Pokerstars Million Dollar Challenge

Watch Million Dollar Challenge, Episode 5 - Challenge of Champions on PokerStars.tv

208

Hands You Want To Play … But Shouldn’t

Phil Gordon

December 22nd, 2009

Even the best poker players in the world make mistakes, and when these mistakes are not corrected, they can develop into "leaks" that can easily sink your game. There are two leaks in particular that I see all the time with regard to Hold ’em starting hands that people play but would be better off folding.
The first of these two leaks involves playing easily dominated hands. Domination in Texas Hold ’em is death, so you must make an effort to fold potentially dominated hands pre-flop if another player has voluntarily entered the pot.
This concept spins off of David Sklansky’s "Gap Principle", which essentially says that the range of hands you’re willing to raise with should be wider than the range of hands you’re willing to call with.
For instance, if everyone folds to me and I have K-Q off-suit on the button, I’m going to raise. It’s likely the best hand, and I give myself a chance to steal the blinds. However, if a middle position player raises before the flop, I’m going to throw that K-Q away quickly. That K-Q is very easily dominated by the hands my opponent is likely to raise with in middle position, such as A-K, pocket Kings, pocket Aces, pocket Queens, and A-Q. These are hands that K-Q will have a very difficult time beating, and if we both flop a pair, I could be in severe trouble and lose my entire stack.
To further illustrate this point, here’s a mathematical look at why a theoretically powerful hand, if dominated, is worse than playing random rags. Say my opponent raises in first position with A-K and it folds around to me on the button with 7-2 off-suit, the worst hand in poker. If I call there, I’m about a 65-35 underdog.
Now let’s say I have A-Q on the button facing that same raise from A-K. Now my hand is about a 75-25 underdog, which is significantly worse than if I had 7-2.
It’s not easy to fold A-Q to a single raise pre-flop, but if the raise is coming from early position and you have reason to believe your opponent has a premium hand, A-Q could easily be dominated. More to the point, that next tier of starting hands—K-Q, Q-J, Q-10, K-10, K-J—those are hands you should just throw away if your opponent opens the pot for a raise.
The other leak involving starting hands that I see frequently is overvaluing suited hands. I see players with A-5 suited or 8-7 suited and they play the hands because they think they might flop a flush. In reality, when you’re suited you will only flop a flush about one out of 121 times. That’s about 0.84 percent of the time. It does not happen very often. And even when it does happen, you’re not likely to win a big pot.
If you take a hand like A-5 suited and compare it to A-5 off-suit, in reality, against the range of hands your opponent might be playing, it only adds about two to three percent to your expectation of making the best hand.
So don’t be fooled by being suited. Just because the hand is suited does not mean that it is playable. The ranks of the cards are much more important than whether or not your hand is suited.
When making your pre-flop decisions, if you can resist the urge to play hands that are likely dominated and resist the urge to play mediocre suited cards, I think you’ll find yourself playing a more profitable brand of poker in the long run.

POKERSTARS IS A JOKE!!

Karmakrazy13 Poker Tournament Part 5

Karmakrazy13 Poker Tournament Part 4

Poker Players Give Back

Poker Players Give Back

Annie Duke showed that professional poker players have heart when it comes to raising money for charity. In last season's Celebrity Apprentice which she won - okay, she finished second to Joan Rivers - Annie raised about $500,000 in charitable contributions from the poker world. Way to go, Annie!

In that same spirit, I hosted and/or emceed four charity tournaments in a single week last month. In Montreal for an event benefiting the Starlight Foundation, we raised over $250,000 for children in need. Then, in Manhattan, I helped emcee Roy "The Oracle" Winston's charity event on Wall Street. The next night, at an event in Philadelphia, we raised $1 million in one night for the Children's Hospital.

Finally, I was joined by twenty other pro poker players and a slew of big-name celebrities for a weekend of poker and golf in Phoenix to benefit the Fallen Officers Foundation. We raised about $500,000 for this organization that supports families of officers killed in the line of duty www.holdemforheroes.com.

