegreanuDan87 dumb spammer... no one wants to pay your shitty 2 cent per month rake

[Mathiu36]

nh peter.

[brunoandthe80mix]

lool what a dum decision bluffing all in lool

[chimapalooza]

@brunoandthe80mix

It wasnt a bad move. Thats the only card that eastgate could hope for to actually call. Schwartz knew eastgate was a bit too tight passive, and was exploiting it. The guy had 5's full on a very dry board and it still took him a while to call. That should have been a snap call all in.

2nd - If eastgate didnt hit that 5 on the river, he wouldnt have bet the river unless he had a monster or a bluff. Because of the board, its hard to assume eastgate has a monster.

[brunoandthe80mix]

@chimapalooza ohhh shith didnt tought that man thanks :)

[accord21]

@chimapalooza It was a horrible play, even by your own admission it was a horrible play, if you don't realize it. You say and I quote "he wouldnt have bet the river unless he had a monster or a bluff." So if he had one of the two hands you wouldn't have to push all in to find out. If he has a bluff he folds to any raise. If he has a monster he calls or pushes all in.

[R4ndomWords]

@chimapalooza You have to ask yourself which hands Schwartz wants to push out here on this very dry board. If Peter had anything middling on the river, like, say a pair of sixes, he would have checked the river, so his bet is either a bluff or a monster. Schwartz had a middling hand himself, his Ace high would beat bluffs, so the only sensible options on the river are to call if he thinks Peter is bluffing or to fold if he thinks Peter has a monster. It all adds up to a horrible spot to bluff.

[sebaxoo]

@brunoandthe80mix it was a good play, he just got unlucky peter hit 5's full in the river

[JohnQWydell]

Poor Schwartz. He shoulda win this tourney.