Satellite Sug.

I am in need of food and sleep, but I wanted to offer up a quick recap of the last six days.

First, the bad:

-I did not cash in the $300 w/ bounties, $500 or $1000 events.

-I suffered through my first bout of real loneliness after almost two years of off-and-on poker touring.   Unlike most poker players, I do not travel as part of a pack, which makes me an oddball.  I prefer it this way.  I do not want any “poker friends” unless they are also genuine, good-hearted people.  Unfortunately, many of the guys I’ve gotten somewhat friendly with on tour have an air of unpleasant desperation about them.  I really don’t need to be lending a degenerate my hard earned money.  So although I’m friendly with a lot of other players, I have chosen not to forge any real poker friendships so far.  Compounding things, I’m at freakin’ Turning Stone.  This means that I’ve spent six days by myself in the middle of nowhere at a facility that serves no alcohol.  I’m an odd solitary figure here, sitting in the 24-hour cafe reading a my book between bites of my turkey sandwich.  Still, I’m not going home to Janeen and NYC for at least one more day (see below). 

Things got so bad yesterday that I actually put in a lame request for a meetup on a poker messageboard.  I regretted doing this soon afterward, which was just as well since the request was met with complete indifference.  This is understandable (and probably for the best) since the average age of the people who frequent the message board is around 15 years less than mine.  I doubt the big meetup would have went especially well.  I haven’t done a bong hit in at least a decade and I don’t even know what a Volcano does.

Now, the good:

-I went to Dinosaur BBQ in Syracuse for lunch yesterday.  It’s still the best.

-The structure of the tournaments here is amazing.  The blinds increase more gradually than anywhere else.  You get a ton of play for your money.  $300 entry tournaments embark on a path that is similar to (if not better than) $3000 World Series of Poker events.  You get a lot for your poker money here.

 -I cashed in the $300 six-handed event.  This actually belongs in the bad news category, since my cash was for only around $480 after a long day of poker.  I felt I was on top of my game in this tournament, and I had a big stack with 30 players left.  Then I ran AK into a megastack’s AA.  I generally do not fold AK against one opponent at a five handed table, and I was the one who put in the fourth raise.  No regrets.

-I am on absolute fire in satellites.  They have been running nightly multitable satellites up here, and I’ve gone a Carew-like 4 for 4 in them.  First, I won three seats to tonight’s $1100 satellite, two of which were converted to cash.  Then tonight, for an encore, I won a seat into the $5200 main event, which starts tomorrow at 10:00 am.  I have found the satellite fields to be very soft.  Like all the other tournaments here, these fields are a combination of older guys who are not very good and young kids who are fundamentally rock solid and often tricky.  In the satellites, the poor players play even worse than they would otherwise.  This is because many of the old guys do not understand satellite strategy and play them as if they were normal multitable tournaments.  They just don’t get the concept that first place is the same as the last qualifying position.  Tonight was a very hairy tournament for me, and I had to do some wacky things like open-folding both QQ and KK in the late stages, but in the end I won my seat. 

Hopefully the momentum carries forward.  Big prize pool tomorrow.  That’s all for now.

Romancing the ‘Stone.

After a lovely weekend in Ithaca & Finger Lakes region, I am now back to work.  In this instance, work means spending a full week at the Turning Stone Casino for the Empire State Hold ‘Em Championships.

First, my weekend.  It was a good one.  Janeen and I spent some time at some of my old college haunts (although we didn’t hit THE Haunt–Ithaca joke!), went wine tasting, and got a lot of relaxation in.  And, as an added bonus, I had my first near-NASCAR experience!  There was some kind of big race in Watkins Glen, so I unilaterally decided that we needed to check it out. 

Watkins Glen is very close to Ithaca, maybe only 20 minutes away, but I never traveled there during my four years at Cornell.  And this past weekend I figured out why:  like Ithaca, it is a pretty lakeside town, but it lacks Ithaca’s college campuses, sophistication and general hippy-dippiness.  What it does have is a big car racetrack, and this past weekend there was some kind of big race.  I’ve always been captivated from afar by car racing culture.  Not captivated by the car racing itself mind you, but captivated (again, from afar) by the people who care about it.  Specifically, I cannot wrap my head around the appeal of this sport, so I’m really curious about the people who love it.

I must report that my little tour of Watkins Glen only reinforced my preconceived notions of the car racing scene and did not reveal anything surprising.  There were a lot of the following:  mobile homes, shirtless men, fat women, big trucks and alcohol.  Oh… and people selling firewood.  All of which were expected, except for the firewood.

Onto Turning Stone.  I’m back at this place for the second time as a poker pro.  In past blog entries, I’ve covered what makes this place different than all the other pit stops on my tour, so I won’t belabor those points.  In short, there is nothing glamorous about this place, there is no booze on the premises, and it’s filled with poker players who are under the age of 21.

I played a $300 event earlier today and found myself seated at the same table as the kid who the poker cognescenti have annointed the biggest tournament prodigy in the world, i.e., the next big thing.  I am not going give his name, because I am about to be somewhat critical of him.  Of course, I saw nothing in his play that would lead me to believe that everyone is wrong about him.  He controlled the table throughout, and last I checked, he was still in tournament with only three tables (out of 31) remaining.

It’s his mannerisms at the table.  They’re disturbing.  He is a very respectful, deliberate player, which are both fine in and of themselves.  When the action is passed to him and he intends to fold his hand, he looks at his cards, pauses, and then tosses them in.  No problem there.  It’s when he plays a hand that things get peculiar.  If the action is folded to this kid and he intends to play his hand, he goes through the following routine:  he looks at his cards, pauses, cocks his head back slightly, pauses again, then fixes his face with a blank, open-mouthed expression.  He then maintains the same disquieting facial expression, which can best be described as Schiavo-esque, as he very slowly riffles his chips, selects the amount he wishes to bet, and very, very slowly places them in the pot.  This routine is repeated on every betting round, and it is unnerving.  People might not feel comfortable admitting it, but I’m going to come out and say it.  No one likes having to stare at a mentally disabled person.  As a child, everyone is taught not to stare at them, and you follow this rule for the rest of your life.  Playing poker with this kid forces you to break this rule and entails several hours of staring at a tard.  Not natural, and not fun.

This kid’s routine likely derives from watching Phil Ivey play.  Everyone knows that Ivey makes that expressionless mouth-breather face all the time, thereby giving off no tells and taking everyone’s money.  And since Ivey is an amazing poker player, imitating him is something to be expected and can hardly be critisized.  But this kid’s routine is no mere imitation.  He’s taken it to another level.  During his mouth-breather moments, Ivey actually looks around and continues to play relatively fast.  This kid, on the other hand, has managed to master a completely braindead countenance and plays slower than almost any opponent I’ve ever seen.  And the kid is a great player and who is going to be playing the same tournaments as me for a long time.  Please God, I implore you, make him stop doing that goddamn face!

Another prodigal player was in today’s tournament, and he is even harder to miss.  I’m once again not naming names.  Here’s a dead giveaway:  there is no poker player in this scene who is more maligned about his appearance.  Unfortunately, this kid just doesn’t get it; basic fashion sense evades him.  Here is an ironclad rule from a guy with limited fashion sense:  when people are constantly ripping you for the way you look, do not show up for a big tournament wearing jean shorts.  NO JEAN SHORTS.  This player happened to be sitting on the biggest stack in the room with three tables remaining, by the way.

Here’s my bustout hand, for those of you who might be curious.  With half the field gone and my stack at 7200 at the 100-200 blind level, a crazy donk is moved from another table to my immediate right.  He has like 12,000 chips, then increases his stack to around 20,000 chips by openlimping QJ under the gun, calling a 500-chip raise from a player in middle position and cracking KK on a K-10-9 flop.  He now has every other player at the table easily covered and proceeds to play half the hands in the next orbit with crappy holdings and mixed results.  Then it’s my big blind and his small blind.  The action is folded to the button, a standard TAG player with about 3500 chips.  TAG openraises to 600.  The crazy donk looks at his holecards and without hesitation announces that he is all in (yes, all in for 20,000).  I am holding AK, and the more I think about it, the more I realize that AA and KK are out of this guy’s range, and that AQ and AJ are included in that same range, which obviously also includes many pocket pairs.  I decide to call, the button folds, and I lose a race to the crazy donk’s 99.  A lot of people would fold in that spot, but I will not, and I’m not second guessing myself.  My edge over the field isn’t so strong that I’m going to pass on a +EV situation. 