Antonio "The Magician" Esfandiari won the main event in Phoenix and fellow poker pro Jeff Madsen finished second. Then came the so-called Winners Tournament where the top two finishers in each of the four charity events and I squared off for a $10,000 seat at the 2010 World Series of Poker Main Event.

Blinds were $100/$200 when I opened for $600 with 6-6 from early position. Jeff Madsen, sitting directly to my left, called with A-A.

The flop came 7-7-6. Bingo! I checked and so did Jeff.

A deuce hit on the turn and I bet $800. Madsen called.

A ten popped off on the river and I tossed in $1,200. Jeff studied the situation. Even though he recognized that I only had $2,200 left, he just called.

I told Jeff that he played the hand masterfully, managing to lose only the absolute minimum.

Let's break this hand down.

My opening $600 raise was standard however Madsen's smooth pre-flop call with pocket aces was a very advanced play. He was attempting to trap one of the players behind him - including me.

I like Jeff's play, especially because the table was filled with aggressive players. Jeff reasonably expected that one player would reraise or at least overplay his hand after the flop.

My check on the flop was just okay. A bet might have been better as everyone seems to expect a continuation bet these days. As it turns out, my check probably revealed some of my strength to Jeff.

Madsen's check behind me on the flop was solid. He checked for the same reason I did on the flop; he was trying to trap. His check was designed both to signal weakness and tempt me to bet on the turn with a weak hand, or even bluff.

On the turn, I like my smallish $800 bet. I was trying to make it easy for Jeff to call with a hand like A-Q, or even give him a chance to attempt a bluff.

His smooth call on the turn was a good play. He probably thought he had the best hand and that I may have been bluffing.

My $1,200 bet on the river was decent. How could I know that he had an overpair and that he'd only call with A-A? My bet was designed to get maximum value for my full house.

Madsen's smooth call on the river was great but I'd never recommend that sort of play unless you've got an unbelievable read on your opponent. Obviously, Madsen had that kind of read on me.

An all-in raise was the standard move for a player in Jeff's position, especially considering that I only had $2,200 remaining. I definitely prefer the all-in move unless you possess Jeff Madsen-like reading skills!

-Phil Hellmuth

207

What Not To Do With a Short Stack

Erick Lindgren

December 8th, 2009

When you’re on the extreme short stack in a tournament, there isn’t always a “right” decision to make. You’ll find yourself in a lot of marginal spots, such as holding an A-9 off-suit in early position or maybe holding a small pair when someone in front of you has already raised. With those hands, it’s never clear whether the better move is to shove and cross your fingers or just fold and wait for a better spot.
There are, however, some very “wrong” decisions to make when you’re on the extreme short stack, and I saw one of them on display in a tournament I played on Full Tilt Poker a short time ago.
We were at the final table of a tournament with six players remaining, the blinds were 50K/100K with a 10K ante and I was the chip leader with more than 8,000,000 in chips. The average stack was about 3,000,000, and the player directly to my right was the shortest stack by far with 811,000.
When you have eight big blinds, which in this case wasn’t even enough chips for four revolutions around the table, the logic is simple: You only enter a pot voluntarily if you have cards that you’re willing to go all the way with pre-flop.
On this hand, the short stack entered the pot for a raise to 250,000 under the gun. The fact that he didn’t just move all in suggested he was being a little bit tricky. He could have had a monster, or he could have just been trying to make it look like he had a monster. A lot of players will make that play with a hand like J-10 suited, hoping other players might call but not re-raise, allowing them to see a flop. But it’s not a play I endorse. When you’re down to eight big blinds, you should be playing all-in-or-fold poker.
In any case, I picked up a strong hand, A-Q off-suit. I just went ahead and moved in my stack, figuring if someone behind me has a bigger hand, so be it, but I wanted to isolate and try to eliminate the short stack.
And this was when my opponent made an even worse play than raising small under the gun: He folded to my re-raise.
There was 1,270,000 in the pot and it would have cost him 561,000 to call. Folding was simply the wrong play. He should have called with any two cards. He had already committed too much money to the pot to fold his hand. If he was getting cute with a medium suited connector, then he was only about a 60-40 underdog. If he was playing a weak ace, then technically he wasn’t getting the right odds to call, but he would need to know for a fact that he’s dominated in order to correctly lay his hand down.
And it’s important to note that I was the big stack and I’d been very active. He didn’t necessarily have to give me credit for a premium hand.
By folding, my opponent left himself with only 561,000 in chips, less than six big blinds, and the big blind was going to be on him the next hand. He was going to be forced to take a stand, but he would be doing so for a lot less money than would have been the case on the previous hand. Instead of trying his luck against me for a pot of more than 1.8-million, a double-up on the next hand would only increase his stack to 1.2-million.
The lesson is simple: When you’re extremely short-stacked, raising and then folding pre-flop shouldn’t be an option. Either a hand is good enough to play for all of your chips, or you throw it into the muck. The worst thing you can do is attempt something in between those two extremes.

