|
| | | Forum Member
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/16/2007 11:23:00 PM
Posts: 33, Visits: 69 |
| | This topic has been on other forums on the internet but here it is on this one: What did KGB have on the final hand of the movie Rounders? Before you go any further, if you haven't seen the movie, don't read on as this post is a spoiler. The following description of the hand was taken from Copyright83 from the FullTiltPoker forum and editted (I was too lazy to type it myself): At this point, the blinds are $50/$100. KGB has about $20k in front of him; Mike has $40k.
KGB has the button and the big blind.
Mike raises to $200 with 9s 8s. KGB calls.
Pot: $400.
The flop comes down 6d 7s 10h, giving Mike the nut straight. He checks, and KGB bets $2,000. Mike calls. Pot: $4,400.
The turn is the 2c. Mike checks and KGB bets $4,400.
Mike calls. Pot: $13,200.
The river is the As. Mike checks, and KGB moves all in.
(His comment was "the ace couldn't have helped you.") Mike calls and flips his hand revealing the nuts. KGB's hand is never shown. What did he have? I have a pretty good guess but I'll give you all first crack at it. |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/8/2006 3:22:11 AM
Posts: 36, Visits: 75 |
| | A 10 off, just off the top of my head betting fairly aggressivly off the flop, like he had top pair, moving all-in when the ace hits. If it was suited, he probably would have re-raised pre-flop. That's a good question, though. I've watched that movie a few times and never wondered that before |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/8/2006 3:22:11 AM
Posts: 36, Visits: 75 |
| | just as an afterthought he may have had 67 suited, but my first guess is the A 10 off |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/25/2006 4:36:44 PM
Posts: 40, Visits: 96 |
| | My first thought was that he had limped with pocket aces. I think that's the only hand that would guarantee that his statement is true. If he said it before the other guy called, it might have been a part of a bluff (I haven't seen the film). |
| |
| | | Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/25/2006 4:36:44 PM
Posts: 40, Visits: 96 |
| | I guess it's movie, not film... |
| |
| | | 
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/11/2006 12:55:04 PM
Posts: 109, Visits: 229 |
| | Two Red Aces is my guess. G O N E F O R E V E R |
| |
| | | Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 3/7/2006 4:58:01 PM
Posts: 9, Visits: 32 |
| AA -
His statement about the ace not being able to help is only true in this case, as even if Mike has the 4th A, the best he can make is two pair vs KGB's set.
The best argument against AA is that no one in their right mind would slow-play AA pre-flop, and should have re-raised instead of just calling the weak bet. But then he overbets the flop raising five times the pot, hopefully looking to take it down there. KGB then makes a decent play at figuring out what Mike has by betting the pot at the turn - if Mike makes a 1:2 pot odds call, then he knows he's beat and can get away from his pair if he doesnt hit his 3rd A on the river. From Mikes weak preFlop raise KGB probably puts him on a weak pair, and figures he may have hit his set on the flop by the big call there. He then goes all-in hoping Mike thinks he had hit a low pair with an A kicker, caught the A on the river for two pair and hopes Mike trusts his winning set.
The only other feasable option is that KGB is bluffing the entire time, has garbage and is bluffing with his flop over-bet, his turn pot-bet, and his too-nicely timed comment about the A not helping as if he's trying to let Mike 'figure out' that KGB is holding bullets.
I find both of these cases improbable, but AA is the more likely hand. |
| |
| | | 
Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 5/20/2007 11:24:48 PM
Posts: 42, Visits: 88 |
| | My first guess was Ace Ten offsuit, but a good case is made for the aces. The only problem that I can't overcome with the Ace ten arguement is that after the overbet on the flop and Mike's call, if he did just have Ace Ten why would he keep firing unless he truly thought Mike was on a draw. But if that arguement is believed than the same case can be made for the aces. Why would he keep firing if he thought Mike held at least two pair. The caliber of poker player that KGB is I think means he would recognize this and stop shooting and surrender the pot. And I can't imagine him fishing for one of the last two aces on the end. So all this considered, now that I've overthought myself and probably have the wrong read I'd say he had trip sixes or sevens and thought that by betting as much as he did would make maximum profit.
Bad Beats are part of life, so quit complaining. |
| |
| | | Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 11/25/2007 3:06:07 PM
Posts: 195, Visits: 381 |
| | I imagine it was AA also after reading the posts. I didn't really think of AA but it makes perfect sense. Mike MR pre-flop in both hands and both hands he smooth called w/ AA. And he was cocky the whole hand. And it's a great point someone made that he says, "The ace could not have helped you." that it's only true in the event he has aces. It's hard to believe he bets the river with just one-pair. That also indicates aces. At first I thought before the posts that he flopped a set. But Aces makes more sense. He bet it all on the river because that was his gin card. There, aces. And I'm glad. Go Steelers!
pokerponcho |
| |
| | | |
|