Anyway, I whiffed that tournament but won a satellite into a $1000 event later in the week, so I’m technically ahead on this trip so far.  I will probably do some more random musing later in the week.

Reading is Fundamental.

I recently received my copy of a new, highly acclaimed instructional poker book. It’s called Professional No-Limit Hold ‘Em, and you should believe the hype. The authors, Matt Flynn, Sunny Mehta and Ed Miller have done something that is not easy: created a book on no-limit hold ’em that breaks new ground. Not only that, but this book succeeds in presenting some well-known concepts that have previously defied description in a neat, concise way. I’m only about halfway through the book but am already pretty sure that it’s the best book on no limit hold ’em cash play since Super System. You should read it.

Reading my first poker book in quite awhile has a nostalgic feel. This is because I read literally every poker book on the market from the years 2001 through 2005. It was only when that market got completely glutted that I stopped purchasing (and devouring) poker books as fast as the publishing companies could release them. I’m a tad more selective now. As I’ve mentioned before, the years 2001 through 2005 in my life were a continuous course in poker. I’m self-schooled, I was my own professor. And it wasn’t an easy course. I studied my poker textbooks a lot harder than any of the other textbooks I’ve ever come across, and there had been a lot of nasty ones.

As a result, my apartment is overflowing with books about poker. If a stranger took a look at the crammed bookcases in here without inspecting the titles, he’d think that I was a literary sort. And that’s amusing, because nothing could be farther from the truth. I don’t read fiction at all, and I have little apprecation for most widely-acclaimed books. What I am is just a guy that really likes to read about poker.

So without further ado, here’s a very short review of each book in my apartment, presented in whatever order they’re pulled off the shelf.

Poker for Dummies, Richard D. Harroch and Lou Kreiger (2000). The very first instructional poker book that I purchased. I only remember one thing about this book: It was the book that introduced me to Stu Ungar, a person I have been fascinated by ever since.

The Poker Tournament Formula, Arnold Syder (2006). This book is such garbage. The only section that isn’t total dogshit is the part about profiling opponents. The fact that this book was published is a testament to how profitable anything related to poker has become. The fact that I own it probably says something sad about me.

Super System 2, Doyle Bruson and others (2005). The long-awaited sequel to the grandaddy of them all, Super System, the most influencial poker book ever written. Part 2 has several stellar sections on the various forms of poker (and the no limit hold ’em section from the original is left mostly unmolested), but the most fascinating section for those who are already familiar with the original is Crandall Addington’s description of how no limit hold ’em infiltrated the Vegas cardrooms in the 1960’s and 70’s.

Your Worst Poker Enemy, Alan N. Schoonmaker (2007). A surprisingly helpful book, and by far the best one on the topic of poker psychology. Reading the enlightening chapter on the struggle between the ego and the id at the poker table inspired me to buy a book about Sigmund Freud.

Ace on the River, Barry Greenstein (2005). Meh. Greenstien gives us a 300-page paternal lecture about how a professional poker player ought to conduct himself and his business. A lot of people love this book, but much of what it contains is just common sense. It should be required reading for college-age poker geniuses who are playing over their bankroll, but no one else. The pictures are excellent, though.

Winner’s Guide to Omaha, Ken Warren (2003). Very basic how-to. Don’t play bad starting hands in Omaha, everyone.

Championship No-Limit & Pot-Limit Hold ‘Em, T.J. Cloutier and Tom McEvoy (1997). I HATE this book. Because it was the only tournament poker book available when I began playing serious poker, it became my bible by default. I therefore read it cover-to-cover at least five times. My copy of it is weather-beaten, numerous passages have been underlined, and its margins are filled with my notes. All of this is incredibly tragic, because the book teaches you to play tournament poker like a pussy. I’m not sure if T.J. actually believes what he “wrote” (the material was actually culled from a couple of interviews) or if he was playing a cruel trick on his future adversaries. Either way, this book is toilet paper and has no use in modern poker.

Hold ’em Poker for Advanced Players, David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth (1988). If you exclude my childhood favorite Harold and the Purple Crayon, this is the single work of literature I have spent the most time clutching in my short life. And it’s easy to tell: my copy of this book is in woeful shape. The binding no longer works, so the entire thing is tattered and falling apart, with various pages loose and out of order. This is an absolutely amazing book, and it is where many concepts that are now completely taken for granted–such as expected value, semibluffing and free cards–were first thoroughly discussed. Mostly because of this book, David Sklansky is to limit hold ’em what Hugh Hefner is to pornography. I read (and read, and read, and read….) this book until all of its precepts were embedded permanently in my brain. The moment I accomplished this was the moment I began to destroy bad poker players.

The Book of Bluffs, Matt Lessinger (2005). In light of the goofy name, this book is surprisingly solid. Maniacs would be good poker players if they understood what conditions were not right for running a bluff. This book does a good job of explaining when and why it’s right to bluff, and when and why it isn’t.

Tournament Poker for Advanced Players, David Sklansky (2002). This book couldn’t come along soon enough for me. Not because it’s such a great book, but because it saved me from Cloutier. This book was the first to explain why a tournament is different from a cash game, and it introduces the all-important concept of fold equity, thereby setting the foundation for good tight-aggressive tournament play. I really owe David Sklansky.

Professional Poker–The Essential Guide to Playing for a Living, Mark Blade (2005). This book can be summed up pretty neatly in one sentence: playing poker for a living is not as easy as it looks. Blade tells us all about paying taxes, staking arrangements and handling downswings. Exciting stuff.

The Making of a Poker Player, Matt Matros (2005). One of poker’s leading “math guys” does a good job of telling the story of how he went from a run of the mill nerd to the final table of a WPT event. It’s a pretty decent book considering that it’s not terribly different from this blog.

How To Win at Omaha High-Low Poker, Mike Cappelletti (2003). A short, basic how-to. Hey everyone: you should only play very strong starting hands and concentrate on scooping pots in Omaha Eight or Better.

Poker Nation, Andy Bellin (2003). Coming along right on the cusp of the poker explosion, this book is an entertaining memoir about life in New York’s underground poker clubs and borderline degeneracy. I strongly identified with the author, who is clearly capable of doing very well in the straight world, but prefers a life without alarm clocks. I read this one twice.

Big Deal, Anthony Holden (1990). This book had an immense influence on me, and I discovered it under strange circumstances. Big Deal was recommended to me by a high ranking partner at my first law firm. I was not being assigned any work at all, so I asked the partner who was in charge of assigning matters to associates to have lunch with me. He agreed, and at an outwardly convival lunch, I shared with him my growing fascination with poker. He said that if I like poker, I must read Big Deal. I went out and bought it later that day. Less than two weeks later I was fired, most likely at the behest of the very person who recommended this book to me. The book is a funny, endearing firsthand account of the author’s attempt at playing professional poker for one calendar year. It holds a special place in my heart and served as a beacon in an extended dark period of my life. Holden’s book double dog dared me to dream about playing poker for a living, and I guess I’m the kind of guy who takes dares seriously. Looking back, I would like to sincerely thank Bob Fischler for both pointing me in the direction of Big Deal and for possibly firing me.

Bigger Deal, Anthony Holden (2007). I’m sure you can imagine how excited I was when I heard a sequel to Big Deal was coming out. Alas, it’s not much of a book. It certainly has its moments, and Holden is as wry as ever, but it still falls a little short of the mark. Oh well.

No Limit Hold ‘Em Theory and Practice, David Sklansky and Ed Miller (2006). This is a serious advanced how-to that will improve any intermediate-level player’s game. No limit is a game that resides in a murky place somewhere between the structured mathematics of probability and the magic netherworld called “feel.” This book does a good job of bridging that gap by providing mathematical proofs of several plays previously ascribed to “feel.”

Six to Five Against, A Gambler’s Odyssey, Burt Dragin (2005). This book rules. I have never seen or heard it discussed anywhere, and it obviously was never highly acclaimed, but I’m glad I whimsically purchased it one day last year. It’s only peripherally about poker. But if you have ever wondered why you get a charge out of watching big inbred animals running in circles, or wondered why standing there watching dice bouncing around a table for hours on end is fun, you should read this book. Partly autobiographical and partly scientific, this book shares the story of an addicted gambler, and then embarks on an in-depth attempt to answer a question pychologists have grappled with for years: “why do people gamble?” Dragin accomplishes this in a remarkably sympathetic way, without ever losing his sense of humor. This book is one of my all time favorites.