Deal Me In with Daniel Negreanu

Deal Me In with Daniel Negreanu

Here’s another excerpt from my new book, Deal Me In, written by my friend and perennial fan-favorite poker professional, Daniel Negreanu. I hope you enjoy it:

I can remember going to the mall in Toronto with my brother and parents and just staring at people. I guess all kids do that, but there was more to it for me than just staring at things that were new to me. I was, at just five years old, trying to figure people out. I was a people watcher then and I’m a people watcher to this day.

I still do that sort of thing when I go to the mall. I can’t help myself, I’ve always been intrigued by people and want to know what makes them tick. It just so happens that doing that kind of thing is excellent training for the poker table.

My affinity for people, numbers, and competition eventually brought me into poker. I’d never played the game as a kid; my first taste of poker was through my buddies at the pool hall. One night after a snooker tournament, I got invited to a house game. They were playing all kinds of crazy wild card games like Kings and Little Ones, Follow the Queen, In Between and 7/27.  

It didn’t take long before I lost my $10 and ended up chilling on the couch, just hanging out. I didn’t have a clue what I was doing.  

There was one guy in the game, an Asian kid named John Seto, who seemed to win almost every night. I’d watch him and he’d just sit there the whole night and maybe play four or five hands and that’s it.

I thought, how can you win if you don’t play?

Well, I learned my first valuable lesson from Seto: Don’t play if you don’t have the best of it. Be patient and wait for good hands.

When I turned twenty-one, there was only one place I wanted to be: Las Vegas. I’d planned on going there in 1996 to become the youngest ever WSOP champion. My first problem was that I didn’t have the $10,000 buy-in so I played in a super-satellite.

The satellite gave away eleven seats to the Main Event, and with 13 players left, I was looking good. A player went all-in, then I went all-in with pocket aces, and then another player called with A-K.

A-A against J-J and A-K! I was on my way to the Big Dance!

Nope, the first card I saw was a jack. I was devastated. Playing in the WSOP just wasn’t going to happen for me. Huck Seed won it that year and I couldn’t even bear to watch. I wanted to be in the event, not a spectator.

By late-2003, I had it all figured out. I realized not only that I should have more money but that I needed to get my priorities in order and stop being a screw-up.

The timing was pretty good. In 2004 I tore up the tournament scene, putting together a year that will be tough to duplicate. At the WSOP, I won my third bracelet and Player of the Year honors. Immediately after, I won the $10,000 buy-in event at the Sands against one of the toughest fields I’d ever faced. Later in the year, I won the $10,000 WPT event at the Borgata, and then did it again in December, winning the $15,000 WPT event at the Bellagio.

I’d like to be remembered as a guy who put the best interests of the game before my own and as a guy who obviously had a lot of fun at the poker table.

The rest of Daniel Negreanu's story, plus many others, are in Deal Me In, the new book by Phil Hellmuth, available at www.pokerbrat.com.

Play Poker With Me!!!

Kobe Bryant Amazing Buzzer Beater!!

