Community Cards: Poker-Like Plotting at Super Bowl XLVI

Poker in Popular Culture

Topics: Epic Poker League, Community Cards, Chris Moneymaker, Poker in Popular Culture

Connections between poker and sports are many. It wasn’t surprising, then, for various poker-related analogies to suggest themselves during Sunday’s exciting conclusion to the National Football League season, Super Bowl XLVI between the New York Giants and New England Patriots.

Like a highly competitive heads-up battle punctuating a hard-fought tournament, Sunday’s game featured a number of moments that recalled our favorite card game, as well as the fact that like in poker, both skill and luck were of significance in affecting the outcome, a 21-17 victory by the Giants.

Spectacular, skillful plays punctuated the game throughout, perhaps the most jaw-dropping coming late in the fourth quarter when Giants receiver Mario Manningham made a circus catch along the sideline to pull in a brilliantly-thrown 38-yard pass from Eli Manning, thereby launching what would turn out to be the game’s winning drive. Meanwhile two New York fumbles during the second half bounced fortunately for the Giants, allowing them to retain possession at key moments when Pats recoveries might well have led to a New England victory.

Near the game’s conclusion a most unusual circumstance developed which saw New England purposely allow the Giants to score the go-ahead touchdown with a minute left so as to preserve time for a possible game-winning drive of their own. It wasn’t the first time in Super Bowl history such a strategic decision has been made -- Green Bay took a similar route at the end of Super Bowl XXXII by letting Denver score the go-ahead TD with a couple of minutes left -- although some particulars of the situation were different on Sunday.

Even so, it was a highly unique turn of events, made all the more remarkable given the fact that when Giants running back Ahmad Bradshaw scored that touchdown to put New York in front, it was clear he had been instructed not to score but rather to fall to the ground with the ball before reaching the end zone so his team could run out most of the remaining time on the clock.

To recast the play in poker terms, the Patriots allowing the Giants to score was not unlike a poker player folding a hand in order to preserve chips and continue playing and perhaps win a subsequent hand. Or, in the case of the heads-up stage of a poker tournament, to survive and play on with the hopes of coming back to win an opponent’s stack and the tournament.

The play recalled one of poker’s most famous hands, in fact, the one from 2003 in which an amateur accountant from Tennessee named Chris Moneymaker successfully bluffed the veteran pro Sam Farha when heads-up for the bracelet at the World Series of Poker Main Event -- a tournament often referred to as poker’s “Super Bowl.”

Moneymaker enjoyed about a 2-to-1 chip advantage when heads-up play began, but Farha had closed the gap a bit so that when the monumental hand took place the amateur had 4.62 million to the pro’s 3.77 million.

Moneymaker opened with a 2.5x raise to 100,000 with K7 and Farha called with Q9, and both saw the flop come 926. Both checked, and when the 8 landed on the turn Farha led for 300,000. Moneymaker raised to 800,000 -- a semi-bluff with his king-high flush draw -- and Farha called with his top pair of nines and a flush draw of his own. The river then brought the 3 and when Farha checked, Moneymaker declared he was all-in.

“You must have missed your flush, huh?” said Farha to Moneymaker while contemplating how to respond. Finally, after some thought, Farha folded, conceding the 1.8 million in the middle and continuing the battle having slipped back down to around that same 2-to-1 disadvantage he’d had to begin heads-up play.

When New England conceded the touchdown to the Giants, they chose one of two options, namely the one that guaranteed they would lose the lead but get the ball back with time perhaps to march down the field for a winning score. The option they rejected was to allow New York to run the clock down to around 20 seconds or even less and try a go-ahead field goal which they’d almost assuredly make, then hope somehow to get down the field in a play or two and kick a winning field goal themselves.

The pundits have already performed various statistical analyses to suggest percentages of success for either of New England’s options, with the results showing neither choice was all that promising. Suffice it to say, from the Patriots’ perspective, not allowing the touchdown appeared to provide almost zero chance of winning, while allowing it afforded enough of a chance to make it the better decision.

Farha’s choice in the face of Moneymaker’s audacious bluff wasn’t all that different. To call and lose meant his tournament would be over, but to fold ensured he’d at least still have a chance at winning. Obviously Farha decided the likelihood of his having the better hand if he called wasn’t good enough to risk doing so, especially given the still considerable possibility that he could battle back from his chip deficit and defeat the amateur.

So like New England giving up the score, Farha gave up the pot. And while he’d go on to lose just like the Pats did, his chances of winning were probably much greater, all things considered.

I found Sunday’s game thrilling from beginning to end, with the unusual ending making it all the more riveting to watch. But not everyone felt the same way about this year’s Super Bowl.

For example, on Monday I was listening to sports radio where I heard a caller complaining about the game ending the way it did with a winning touchdown being scored upon a team that was purposely allowing the other team to score. Something about the play violated the caller’s sense of propriety, suggesting that it was somehow lamentable that the winning score wasn’t “earned” as most touchdowns are -- with one team trying to score and the other trying to stop that from happening.

But as I listened I thought about Farha’s fold, and how in poker we’re well used to the necessity of occasionally giving up and folding -- even when we might think we have the best hand -- in order to assure ourselves a future chance at winning.