Winner’s Guide to Texas Hold ‘Em Poker, Ken Warren (1996). The fact that I own this book is a good evidence that instructional poker books were a lot more scarce at the turn of the century. I don’t recall much of what is in this book, but i’m pretty sure that it will help you beat the 4-8 limit game at the Trop.

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky (1987). This book is the poker equivalent of the first page of the Old Testament. God may have created light, but Sklansky created EV, and he saw that it was good. Despite incessant archaic references to forms of poker that no longer exist, this book remains worth reading.

The Gambler’s Guide to Taxes, Walter L. Lewis, CPA. Self explanatory.

How to Turn Your Poker Playing Into a Business Ann-Margaret Johnston, CPA. Also self explanatory. When I first went pro, I thought these skinny little manuals (practically pamphlets) might give me some special insight into taxpaying, but the right advice boils down to “keep good records and find a good accountant.”

Pot-Limit & No-Limit Poker, Stewart Reuben & Bob Ciaffone (1997). This book was ahead of its time. Only about 20 of the 200 pages have anything worth reading on them, but those 20 pages are excellent. This book does a great job explaining the value of position and implied odds in no limit games, and it was published long before those concepts had been fully fleshed out in the rest of the poker literature.

Online Ace, Scott Fischman (2006). There was a good deal of hype before this book hit the scene, all for naught. The book is forgettable other than a few profiles of successful online players.

The Psychology of Poker, Alan N. Schoonmaker, Ph.D. (2000). It might have been the first book to really explore the emotional side of poker, but it’s still not worth reading. It gives a few common sense pieces of advice. Schoonmaker did a lot better with his second book on this topic.

Making the Final Table, Erick Lindgren (2005). This book is seldom mentioned by anyone as having any special influence in the poker world, but it engineered a huge phase in my development as a player. Before I picked up this book, I could not get the idea that I needed to loosen up, gamble and accumluate chips through my thick skull. This book is written in a matter-of-fact, conversational way, and it was preciesely what I needed at precisely the right time. It was as if Lindgren was personally telling me to quit being such a tightass and go on the attack. My tournament results improved immediately thereafter. Thanks, E-Dawg!

Play Poker Like the Pros, Phil Hellmuth (2004). Obviously put together by a group of people looking to capitalize on the name Phil Hellmuth at the outset of the poker boom, this is among the worst books I’ve ever read. The supposed aim of this book is to teach beginners how to play poker, but it gives faulty advice at every turn. The most interesting thing about this book is that the author writes in a modest, friendly tone, so we are left to wonder who the ghost writer is.

The Biggest Game in Town, A. Alvarez (1983). The greatest book about poker ever written. Short but powerful and moving. I’ve read it probably five times. Reading this book gets me so charged up. Charged up in the same way that hearing the old-school Monday Night Football theme music gets me charged up. If you have any appreciation whatsoever for the game of poker, you are doing yourself a grave disservice by not reading this book.

Poker: Bets, Bluffs and Bad Beats, A. Alvarez (2001). A coffee table book with a bunch of insightful snippets about poker, and very impressive photographs. You won’t learn anything from this thing.

Positively Fifth Street, James McManus (2003). This book came along at just the right time for me. Just as poker was being romanticized in my mind, McManus’ very romantic retelling of his miracle trip to the Main Event final table hit bookstores. Oh, and it’s also about the murder of Benny Binion’s son. The parts of the book that discuss big tournament poker and the game’s history are illuminating. The murder stuff is a bore.

Read ‘Em and Weep, John Stravinsky, ed. (2004). A collection of short stories and magazine pieces about poker. A fine job of editing was done here, as the pieces run the gamut from an attempted interview with Johnny Chan to a frank disourse on running scams on Mississipi Riverboats in the mid 19th Century. The most hilarious is James Thurber’s contribution, called “Everything is Wild.” I have always wanted to tell everyone in my old home game to read that short story. Read it, guys!

Scarne’s Guide to Modern Poker, John Scarne (1980). What an ironic title. This book is outdated garbage. I have no idea why I own it.

The Championship Table, Dana Smith, Tom McEvoy and Ralph Wheeler (2003). An attempt to recount every Main Event final table in World Series of Poker history. This is a daunting task, and for the most part, this book fails. My ownership of this book illustrates just how desperate for poker knowledge a person can be.

Improve Your Poker, Bob Ciaffone (1997). A book with a lame title like this is destined to suck, but this book does not. It’s a hodgepodge of slapped together advice in no discernible order, and most of it is good.

Super System, Doyle Bruson and others (1978). Here it is. The book that changed the game. Many of you are familiar with the story of how this book was published, so I won’t bore you with that now. The book itself is startlingly large (604 pages crammed with info) and startlingly poorly written from a technical standpoint. Annoying people who are anal about the proper use of the english language will tear their hair out after eight pages of Super System. But if you can get your dim little brain past that issue, this book is a straight-up miracle. Brunson and company revealed, in 1978, things about poker that no one else–literally no one in the world–understood. The legendary section on no-limit hold ’em, which at that point in time was a game played only in the deep South and Las Vegas, and only played for mega-high stakes, changed the game forever. It’s the functional equivalent of Adam Smith on economics or Charles Darwin on evolution. The concepts presented by Texas Dolly, despite being previously unreported, are now part of common poker knowledge. Specifically, Brunson explains, in a printed form of Texal drawl that you can practically hear through the page, that aggression wins in no limit hold ’em. He thoroughly explains how to beat the piss out of weak-tight opponents by pounding away on them. Any studious player who started to play poker seriously before the year 2004 will cite this book as a major influence. Part of what makes the movie “Rounders” so authentic is that Super System makes an appearance in one of the opening scenes.

Winning 7-Card Stud, Ashley Adams (2003). Some years ago, the guys on rec.gambling.poker convinced me that I needed this book, so I bought it. I still don’t play much stud and still don’t know what’s in it. Maybe one day.

One of a Kind, Nolan Dalla (2006). The definitive biography of Stu Ungar. It’s hard to take the most compelling figure in modern poker and turn out a boring book about him, but Dalla managed to accomplish this. The sections about Stuey’s rise, dominance and inner demons failed to move me. The section about his pathetic demise is the best part of the book.

Harrington on Hold ‘Em, Vols. 1, 2 and 3, Dan Harrington and Bill Robertie (2004, 2005, 2006). Even though I’ve mentioned many influencial books in this blog entry, the first two Harrington books likely have had the strongest impact on how I play poker. When the first book was released, I had a semblance of a tournament game with numerous leaks (or, in today’s popular lingo, I was “spewy”). By the time I finished reading and applying the second volume, I was a near-expert tight-aggressive strategist. No poker books published before these taught poker as effectively. This is probably mostly due to the textbook-like format: chapters followed by multiple choice exercises. The first Harringtons are brilliant, and are capable of transforming any marginally intelligent, dedicated person into a formidable tournament player. The third book, which is in workbook format, is only okay.

That’s it for now. I’m sure there are a few books laying around here that I forgot, but you get the picture.

Out of Retirement.

Not much has been happening with me.  I’ve settled back into playing online, with mixed results.  Also–and this is probably a sign that I’m getting old and feeble–I’ve had a variety of stupid physical ailments, including an ear infection (big up to Janeen’s brother, a.k.a. Dr. Lyle for helping with this one), a strange food allergy and a strained muscle in my neck.  I’m fallin’ apart, I tell ya.

Also, this past Monday morning, I made my first court appearance in about 18 months.  Don’t worry, I’m not busto.  I was doing someone a favor in a rinky-dink case:  a friend of a friend got a citation for pissing on the street, the friend asked me to represent his buddy, so I agreed.

I went through my old routine:  I woke up early, showered, put on a suit, took the subway downtown, and handled the case.  I considered the fact that it was torrentially raining the entire time–which left me completely soaked despite my umbrella–as an omen.

On trips down memory lane, you tend to notice things you once took for granted.  After 18 months of making my own schedule, these were:

-Holy alarm clock!  Jesus… I haven’t used one of these in a very long time, and I did not like it at all.  It felt less like a mild annoyance and more like a very rude intrusion into my happy little dreamworld.  I was truly startled.  Oof!

-My favorite suit was slightly tighter feeling than I recalled.  Crap.  I need to exercise more.