The Youtube Poker Challenge Part 5

Add Starting Hands to Your Repertoire

Add Starting Hands to Your Repertoire

by Daniel Negreanu

You have to play more hands than usual to be successful in tournament poker. While a conservative approach can help you squeak into the money, the only way to win is to mix it up and get involved with a wider range of starting hands.

So, the question is, which hands should I add to my repertoire?

Well, the truth is that you should add hands that you feel comfortable playing because it’s likely you’ll make confident decisions with them after the flop.

 

A lot of players will add hands like Ac-8d in steal position when they try to attack the blinds.  Now, I’m not completely opposed to playing these types of hands, but only in certain situations. The problem is that ace-rag hands are extremely difficult to play after the flop. The decisions you’ll face with them become much more complex. 

 

Consider these problems if you do get called with an ace-rag hand:

•  If an ace comes on the flop, you’ll have to worry about your weak kicker.
• You probably won’t get called by a player with a weaker ace-high hand. And, if the flop were     to come A-7-2 and an opponent does call, he’s probably got you beat.
• Face it; most flops just aren’t going to help anyway.
• Your ace-rag hand can put you in a tricky situation where you make a bad call, merely hoping that your opponent is running a bluff. 

Another set of starting hands that can be added include such combos as K-5 suited or Q-7 suited but these hands have problems of their own.

 

Say you get lucky and make your flush with the suited K-5 or Q-7. It would be almost impossible to avoid losing a huge stack of chips to any opponent who hung on to his ace -- a commonly made play -- and ultimately made the nut flush.

 

Of course, you’d have kicker trouble with the suited K-5, too. With a flop of K-7-2, for example, you’d have to figure that any opponent who also has a king will have you outkicked.

Hands like A-8 and K-7 do fairly well hot and cold meaning that if there is no further betting, they’d win a decent amount of the time. But when you factor in betting, these hands have a tendency to lose large pots and win small ones, and that’s not a good combination.

 

That being said, when playing on a short stack or in a fast-paced tournament where you’re often forced to move all-in, you can reasonably add these hands to your repertoire.

 

In deep-stack tournaments, though, these hands are simply more trouble than they’re worth. The best hands to add in these tourneys are suited connectorsbecause they have the potential to make both straights and flushes.

 

Say you choose to play a hand like 5c-6c and get to see the flop. You probably won’t have to worry about your kicker if your sixes pair on the flop and that’s a good thing. If you do make your flush, great, but be wary of big pots with reraises because it’s quite possible that your opponent made a bigger flush.

 

Make your straight, though, and you’ve hit pay dirt! That hand will win a very high percentage of the time. And because it’s so well disguised, you’ll stand to win a monster pot against any player with a hand like pocket aces or better.  

 

But regardless of the non-traditional starting hands you decide to add to your play list, react to any reraise in the same way by laying down your hand.

 

© 2009 Card Shark Media.  All rights reserved.

Online Poker Video Tutorial Strategy for Winning Money

Peter Eastgate - 2008 Main Event WSOP Champion

---

Peter Eastgate - 2008 Main Event WSOP Champion

Two weeks after the conclusion of the WSOP Main Event and Las Vegas is still buzzing with poker excitement. For me, though, it's been several hectic weeks of travel to host a couple of important charity poker tournaments. I started in Montreal for the Starlight Foundation, then to Philadelphia for the Children's Hospital, and finally made it to Phoenix for my own charity tournament, Hold'em for Heroes.

In today's column, we turn back the clock and learn about last year's Main Event champion, Danish pro Peter Eastgate, as excerpted from my just-released book, Deal Me In:

I went to college for just half a year, studying economics at Aarhus University in Denmark. While there, I started playing poker with friends in live games. One friend told me about playing online and I found that I really enjoyed it.

One aspect of online play that I enjoyed most was playing multiple tables at once. I could fold two hands but still be involved in plenty of action at two other tables. Sometimes I'd play as many as seven tables at a time but most of the time just four or five.

When you're playing multiple tables, you can learn the game very quickly because you're exposed to many different hands and situations in a short period of time.

