Solver Backs Negreanus Thin WSOP Online Call

Daniel Negreanu’s fourth-place exit from the $25,000 WSOP Online High Roller Championship produced one of the more interesting ICM spots of the final table. His call with pocket tens against Casimir Seire’s 28-big-blind small-blind shove was close, but the baseline GTO Wizard ICM model placed it within a profitable calling range.

Negreanu was eliminated when Seire’s nine-eight offsuit improved to two pair on an A-9-6-8-K board. The result paid Negreanu $415,699.75, but the hand is more useful as a final-table study than as a simple results-based judgment.

The Final-Table Pressure Behind the Decision

The hand took place four-handed with blinds at 100,000/200,000 and a 25,000 ante. Seire held the chip lead with 57.1 big blinds, while Negreanu had 28 big blinds. Erwann Pecheux had 11 big blinds, and Fabiano Kovalski had 7.9 big blinds.

The payouts added significant pressure to every all-in decision. First place was worth $906,647.32, second paid $699,120.76, third paid $539,095.76, and fourth paid $415,699.75. With two shorter stacks still in play, Negreanu’s tournament life carried a heavy ICM premium.

The analysis, conducted with poker pro Lukas Robinson, assigned Negreanu a 2.8 bubble factor and a 23.7% risk premium against Seire. Those numbers help explain why pocket tens, despite being a strong four-handed hand, landed near the edge of the profitable calling range rather than in automatic-call territory.

Why Pocket Tens Were Profitable but Not Comfortable

In the baseline model, Negreanu’s continuing range was only 2%, beginning with pocket tens or better. That placed his exact hand at the bottom of the recommended calling range.

The distinction is important. The model did not suggest that pocket tens should always call off in similar-looking short-handed spots. It supported the call under this exact combination of stacks, payouts, blinds, antes, and assumed small-blind strategy.

That also shows why the hand was so thin. Against a chip-leading opponent, with two shorter stacks behind, Negreanu needed more than chip-equity strength. He needed the call to clear the ICM cost of risking fourth-place elimination, and the baseline model found that pocket tens did so by a narrow margin.

Seire’s Nine-Eight Offsuit Shove Also Held Up

The same baseline model supported Seire’s all-in with nine-eight offsuit as the highest-value option. The shove generated $4,380.01 in all-in expected value, compared with $4,372.76 for raising to 3.5 big blinds.

The modeled small-blind strategy was polarized between 3.5-big-blind raises and all-ins, with no calls or folds in the stated baseline. Within that structure, Seire’s shove produced slightly more expected value than the smaller raise.

The conclusion changed when the assumed small-blind strategy changed. In a test where Seire used a 50% all-in and 50% 3.5-big-blind raising strategy, pocket tens became a losing call for Negreanu, and the recommended calling threshold moved to pocket jacks or better.

That sensitivity is the central lesson of the hand. Solver output is not just an evaluation of one player’s cards; it depends heavily on both players’ assigned ranges and the ICM environment around them.

What the Hand Shows About ICM Edges

Negreanu’s call was not a clear punt, nor was it a risk-free theoretical slam dunk. The baseline model framed it as a profitable but marginal call at the bottom of his range.

For final-table play, that is often where the real difficulty lies. Strong hands can become borderline when pay jumps, stack distribution, and opponent strategy create a severe risk premium. In this case, pocket tens survived the baseline ICM test, even though the runout sent Negreanu out in fourth.