-The subway!  I only take the subway maybe once a week these days, and when I do, it’s not during the morning rush.  Wow.  After passing on the first crowded 6 train, I got onto the second one that pulled into the station.  Getting jostled around on there and looking at all the somber faces, I was torn between feeling nostalgic and annoyed.  Due to its amazing efficiency, the NYC subway system is like the city’s last bastion of populism:  well heeled CEO’s are standing side by side with minimum wage workers, and no one really notices it.  No one really pays attention to anything outside their little personal bubble, as a matter of fact.  Taken largely for granted by New Yorkers, the subway is an amazing benefit of living here.  I had half forgotten how ridiculously fast you can get from one end of Manhattan to the other.  So cool.  On the other hand, being in such close quarters with so many people has its drawbacks.  You’re an 8-1 dog to not encounter any smelly people.

-Going to court.  Downtown Manhattan on a rainy morning is such a dreary place.  There’s no charm to it at all, just a bunch of blank looking faces hustling into ugly concrete buildings.  Court itself hasn’t changed, of course.  My attorney pass had expired, so I had to enter the building along with all the defendants.  But making the appearance was like riding a bike, I hadn’t forgotten anything.  The room was crammed full of people of all kinds, waiting their turn to plead guilty and pay their fines.  I took my spot up in the front row and made idle chit-chat with another attorney while we waited for the elderly judge to show up.  He wanted to talk about the peculiarities of legal procedure in different counties.  I had the urge to explain to him that I wasn’t a lifer and therefore didn’t give a shit, but instead I sat there feigning interest in how Rockland County handles its administrative docket.  When the judge finally showed, they called my case right away.  I got the pissing charge reduced to generic city code violation, my client paid his $50 fine, I got paid, and I left.

The subway home was a lot less crowded.  I bought an egg sandwich at my local deli, ate it, and went back to sleep.  All in all, it was a nice trip down memory lane, but I won’t be back anytime soon. 

Sug in Action.

I’ve been getting a lot of requests for this, so here goes:

Good news for DZ fans! If you are somewhat computer-savvy and have a couple of spare gigabytes lying around, you can download and watch my entire final table from WSOP Event #12. Here’s how. Click the links to veoh.com that i’m about to provide, download the Veoh Player (an unfortunate but necessary prerequisite), then download my final table in three parts:

Part 1:

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v791364CtCtrpWt

Part 2:

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v788927btEM4HHT

Part 3:

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v793828nJxhcTaA

Notes to those who DL this footage and watch it:

-It was filmed live, which is why there are so many boring hands. Poker on TV is heavily edited. Live poker is more boring, but this is a pretty nice production, considering it was done live. There are hole card cams and announcers. I did edit out the commercials and dead air.

-I do not have a facial tic. i was chewing on a toothpick for the entire final table.

I hope you enjoy it, and I hope you get an idea of how intense and exciting playing a WSOP Final Table is.

In case you’re either not interested in or incapable of those long downloads, here are two short edits that I made.

1. “Poker,” a short film by David Chase:
[kml_flashembed movie=”http://i75.photobucket.com/player.swf?file=http://vid75.photobucket.com/albums/i314/dzeitlin/7970acb7.flv” height=”448″ width=”361″ /]

2. Sug gets lucky, announcers forsee domination:
[kml_flashembed movie=”http://www.youtube.com/v/Mym8RUGPilo” height=”425″ width=”350″ /]

Anatomy of an Early Washout.

In both 2005 and 2006, one of my personal highlights from the World Series of Poker’s Main Event was writing the long triumphant recaps which are now located in links at the top of this website’s main page.  This year, by necessity, my recap will be shorter.  But I hope you enjoy it anyway!

Because I did not qualify for this year’s Main Event online (which, technically speaking, was impossible for a US resident to accomplish anyway), I was still unregistered for the tournament when I boarded a plane and left for Vegas on Thursday, July 5th.

My first order of business upon arriving in Vegas was to take care of two administrative matters:  1) register for the Main Event, preferably on Day 1b (Saturday) or Day 1c (Sunday); 2) appeal to the higher-ups at Harrah’s to get some compensation relating to an ongoing dispute.

When the plane landed, I discovered–the hard way–that Las Vegas was mired in a heatwave.  A summer heatwave in Las Vegas means that the daytime high temperature is 116 instead of 108.  On a typical July day, exiting a building and walking outdoors in Vegas feels like entering an oven.  Last Thursday, it felt more like being blowtorched.  Even at night, the temperatures were extremely uncomfortable.  Disgusting.

Heightening my digust, I failed to achieve either of my administrative goals on my first day in town.  I arrived at the Rio on the eve of Day 1a and walked into a tidal wave of humanity.  The hallways surrounding the Amazon Room were literally swarming, wall to wall, with the usual suspects:  players, wannabes, poker fans, dealers, representatives from commercial sponsors.  Everyone and their mother.  The people were everywhere; I could barely walk.  Even though I am now accustomed to this scene, the energy level in the hallways still charged me up.  This was my workplace.  It was good to be back.  That is, until I saw the registration line.

The last time I witnessed a line of similar length was quite a long time ago–at the stupidest place on earth—Disney’s Epcot Center in 1984.  Well over a thousand people were queued up, trying to reach the five registration windows inside the Amazon Room.  The line wound in a snakelike formation until it reached the room’s doorway, then stretched out haphazardly into the hallway and beyond.  After confirming that I was actually in the right place, I took my spot at the back of the line, a half mile from the line’s origin, and waited.  It was 4:10 pm.  A $500 supersatellite to the Main Event was starting at 6:00 pm.  The individuals on the endless line were registering for that tournament, along with the Main Event.

Already very weary from a long day of travel but relieved that I was about to register for both the Main Event and the $500 supersat (I’d sell the lammers if I won), I finally found myself only four players from the front of the line at 5:55 pm when a Rio employee appeared and made an announcement:  the supersatellite was sold out.  Anyone wishing to register was shit out of luck.  This pissed me off a great deal; if I had known that this would happen, I’d have gone and taken a nap then registered for the Main Event late that night, when the line was sure to be shorter.  Still, I was now at the front of a two-hour line, so I wasn’t going anywhere.  It was time to take care of Main Event registration and my dispute with Harrah’s.

When I reached the front of the line, I pulled $3500 in lammers and $6500 in cash out of my pocket, along with the required picture identification.  I asked the window clerk for a seat on Day 1B, Saturday, but was informed that they were only selling seats for Friday and Monday.  I had no interest in playing either day.  I was way too tired to perform well the next (Friday) morning, and playing Monday would require missing a Sunday night party that I had circled on my calendar.  After some persistent inquiring, I discovered that Days 1b and 1c were not completely sold out.  The problem was that a disproportionate number of seats had been sold for those days, and the tournament directors had ordered the cashiers to allow Days 1a and 1d to “catch up” before reopening registration for the days I wanted.  So I decided to play their waiting game, passing on Main Event registration for the time being.

Still at the window and now fully frustrated, I turned to my final order of business:  trying to settle a month-long dispute I had with Harrah’s.  I have made a few cryptic references to it on this blog, but haven’t really discussed this matter publicly.  Now I will go into a little bit of (but not much) detail.  In short:  when I finished second in Event 12, I received a check from Harrah’s, the largest gaming corporation in the world, in the amount of for $269,000 and change.  When I tried to deposit the check, it bounced.  The full story can be found here, in a post I made on the 2+2 forums.  Since this ordeal took place, I registered three separate complaints with people at the World Series of Poker cage:  twice on the phone, and once in person.  All three times I was rebuffed, told that there wasn’t anything that could be done beyond refunding my bank’s bounce fee.  Now, for a fourth time, I animatedly described the situation and the trouble it had caused me.  And for a fourth time, I was informed by a Rio supervisor that no one at the WSOP had any authority to do anything for me.  I did receive a ticket redeemable for two free buffets at the Rio.  Whoop-dee-doo.  I also got the name of some suit at Harrah’s who will be receiving a nasty letter from me soon.

Exasperated, I stuck around the Rio until about 1:30 am, waiting in vain for Day 1b and 1c seats to open up, but it never happened.  I returned to the Excaliber, where I was staying for one night with Kevin (who arrived late that evening), and went to bed grumpy. 

However, as the Main Event got underway the following day, my mood improved.  I just needed to take a step back and exhale.  It was the biggest day on the poker calendar, and I was back, a part of it for the third time.  It was my place, my time.  The WSOP was my turf now.  I regrouped emotionally, put the annoyances of the previous day behind me, and was ready to rock ‘n roll.  And so was Kevin, who I met that morning at the Rio, along with his father.  And things began to immediately fall into place:  as promised, seats for 1b and 1c were finally made available at 2:00 pm.  I snapped up a Saturday (the next day) seat and Kevin registered for Sunday.  Now the only thing left to do was relax and get ready to play some poker.