I first realized that I could make enough money playing poker for it to become my career in the summer of 2006. By then, I started beating medium-stakes games regularly and made about $300,000 by the end of that year.

I qualified for the 2008 World Series of Poker Main Event via the Ladbrokes Poker website. Early in the tournament, I encountered hundreds of amateurs who all dreamed of playing in the WSOP Main Event. For them, it was like a fairy tale. One thing I immediately noticed was that the tournament attracted many bad players strictly because they wanted to be part of the event; they knew they had no shot to win but they entered anyway.

I hadn't made much of a mark in live tournament play prior to the WSOP Main Event. In fact, before the WSOP, my greatest accomplishment had been making the final table at the 2007 Irish Poker Open where I finished ninth.

At the Main Event, one factor that played a role in my success was that because I had not played in many live tournaments, and was not a known entity around Las Vegas, some players might have overlooked me or looked past me. Not that I think anyone showed me a lack of respect but I don't believe that many players thought I was a real threat to win.

When I play poker, I'm known for staying calm and collected at all times – at least on the outside. Inside, however, I'm really feeling the tension. I played a little below average for the first three or four days and went all-in only twice. After that, though, I never had my entire stack threatened. There were moments when players had me covered but I was mentally prepared for them to make a move or to try to knock me out.

At the final table, I went heads-up against Russian pro Ivan Demidov. I had never played against him but I had watched him play on Day 5 and Day 7.I knew a little about how he played. I knew he was capable of some very misleading moves. In fact, he did try some tricky things, but unfortunately for him, I had a number of very strong hands that I would never fold.

I ending up winning the tournament and earned about $9 million. I also became the youngest WSOP Main Event champion in history, breaking the 20-year record that had been held by Phil Hellmuth.

The Youtube Poker Challenge Part 4

The Youtube Poker Challenge Part 3

Karmakrazy13 Welcome Video

The Youtube Poker Challenge Part 2

206

Managing Your Poker Bankroll

Steve Zolotow

December 1st, 2009

People always ask, “How much do I need to play in a certain stake game?” The usual answer to all poker questions is, “It depends.” But in this case, it is the wrong question. The question really should be, “Given my temperament and current financial situation, how much can I risk in a game?”
Let’s examine these components. First is your temperament. Years ago, Mike Caro distinguished between two types of players – plodders and adventurers. I like to put poker players into three categories. First are the plodders. They are extremely risk adverse and would rather play for pennies than take a chance of going broke. Next are the normal players. The normal players are willing to take moderate risk if they think they have a reasonable advantage. Lastly there are the plungers. They love to take extreme risk. They are the poker equivalents of mountaineers who want to reach the top of Mount Everest. The risk in question is, of course, losing a large percentage of your bankroll or, in the worst case, going broke.
There are many gradations of each of these types, and many players may go from plodders when winning to plungers when losing. Likewise, external circumstances may change a player. Losing a job, getting married, having a kid, etc. make some players eager to avoid risk and others desperate to win a fortune.
The second component to examine is your financial situation, specifically your bankroll. Some people have jobs, businesses or other outside sources of income. Some do not. I am going to divide bankroll types into three categories – small, medium and large. A small bankroll is an amount you could get in a month or less from working, from your business or from your investments. For some people this may be a few hundred and for others a few hundred thousand. A medium bankroll should take about six months to accumulate. A large bankroll takes at least a year. If you have no outside sources of income, treat your bankroll as large. Losing a small bankroll is distracting, losing a medium one is disturbing and losing a big one is disastrous.
Your temperament should not change from session to session. It is possible that you might want to adjust your risk threshold a little higher for great games and a little lower for bad ones. Before starting any session of any game, determine what your bankroll is and then refer to the chart below. This chart gives my opinion of the correct percentage of your bankroll to risk in any game. Use the appropriate percentage to calculate the amount you can risk.