After passing on that evening’s supersatellite, I checked into the Rio and did what I always do before a big tournament.  I went into a semi-meditative state, eliminating all stimuli.  I did some non-poker related reading and lounged around my room.  In contrast to previous years, relaxation came very quickly on the eve of my first day.  I fell into a sound, uninterrupted sleep by 11:00.  I woke up the next day feeling great, with two hours to spare before the cards would be dealt.  I was not nervous.  I was as focused as could be, ready for the (potentially) sixteen-hour day that lied ahead.  I dressed carefully, selecting a well-worn t-shirt, comfortable jeans and sneakers, the baseball cap that had served me so well in Event 12, and of course, my ubiquitous lucky sweatshirt.  Time to go to work.  I headed downstairs at 11:40, twenty minutes before kickoff.

My table was in the area of the Amazon Room that was normally reserved for cash games, right by one of the side doors.  Per my usual custom, I arrived early, but not so early that I’d have to kill an inordinate amount of time.  I had left about ten minutes to spare.  I’ve learned that the ten minutes before a tournament starts are very valuable.  That’s when I take my seat, look to my left and right, and do my profiling.

Profiling people based on age, race and/or nationality has been taboo in the United States since the Civil Rights movement took hold, even though the current administration has done its best to throw things in reverse.  Still, at a poker table, very accurate information about most players can be obtained by simply categorizing them this way.  This concept is not novel.  It has been discussed in many poker books, most notably the otherwise useless book written by Arnold Snyder.  Profiling is especially effective in the Main Event, with its massive field of nobodies who typically fit snugly into a narrowly defined, easily identifiable category. 

The most prevalent categories in the Main Event are the weak-tight nit and the loose-passive nit, both of whom look the same.  Both categories of nit are usually middle-aged or older white males, but they can sometimes be younger white males (often sporting non-ironic goatees).  The nit is usually dressed like he’s on his way to play a round of golf at his local country club, and if it’s one of the younger nits, a baseball cap is mandatory.  Either category of nit is often overweight.  It is not a coincidence that the younger nit looks a lot like Chris Moneymaker.  Neither category of nit is usually comfortable handling his chips. 

If he has a laid back personality, the nit will adopt an “aww, shucks” attitude at the table and will probably become very chatty as the minutes before the tournament tick down.  If he’s more of an uptight guy, he will be visibly nervous as the start of the tournament nears and he will not say a word.  Either way, a big poker tournament is a special treat for the nit.  The tournament is a luxury that he affords himself once, perhaps twice per year.  The Main Event is teeming with these guys.

The only way to tell the weak-tight nit from the loose-passive nit is by watching them play.  This can be done in the span of ten or fifteen hands.  The weak-tight nits don’t enter many pots, and when they do, they have a big hand.  They fold, especially after the flop, at the first sign of aggression.  Three’s nothing complicated about their game.  The loose-passive nit openlimps a lot from all positions at the table, but usually goes away once he feels threatened by a raise.  Some loose-passive nits need to see the flop and face a bet before they’re inclined to go away.

So, at my particular table, as the minutes before the tournament faded away, here’s what I came up with.

Seat 1: Young, conservatively dressed guy.  Expertly handling his chips.  Jury’s out.

Seat 2: Extremely nervous 50-ish guy.  Country club gear.  He seemed to be mumbling to himself.  Nit.  I was 99% sure that this was a positive identification.

Seat 3:  European guy.  Most Americans know what I’m talking about here.  There are certain guys who just look ambiguously Northern European, even when you haven’t the foggiest clue which country they’re from.  Sometimes the country is obvious and sometimes it’s not.  They don’t need to open their mouth and speak another language, they don’t need to be wearing unusual clothes, and they don’t need to look a certain way (this gentleman happened to be blond and unshaven).  It’s just something transmitted by their features and facial expressions—they’re from Europe.  Maybe I’m just used to observing these people since they’re everywhere at poker tournaments (and in New York City), but I instinctively know when someone is of European descent.  The guy in Seat 3 was of undetermined European ancestry, which meant that I couldn’t figure out how he’d play just yet.  He could be a crazy Swede, a timid British guy, or a cunning Dutchman.  It was hard to say.

Seat 4:  I don’t recall this player.

Seat 5:  Me.

Seat 6: A Latino guy, probably from Puerto Rico or Costa Rica.  This is a category of player who is hard to profile, the Latino players don’t really fall into any set pattern.  I’d have to wait and see.

Seat 7:  A crusty old gambler.  These guys are their own special category, and they’re an increasingly rare breed.  They always are over sixty-five years old, have a thick southern accent, and they love to wear ugly jewelry that is probably very expensive.  They either wear a cowboy hat or have treated what’s left of their hair with a foreign substance that makes it nice and firm.  They’re almost always impossible to shut up.  I believe many of them are from Texas and the states which surround Texas to the north and east, which means that they’ve been playing hold ‘em a lot longer than the rest of us.  They’re usually tight players, but tight players who are capable of trickery.  One of these dudes was in the 7 Seat, and he was yammering away.

Seat 8:  Heavy set thirty-ish guy with a nice fitted baseball cap, dark sunglasses and a goatee.  Hi Mr. Moneymaker!  Looked nervous.  Probable nit.

Seat 9:  Another country club gear older guy.  He knows Norman Chad, who came over to wish him luck a couple of times.  Probable nit.

Seat 10:  Middle aged asian guy doing about six different chip tricks, impatiently waiting for the tournament to begin.  I’m not going to be as brutal as the aforementioned author Snyder, who called these players “boat people,” but Asians do tend to play with less fear than whiteboys.

As we drew ever closer to the scheduled start time, I settled in and began to feel some real excitement brewing inside.  I looked around and saw a massive room full of nervous anticipation.  This was it, I said to myself.  The event of the year.  My stage.  Poker’s prom night.  As I chuckled to myself about my prom night analogy (I crack myself up sometimes), I realized that the Main Event really did feel to me like the grown-up equivalent of prom night, New Year’s Eve.

In my post-scholastic world living in Manhattan amidst a lot of good friends, New Year’s Eve has always been a big event.  It is a night subject to a lot of anticipation.  Plans for it are often made at least a month in advance.  It’s a big night both because of what it supposedly portends and also because it’s the one night on which none of my friends will bail out at the last second.  Everyone’s there.  And if it turns out to be a good night, it’s epic.  On the other hand, if New Year’s turns out to be a dud, it fills me with an out-of-proportion sense of disappointment.    In the end, it’s just another night out, but with a magnified sense of importance attached to it.  It’s hard to keep this in perspective when everyone is drunkenly hugging, slurring Auld Lang Syne, but really, it’s just another night.

And so it is with the Main Event.  Everyone awaits its arrival eagerly, booking their trips to Vegas many months beforehand.  The outrageousness of both the field and prize pool is a virtual guarantee.  It is a true event.  Celebrities and weirdos show up by the dozens.  And if your Main Event goes well, you can legitimately claim that you’re on top of the poker world.  However, if you perform poorly, it’s a very empty day, one that you can’t get back for a full year. 

And just as New Year’s Eve is really just another night, the Main Event is really just another poker tournament.  It is crucial to remember this if you want to maintain your sanity in the wake of an early exit.  The nuts and bolts of this tournament are exactly the same as those of any other tournament, down to a lowly $1 entry on Pokerstars.  The same exact pitfalls potentially await every entrant.  If your pocket aces are cracked, you’re gone, that’s it.  If you flop a set of sixes on a 10-6-2 flop, you are going to lose to a set of tens.  You’re gone, that’s it.  I was just finishing reminding myself of this when Penn & Teller appeared on the TV screens above us, telling the dealers to “shuffle up and deal!”  We were underway.

I’m aware that the people who read this blog fall into three categories: 

1) Those who haven’t the foggiest clue about modern poker;
2) Those who are somewhat familiar with modern poker; and
3) Those who frequently play modern poker. 

Since my experience in the 2007 Main Event was such a short one, I am going to now try and give very detailed descriptions of the few hands I actually played.  If you fall into category 1) above, this blog entry will probably cease to make any sense to you from this point forward.  If you fall into category 2) above, I hope that these descriptions will give you an idea of how complex, subtle and demanding tournament no-limit hold ‘em is.  And if you fall into category 3), feel free to constructively criticize or comment on my play.  I am always looking to improve.

As play got underway, the first thing I was able to do was get a better read on some of the players.

The player in seat 1 was definitely a good player.  He wasn’t getting very involved early, but I could tell he knew what he was doing.  I also thought I recognized him from some pictures on 2+2, which is a strong indicator in his favor.