	Plodder	Normal	Plunger
Small	10%	15%	30%
Medium	5%	10%	20%
Large	3%	5%	10%

If you lose that amount, I’d advise you to quit for the day. If you don’t want to quit, make sure you re-calculate the amount you can lose starting from your diminished bankroll. As long as you continually recalculate the amount you can risk, you will never go broke. If you are playing in games where you have the worst of it, you will eventually end up with such a small bankroll that it is meaningless. But in general, you will be able to risk larger amounts (not larger percentages) as your winnings accumulate, and you will be forced to play smaller when you are losing.
Why can you take more risk with a small bankroll? Because it is easier to get it back. As your bankroll gets larger, it becomes harder to replace it and going broke becomes more disastrous. It is much easier to rebuild a bankroll of five thousand then to rebuild one of five million. (Yes, there are players who have built up a bankroll of five million or more, and then gone broke or even into debt.) While these guidelines are customized to provide bankroll management strategies for a variety of temperaments and bankroll sizes, they will enable a winning player to avoid disasters and steadily increase his bankroll.

The Youtube Poker Challenge Part 1

The youtube poker challenge

11$ start = 10x 1.10 45 mans

11$ below play 1.10$ 45 mans

11$-32.50$ play 3.25$ 45 mans

32.50$-65.00$ play 6.50$ 45 mans

65.00$-120.00$ play 12$ 45 mans

200$
Step 1:
I cannot take the bankroll below $11 with any buy in except for $1.10.

Step 2: When the bankroll reaches $14.25, I can play $3.25 SNGs.

Step 3: When the bankroll reaches $39, I can play $6.50 SNGs. If a $6.50 takes you below $33, go back to Step 2.

Step 4: When the bankroll reaches $76, I can play $11 SNGs. If an $11 takes you below $65, go back to Step 3.

Defending Jeff Shulman's 9-9 Fold at the November Nine

Defending Jeff Shulman's 9-9 Fold at the November Nine

Let's continue reviewing the lesson plan I created for Jeff Shulman at the World Series of Poker November Nine final table.

Starting play with $20 million in chips and blinds at $125,000/$250,000 plus a $20,000 ante, I advised Jeff to play super-tight and make five times the big blind opening bets when entering pots. Jeff's father, Barry Shulman, who recently won the WSOPE using this same strategy, agreed that this was the best way for Jeff to proceed.

By the way, I correctly predicted that Phil Ivey would also play super-tight poker. Why wouldn't he? Jeff and Phil were clearly the best players; they had ample opportunity to play patiently and wait for great situations to develop. Just let the amateurs melt down, blow up, and give away their chips!

Keep in mind, the pressure on all players was massive. Playing in front of a live audience and ESPN cameras for millions of dollars would surely cause a couple of the final table players to self-destruct.

With the blinds at $200,000/$400,000, Shulman opened for $1.75 million on the button with pocket nines and Ivey moved all-in from the big blind for $6.9 million more.

A little history: Shulman had already folded several times on the button when Ivey was in the big blind. This time, when Jeff raised it up, he assumed that Ivey knew that he had at least a semi-strong hand.

On the live internet broadcast, I said, "Ivey doesn't look super-strong. I think he would move all-in here with A-9 offsuit. Jeff should call with A-Q and maybe even A-J."

Well, Shulman actually folded his 9-9. Word rapidly spread that Ivey had K-Q, which happened to be true.

Pro players Barry Greenstein, Mike Matusow, and Howard Lederer all opined that it was a clear call situation for Jeff and his pocket nines. Not me, I'm in total agreement with Jeff. I think it was a clear fold.

I look at the whole story when I make poker decisions. Did Jeff's 9-9 figure to be good? Yes. Would I make that call in a side game? Yes. So, on the surface, it didn't appear to be a good fold.

But it was a fold that would leave Jeff with $14 million - more than enough chips considering the deep structure in place at the final table. With $14 million chips, Jeff could easily wait for a better situation where he could go against one of the weaker players.

A call, however, would leave Shulman with either $7 million or $25 million. The former would cripple him, put his tournament in jeopardy, and probably force him to play big pots with weaker holdings.