The player in seat 2 was our resident idiot.  He took a very long time to look at his cards and act.  Slow, deliberate play is often employed by decent players who wish to avoid giving off tells.  In this instance, the player in question was not doing this.  He was simply mentally overmatched and was having trouble deciding how to respond to the simplest situations.  This player also minraised in late position after four players limped and shoved all in for 20,000 after the player in front of him limped for 100.  Not good plays.  It was safe to conclude that he had no idea what he was doing.

The ambiguously European guy in the 3 seat was in fact Irish, and he was scared.  He was trembling visibly whenever he played a pot, which was not very often at all.

The Latino in the 6 seat was from Puerto Rico.  He was an unrefined but ballsy player.  He also had the worst tell I have ever encountered in all my time playing poker.  He looked at his cards as soon as he received them (not in turn), and if they were trashy cards, he sat very still, then threw them away when it was his turn to act.  If, on the other hand, his cards were playable, his right leg would tremble uncontrollably, wildly vibrating up and down.  We were sitting in cramped quarters and each time they occurred, I could easily feel his good-card vibrations on my left leg.  Because he was sitting to my immediate left, this tell was quite valuable, and it made my early exit even more revolting.

The other notable reads were that the player in the 9 seat, who knew Norman Chad, was a loose-passive calling station preflop.  He was somewhat tricky in that I saw him softplay big hands twice, i.e., he underbet the pot when he made a strong hand, hoping to induce action.

Finally, the most important read was on the Asian player in Seat 10.  He was a cash game specialist from Los Angeles and was very loose.  For instance, I saw him openlimp with 5-3 offsuit under the gun, openraise with 8-5 offsuit in early position, and make many other very loose plays.  He was actively looking to engage the tigher players at the table.  He liked to squeeze limpers, i.e., to make a raise in late position if there were limpers in front of him, either taking down the pot right there, or by firing a continuation bet on the flop.  He did this with any two cards.  His style contrasted sharply with the other players at the table, as he played over 50% of the hands, while everyone else got involved only occasionally.  He wasn’t a total maniac, however.  As is typical for a strong cash game player, his postflop game was excellent.  He knew when to control the pot size, when to slow down, and when to mix in a bluff.  He did all of these things in the first half hour of play.  His style creates a very high variance, and I personally thought it wasn’t terribly well-suited for early tournament play, but he was extremely dangerous all the same.  I knew that he’d likely be gone or sitting on a big stack by the middle of Level Two.

My tournament started very slowly.  Within the first orbit, I checked my option with Ah9h in the big blind after two players limped and flopped the nut flush.  We all checked the flop, and I put in a small checkraise on the turn, getting no action.  A also chopped a very small pot with 6-5 on a 5-7-8-9-x board.

The first hand of remote interest occurred when I picked up JJ in early position and chose to limp.  I limped because the wild Asian guy was sitting five seats behind me, and I figured he’d raise.  He did exactly that, raising my 100-chip bet to 600.  I didn’t want to play a big pot, so I flat called and saw a flop, which brought all small cards.  I checked, intending to put in a checkraise, but he checked behind.  The turn brought a king, and I once again checked, and so did the Asian guy.  The river was a small card, and when I bet, the Asian player mucked A-Q face up.  Couldn’t trap him at all there.

On the last hand of Level One, I picked up A-Q on the button and raised two limpers.  One of them called, and I took down the pot with a continuation bet after the flop missed us both.  I ended level one with 20,250 chips, 250 more than my starting stack.  A very boring level. 

I made phone calls to my father and Janeen on the first break, telling them that nothing had happened yet, which was pretty much what I expected.  I had accomplished the most important goal of Level One:  getting a good read (mostly by extrapolating from my age/race profiles) on my opponents.

Level Two would be more noteworthy.  The blinds were now 100-200.  I began by making a few more openraises, taking my stack up to around 22,000.  And then…

Interesting Hand #1

I picked up A-K offsuit in early position and raised to 550.  Norman Chad’s friend called from the 9 Seat and the flop came A-A-6.  I led at the pot for 1000 chips.  Why did I lead at the pot?  Basically, I was employing some third-level thinking.  When you flop trip aces with A-K, there first three levels of thought are:

Level 1 thinking:  I have a good hand, I should bet. 

Level 2 thinking:  If I bet, my opponent will think I have a good hand.  I should deceive him and check. 

Level 3 thinking:  My opponent is smart enough to know that a check looks strong here.  If I bet, I will look weak and get action from lesser hands.

And that’s why I bet 1000 chips into the 1400 chip pot, knowing that lesser aces and middle pairs would give me action.  Norman Chad’s friend considered my bet and called.  The pot now contained 3400 chips.

The turn was a nine, and I checked.  Why did I check?  At this point it had been established through the action on the flop that my opponent had some kind of a hand, either A-x or a pocket pair.  I checked to feign weakness, to indicate that I was giving up on the hand and to invite him to make a bet, which I intended to call.  Why did I intend to call rather than checkraise?  I intended to call because I felt that 99, 66, and A-9 suited were in Norman Chad’s friend’s range, and I didn’t want to play a huge pot, just a nice big one.

When I checked, my opponent did something curious.  He bet 1000 chips, less than one-third of the pot.  It was a puny bet.  This set off some bells in my head, because I had watched this player softplay two very strong hands in Level One.  Now he was doing it again.  I was now convinced that this guy had AK (for a tie), AQ, AJ, or A-10 (I was beating those), or A-9, 99, or 66 (I was losing to those, which were all full houses). 

I raised to 3500.  Why did I raise to 3500?  Both to get more chips in the pot against the hands I was beating and to gain information.  I wanted to find out now if I was beat, and I was prepared to fold to a reraise.  If the guy flat called my checkraise, I knew that I would probably check/call a reasonable bet on the river if the river didn’t bring a Q, J or 10, all of which would give his likely A-x’s a full house.  Actually, I’d still probably make a crying call on the river if any of those cards fell.  Norman Chad’s friend flat called.  There was now 6900 in the pot, or about one-third of our respective stacks.

The river was a brick, and I checked.  Why did I check?  I checked because this was already a pretty big pot.  I believed I was probably beating AQ, AJ or A-10, but I wasn’t sure.  A-9, 99 and 66 were still in the mix.  Since I wasn’t sure, I wanted to keep my losses under control in the event that I was up against a full house.  It has occurred to me that another small value bet might have been the best play on the river.  I could have then folded to a raise, which would almost surely have indicated that I was beat.

Norman Chad’s friend responded to my river check by checking behind and happily opening his hand:  A-10 suited, which he thought was good.  It was not.  I showed my big slick and raked the pot.  I was up to around 28,000 chips. 

Interesting Hand #2

I had bled away perhaps 1,500 chips since Interesting Hand #1 when I picked up 33 on the button.  The loose Asian player openraised to 600 in second position and got called by the scared Irishman and I.  The blinds both folded, leaving us three-handed.  The flop came A-K-5 rainbow.  Both the Asian guy and the Irish guy checked, and I bet 1200 into the 2100-chip pot.  Why did I bet?

I bet because I believed the Asian guy’s check meant one of two things:  he either hated the flop or loved the flop.  If he had an ace that made one pair, he would definitely have protected his hand by betting.  He was either slowplaying a set or giving up.  And what about the Irish guy?  Well, he was a very straightforward player and I knew he’d have bet if he had an ace, and that he’d check/fold everything else.  So I took a stab.  The Asian guy called and the Irish player folded.  Now what?

I was done with this hand.  I tried to take it down cheaply and was denied.  I was pretty sure I was up against AA or KK.  The turn and river both bricked and the action went check/check both times (this river check foreshadowed the next hand of interest).  The Asian guy showed pocket aces and I mucked my underpair.

Interesting Hand #3

At the start of this hand, I had around 24,000 chips.  The LAG Asian player was in the big blind.  He had really been splashing around, playing like a wildman, and one of his bluffs had just been picked off by the Puerto Rican leg twitcher to my left.  LAG Asian was now the shortest stack at the table, with only around 12,500 chips when this hand started.  I was dealt pocket eights and the action was folded to me.  Raise or call?

In almost all situations, I raise here in middle position.  But this was a special situation, since a player that was very likely to defend was in the big blind.  Therefore, the normal equity from stealing the blinds was absent from this hand, so I considered just calling in an effort to keep the pot small and avoid possibly wasting chips.  I overruled myself, however, deciding that I really wasn’t scared to play a big pot with my LAG-y Asian friend.  I raised to 550 and got called by the Moneymaker lookalike on the button and, of course, the Asian guy in the big blind.

The flop came Ad-Kd-4s, and all three of us checked.  Why did I check instead of representing the ace?  I checked because the double-suited board bothered me, and because we were three-handed, with a player yet to act behind me.  I figured I’d rather check, hope the button also checked, and further hope that the dealer would peel an eight on the turn. 

And that’s exactly what happened.  The turn was a black eight, giving me a set.  The Asian guy bet 1200 into the 1750 pot.  Now what?

This was a really intriguing situation.  The Asian player’s turn bet meant one of three things:

1) He was on a pure bluff;          
2) He was value betting an ace or two pair; or
3) He was betting on the come with a diamond draw.

One thing was certain:  I had the best hand right now.  If one of my opponents held a hand that was beating me (only AA or KK), they would have reraised preflop to avoid playing a three-way flop with those hands.  So, with the best hand, was the correct play to flat call or to put in a raise?  The answer depended on which of the three enumerated possibilities was held by the Asian guy. 

If he was on 1) a pure bluff, the correct play was to flat call and hope he fired another barrel on the river.

If he was 2) value betting an ace, I believe the correct play is also a flat call.  The reason is that Mr. LAG-y Asian he was a good player and would fold most aces if I raised.  Raising on an A-K-8-4 board with two diamonds after checking the flop and openraising preflop is a line that is very consistent with AA or KK.  So, the Asian guy would probably put me on a very strong hand and fold a weak ace if I raised.  Therefore, if I thought the Asian guy had something like A-J, I should also flat call.

But if the Asian guy had 3) a diamond draw, the correct play was a raise, which would  make him pay to draw. 

The more I considered the situation, the more I believed I should raise.  Part of the reason was to make a diamond draw pay, and part of the reason was to define my hand.  If I raised and the Asian guy called, I could be fairly sure that he was on a diamond draw, and I’d know what kind of river cards to fear.  I raised to 3500.  The button folded and the big blind called after thinking for quite awhile. 

I was now fairly sure that I was up against a diamond draw, or possibly a two-pair hand that could call me, such as A-4 or maybe A-Q.  I prayed for a non-diamond river (unless it paired the board) and watched as the dealer produced the queen of clubs.  The Asian guy, who had 8500 chips left, checked.  Now what?

My mind, as it is trained to do, automatically catalogued the hands that beat me.  AA, KK and QQ were out of the question, and the J-10 of diamonds had just hit a gutshot straight, making the nuts on the river.  But could LAG Asian have that hand?  Unlikely, since he had just checked the river.  So should I value bet, and if so, how much? 

Since I was pretty sure I was up against a busted diamond draw, I did briefly consider checking behind here with my set of eights, since the busted draw could not call me, which destroyed the equity in a river bet.  But I had not completely ruled out the possibility of my opponent holding A-4 or A-Q, which he might feel compelled to pay me off with.  I therefore chose to bet 4000 chips on the river, which was just under half of his stack.  My opponent considered this bet for a second before shoving all in, spilling his stack over in the process.  It was 4500 more for me to call, and the pot was now huge, with over 20,000 chips in it.

I felt sick when the guy checkraised all in.  I knew I was probably up against exactly the J-10 of diamonds, based on the analysis above.  Did I have to call?

In my humble opinion, yes.  The pot was laying me huge odds, and there was an outside chance that my opponent had something else in his hand.  He was, after all, a wild player in many respects.  Also, the checkraise on the river was an odd play.  If the Asian guy put me on AA KK or 88, he should have simply shoved the river, knowing that I’d put him on a busted draw and would call.  Why would he check the river, knowing that I’d check behind with hands like A-J and the like?  I wasn’t sure, but I knew that I had to put in 4500 more chips.  I shook my head and despairingly called.  As it turned out, it was the second time this particular player had checked the nuts on the river.  And there it was:  he turned over the J-10 of diamonds.  Fucking revolting.  I winced and mucked the eights.

The non-diamond queen was the worst card that could have possibly fell on the river.  If a diamond had fallen, I would likely have checked behind on the river or called a small value bet.  But the queen really blindsided me, completing a gutshot straight, the only drawing hand that I could not accurately forsee.  I had (in my opinion) played the hand correctly from start to finish, but my stack had been chopped in half nevertheless.

Adding insult to injury, a tournament director immediately broke my table after the completion of the hand.  If the dealer had taken only a few more seconds to shuffle the cards, the table would have been broken before the devastating hand ever took place.  My stack was now down to around 12,000 chips as the end of Level Two approached.

A very quick profile of my new table led me to believe I was once again in nitland, it was all older white guys.  I once again ended up playing the last hand before the break.

Interesting Hand #4

I was dealt AhJc in middle position.  A player with a lot of chips, perhaps around 35,000, limped in early position.  It was folded to me and I made it 850 to go.  I had the sense this guy was your basic loose-passive nit, and I figured he had limped in with some kind of crap.  Everyone else folded and went on break as my opponent called the 850.  The flop came A-Q-x with two hearts and my opponent checked.  With top pair, I bet 1200 into the pot of approximately 2000, and my opponent called.  The turn was the 10 of hearts and my opponent checked again.  I checked behind.  Why?  I checked behind both because the board was ugly, so I wanted to keep this pot small, and also because I wanted to draw at the nut flush for free.

The river was a brick, a small black card, and now my opponent bet 1400 into the roughly 4000 chip pot.  I was having a hard time putting him on a hand since I had just been switched to the new table and had never seen this guy play, and I was getting very good pot odds, so I called with my top pair.  He showed me QQ for a set.  Lovely.  I had around 9,000 chips left as the second break arrived.  The Level Three blinds would be 200-400.

Janeen and my father both received another phone call at this break, which came hot on the heels of the last two hands.  I was pretty distressed, and I think that came through in the two short conversations.  Still, after completing the calls, I regrouped emotionally, reminding myself that I had made hundreds of comebacks from similar situations.  I knew exactly how to play a short stack, even this early in the tournament.  Besides, my stack wasn’t desperately short.  I would surely be looking for a place to double up, but I still had enough chips to survive for quite awhile waiting for the right opportunity.

The right opportunity arrived pretty quickly. 

Interesting Hand #5

On the fourth or fifth hand after the break, I was in the small blind.  Everyone on the table had me covered.  A player in early position openlimped for 400, and it was folded to me.  I had the 3c2c.  Call or fold?

Folding is certainly reasonable, but I decided to call, putting 200 more into the 1000-chip pot.  I told myself that I was done with the hand unless I flopped a wheel, a big draw, trips, or two pair.  The big blind checked his option and the flop was a beautiful one for me:  A-3-2 with two diamonds, giving me bottom two pair.  Now what?

The answer is simple:  try to get all my chips into the middle.  The big blind had a random hand, and the early position limper was very unlikely to have a hand that beat me.  Those hands were: 

5-4, which was definitely not an early position limping hand;
 
AA, which was somewhat possible.  I’d just have to pay that hand off;

33 or 22, which fit the early position limp but were very unlikely mathematically speaking since all the threes and deuces would then be completely accounted for;

A-3 and A-2, which were very unusual hands to openlimp with in early position.

All things considered, I felt it was extremely likely that I held the best hand, and the only objective was thus to get all my chips in the middle and double up.  I felt the best way to do this was through a two-step betting pattern:  checkraise the flop and shove the turn.  So I checked, the big blind checked, and the early position limper cooperated by betting 1000 into the 1200 pot.  I followed the plan, checkraising to 3500.  The big blind folded and the early position limper called.  What gives?

The early position limper’s call did not scare me at all.  I tired to get into his head.  Because the board had two diamonds on it, and because my call from the small blind could be a wide range of hands, including different flush and straight draws, his flat call on the flop (rather than a reraise) was consistent with a medium-strength made hand or a draw.  If he had a set or two pair, the common play would be to put me all in so that I would have to pay to draw at him.  Since he had flat called my checkraise, I tried to put him on the various hands that might openlimp and then call a flop checkraise.  The two hands I could envision were a medium suited ace, which gave him top pair, or a diamond draw such as the K-Q or Q-J of diamonds.  What was the plan now?

The plan was to shove all in on any non-diamond turn.  The turn was indeed a non-diamond:  the jack of spades.  I pushed all in for my remaining 5000 chips and my opponent instacalled, flipping over pocket threes for a set.  I was drawing dead. 