I love the fold because I love to protect my chips. Better to fold and wait until some other players are eliminated and then put your chips all-in when you know you have the best hand. That's how to make a big lay down.

Jeff followed his plan perfectly. A few hours later, he was able to move all-in with A-K against Joe Cada's A-J.

One all-in pot in ten hours of play is the definition of risk-free poker!

Then, with only five players remaining, Jeff again had Cada all-in with J-J against Cada's 3-3 but Cada got lucky and outdrew Jeff as a four-and-a-half-to-one underdog.

There's no doubt in my mind that Jeff's 9-9 fold was solid, especially when you consider the complete story. One thing's for certain, Jeff Shulman deserved a better outcome.

Next week, I'll discuss an even more controversial fold by Shulman with A-K pre-flop.

-Phil Hellmuth

Karmakrazy13 Pokerstars Multi Table Tournament Part 2

Karmakrazy13 Pokerstars Multi Table Tournament Part 1

205

Being Focused

Huckleberry Seed

November 24th, 2009

In the world of Full Tilt Poker avatars there are no bad hair days.
Not the type of thought I want to be having at an FTOPS final table. I want my mind absorbing and processing just the right information the best it can to put my creative mind in position to "play Mozart" to the ears of my opponents who I deem capable of appreciating it. I want to be focused. In the moment. In the flow of the game. In the "Zone".
A great way to enhance one’s ability to focus in my opinion is fasting. On a 15 minute break early in a 500 player field NLH tournament at Foxwoods several years back, I walked to the food court, in a conversation with an old school player from my table. I procured a calorie laden sandwich. "Want anything?" I asked. "A hungry dog hunts best" the wise old man replied. I took the saying to heart. I didn't eat the sandwich or anything else the rest of the tournament. I played very well, especially near the end (it was a one day tournament that lasted 22 hours) and won the tournament.
David Williams didn't need a wise old poker player to teach him the value of fasting for poker focus – he figured it out on his own. I was not surprised after his tournament successes to hear him tell me that he would eat nothing during his tournaments and just drink a bit of tomato juice here and there throughout the tournament to ensure his brain was getting sufficient glucose to function at its best.
Yoga and meditation can also be great ways to clear your mind and get you ready to focus on the game. Weeding through a yoga class that was just starting on our way out of the gym after a hoops session, we decided to jump in. We then headed to the casino and after that night’s poker session, my friend Joe said he had never played with such clear-minded focus, and accredited that to yoga. David Hayden, a Seven-Card Stud poker pro, swears by yoga to improve your poker game, golf game and most aspects of your life.
Dan Harrington attributes much of his ability to stay focused down the stretch of a poker tournament to his competitive chess career before he became a poker player. A competitive chess match can be quite long, six or even eight hours sometimes. In chess, one mistake can cost you the game, just as in NLH where one mistake can cost you your whole stack.
If the mental toughness Dan developed that kept him from making blunders in chess was transferred over to poker, your skills and mental focus developed at other endeavors may too. Try to be aware of any mental focus related skills you have and see how they relate to poker. Perhaps you’re just not too mentally tough yet. If something bad happens at the poker table you usually crumple immediately, and after an hour or two your mind always starts to wander. Maybe you need to try standing on your head for an hour while staring at a dot on the wall (I did it for a bet once).
As for meditation, I was first introduced to the world of Zen Buddhism by well rounded intellectual Howard Lederer. I really think practicing various forms of meditation will greatly help your ability to focus at the poker table. After experimenting a bit with various forms of meditation you could try to make poker your form of meditation! Personally, I enjoy the writing of Vietnamese Buddhist monk poet and teacher Thich Nhat Hanh, as well as contemporary spiritual teacher Eckhart Tolle (author of the bestseller "The Power of Now") and I would like to thank them for improving the quality of my life as well as the focus of my poker game.
I think simple desire and motivation go hand in hand with focus. Young players who have a strong desire to win or compete or improve their game are super focused without realizing it and probably don’t know what it means to be unfocused. It just comes naturally when you want it badly enough.
Well let’s leave it at that before I say "focus" more times than Alan Iverson can say "talkin’ about practice". I hope my writing has lead you on the path to be more focused in your poker and in so doing find that place deep in the flow of the game where plays that amaze are made and the joy of the game is found.