I muttered “nice hand” and slowly rose from my chair, gathered my stuff, and trudged off.  My brain was frozen, completely blank.  I was employing a defense mechanism that I learned in early in life and have since mastered:  withdrawal.  There is no pain when you can’t feel anything.  I walked past the tables full of hopefuls, riffling their chips.  I walked through the door, down the hallway crammed with spectators waiting in line, trying to get a glimpse of the action.  Then down two more long hallways, dazedly passing hundreds poker denizens of all kinds.  Then the torpid march through the casino floor with all its persistent noises and lights, then finally into the elevator, then down another hall, through another door, and into bed.

That was it for the 2007 Main Event.  A dud.  

Amusing side note:  I have now busted out of my three Main Events with monster hands–nine high, eight high, and three high.

Seven Out!

The concept that 07/07/07 would be a lucky day for me was thoroughly disproven in the last few hours (my lucky number is actually six, in case anyone was wondering).

I ran into some really shitty luck in this year’s Main Event.  I will write up my very short-lived experience in the next couple of days (I’ll only need maybe four paragraphs).  For now, all you need to know is that the river hates me.

I’m not terribly disappointed.  I had a big month out here, and I’ll still be playing poker for the next few days.  Plus, I have 5% of Kevin Wright, who is going to take this thing down. 

Anyway, if all my poker months were as successful as my 2007 WSOP, I’d be rich and famous. 

Main Event Eve Y’all…

Hello from Vegas.

It took me quite awhile, and yesterday was one of the more annoying days I’ve had in recent memory (details aren’t worth getting into, but Harrah’s is kind of lame), but I have my starting date for the 2007 WSOP Main Event:

07-07-07, which is tomorrow.

I am in bunker/cocoon mode until noon PST tomorrow, at which point I will offiically be in action.  I haven’t played much poker at all in the last week, but I don’t think there will be any rust to shake off once the cards are in the air. 

I’m staying on premises at the Rio this time, so I am hoping to be able to fire off a few short updates during the day, while I’m on break.  We’ll see.  That’s all for now, hopefully I can make some hands tomorrow!

DZ

Prepping for the Main Event.

The next big tournament I’ll be playing is the 2007 World Series of Poker’s Main Event.

As I’m sure most of you are aware, the Main Event is like poker’s Battle Royale:  Everyone plays, figurative fists are flying all over the place, and the tournament is both wildly unpredictable and a great value. 

The tournament is wildly unpredictable in several ways.  First, a relative unknown wins it pretty much every year.  Trying to pick a winner in this thing is an exercise in futility.  It is going to be the week of someone’s life, and chances are, you’ll never have heard of that person.  Second, and more importantly, my personal performance in this tournament is difficult to predict because it is so dependent on my table draw.  I might end up at a table with Patrik Antonius and J.C. Tran in the two seats to my immediate left, which would be a disaster.  Or–more likely–I might end up at a table with a nine players who can barely tie their shoes.  There’s no way of knowing until I actually sit down.

The Main Event is a great value for me because of the abundance of guys who can’t tie their shoes, who show up in droves every year.  These are sane people who would never think of gambing away ten thousand dollars under normal conditions.  But this is the World Series of Poker’s Main Event, where the average Joe’s dreams can and do come true!  Just plunking down the $10k is a badge of honor of sorts.  So there they all are:  normally sane guys paying $10,000 to play poker with players who are mostly better than them.

In the early stages of the Main Event, the best strategy is to leave higher level thinking on the shelf.  The most important skills are to identify the player types at your table and exploit the bad ones with the appropriate form of A-B-C poker.  In a live setting, I excel at both of these things.  This is a nice way of saying that some players might give away a lot of chips.  This obviously makes the Main Event a great value for me. 

I’ve recently been asked what I’ll be doing to prepare myself for the Main Event.  I’ve thought about the answer, and I’ve come to the realization that this year will be different from my only other Main Events, which were 2005 and 2006.

In 2005, I was playing in the biggest tournament of my life, both in terms of size and importance.  At the time, I had never seen a live field over perhaps 300 players.  In the spring of 2005, becoming a professional poker player was little more than a dream.  As it turns out, my performance in the 2005 Main Event went a long way.  That tournament made me realize that I had a lot of innate ability in poker.  It also allowed a seed that was previously unwatered to germinate.  It is very possible that I would never have changed professions had I not cashed in the 2005 Main Event.

My preparation for the 2005 Main Event reflected my relatively novice abilities.  I was in a phase where I was still absorbing tournament strategy as fast as I humanly could.  My bibles were Sklansky’s tournament book and Harrington on Hold ‘Em.  Especially Harrington on Hold ‘Em.  Despite having been through it cover-to-cover at least five times prior, I read it during most of my waking moments in the days before the tournament:  on the plane to Vegas, poolside at my hotel, while eating dinner, late at night in bed.  I literally slept next to Harrington’s two volumes for the entire trip.  Then I went out and applied them, along with a few instinctive moves sprinkled in, at the tables.  Add a dose of good luck and the result was a surprisingly high finish.

In 2006, I was once again playing the biggest tournament of my life, but I was then more seasoned.  I was a pro with one big cash under my belt, and my strategic thinking extended well beyond Harrington.  I was employing new concepts, ones I had learned mostly from PokerXFactor.com, and I had been testing them out online and in smaller live events.  I still wasn’t completely sure of my fundamentals, so I continued to carry Harrington’s books with me on the road, referring to them liberally during my downtime.  I still had the sneaking suspicion that I would be somehow outclassed for much of the tournament, but Day 1 disabused me of that notion quickly.  Once again, with the help of lady luck, I managed an impressive finish.

Now, things have changed somewhat drastically.  Comparatively speaking, I’m a veteran of the poker scene.  If you compare my 1.5 years of professional experience to the average Main Event participant, I’m a veritable wise old owl.  All the things I’ve gleaned from Harrington, PokerXFactor, 2+2, conversations with smart poker players, etc. etc. are now engrained in my head, forming my basic strategy.  Like a big league shortstop fielding a routine grounder and tossing it to first, the fundamentals of the game are now practically etched in my DNA.  As a result, I actually consciously avoid reading poker manuals in the days and hours before a big tournament.  All they can possibly do is alter the things I innately understand.  Does a professional chef need a cookbook to scramble eggs? 

So I guess the short answer is: 

Beyond asking the poker gods for my third consecutive year of good luck, I’m going to do nothing to prepare for the Main Event.

More to come from Sin City….

I’m Bob Cousy.

Boiyoiyoinnng…

That’s the sound of my confidence bouncing back from the subterranean level.  The last two weeks have left me feeling like I’m really on my game.  When I analyze my play, I either end up feeling sky high or miserable about it.  I think the absence of any middle ground (where the truth likely resides) is due to the relative youth of my poker career.  I’m still not used to the swings, so my self-confidence gravitates in the direction of my most recent results.

I finished exactly 100th in Event #38, which was about as good as was possible with the cards I was dealt on Day Two.

Boiyoiyoinnnnng…..

That’s also the sound of a basketball being bounced.

You see, during the tournament, something occurred to me.  I realized that in these $1500 events with 3,000 person fields, I have way more tricks up my sleeve than the average player.  My experience and study has enabled me to understand how relative stack sizes, position, stack-to-blind ratios, table image, table dynamics, and other factors all combine to create a good strategy for each hand.  In short, I’m a better preflop player than at least 90% of these fields.

It reminded me of something that really has nothing to do with poker:  playing basketball.  When I was a lot younger–throughout high school, and when I came home on breaks from college and law school, I used to play a lot of pickup basketball (also stickball), usually at an outdoor court in Sea Cliff, New York.  The participants varied widely in age, size, and skill level–you were equally likely to encounter an old fat guy wearing kneepads and smelling like Ben-Gay as you were a senior on the varsity team–but any group of three was welcome to play halfcourt ball, provided they called out that they “got next.” 

This was not West 4th Street.  These games were pretty novice, and there was one thing separated the good players from the hopeless ones:  the ability to dribble the basketball.  I don’t mean to say that this was a game full of bozos bouncing the ball off their own legs; most of us were pretty decent.  But there were a couple of guys who really had a “handle.”  That is, they could dribble out of trouble and create opportunities for themselves, even when it meant going between their legs, behind their backs, using a stutter-dribble, a yo-yo dribble… whatever the situation required.  These players, even when they were very small or terrible shooters, usually ended up on the winning team in our little three-on-three games.  There is only one way to acquire the skills these kids had:  combine a modicum of talent with a whole lot of practice. 

That’s me in a No Limit Hold-Em tournament with a massive field.  I can dribble circles around the average clod.