Lessons with Jeff Shulman - Part 2

Lessons with Jeff Shulman - Part 2

Last week I wrote that Jeff Shulman had asked me to coach him in preparation for the World Series of Poker November Nine final table.

To recap:I advised Jeff to play super-tight poker at the beginning of the final table, come in before the flop by raising about five times the big blind, and play low-risk poker because with $20 million in chips and blinds at $125,000/$250,000, there was ample time for him to sit back and let other players bust out of the tournament.

I built an advisory team comprised of Diego Cordovez, a WSOP bracelet winner in No Limit Hold'em, Barry Shulman, Jeff's father and winner of this year's WSOPE Main Event, Cy Young award-winning pitcher Orel Hershisher to sharpen Jeff's mental edge, and a few others to allow us to simulate final table action.

We played for dozens of hours.We reviewed every single hand that had been played by the other members of the November Nine.We watched every Main Event episode on ESPN, rewound and reviewed every bluff and every super-strong hand while looking for physical tells and discernable betting patterns.

All this so Jeff Shulman would have a great feel for his opponents once final table play began.

We set up chipstacks at a poker table in accordance with the seat order of the final players, including a picture of each player in front of his respective stack.We played countless hours of seven-handed, six-handed, five-handed, four-handed, and three-handed poker, with each of us assuming the identity of one of Jeff's competitors.

Whenever Jeff entered a pot, action paused while we dissected his tactics in detail.Was he playing tight enough?Was he moving his chips well?Were there alternative plays that better suited the particular situation?

I even pulled a new tactic out of my bag of tricks.I advised Jeff to make big pre-flop raises in order to keep the other players out of the pot with their small pairs and suited connectors.I wanted to deter other players from bluffing Jeff pre-flop.The plan was correctly based on the fact that it's next to impossible to bluff a guy like Jeff who's playing super-tight poker and raising big whenever he does enter a pot.

We wanted to keep Jeff in the game for as long as possible by winning small uncontested pots and keep him away from major catastrophes.

By the time Jeff sat down at the Main Event final table, with ESPN cameras rolling and thousands of spectators observing in the Rio's Penn and Teller Theatre, he was remarkably calm and confident.

Jeff stuck to the game plan.He pushed all-in only once in the first ten hours of play, with A-K against Joe Cada's A-J.When his hand held up, it appeared that the rest of the field was in real trouble.

Only fifty minutes later, however, Cada moved all-in with pocket threes and was called by Jeff with pocket jacks in a pot worth over $22 million.Win this one and Jeff would have $30 million at the start of four-handed play!

It didn't happen.Cada hit a miracle three on the flop and Jeff was left crippled with about $7 million chips and five players remaining.Then, Shulman lost a race with 7-7 against A-9 and was out in fifth place.

Would I have changed a single tactic regarding how I coached Jeff Shulman?No way.

If not for an unlikely three to hit on the flop for Cada, Jeff may very well have won the 2009 WSOP Main Event.Well played, Jeff!

-Phil Hellmuth

A Poker Tip, You Can Be Thankful For.

GIVE ME YOUR INPUT!!! Hit Subscribe!!

Post comments

204

Using Aggression Wisely

David Oppenheim

November 17th, 2009

In the game of Hold ‘em, especially No Limit, aggression is usually rewarded. By being aggressive, you are putting your opponent in an uncomfortable situation and forcing him to either make a hand or make a bluff. You take over control of the pot and put yourself in the driver’s seat.
And yet, for as much good as aggression can do, I still see far too many players either being too aggressive or misusing aggression altogether. Aggression is one of the biggest tools a poker player has, but it needs to be used wisely at all times.
For instance, I see a lot of young players getting out of line and being overly aggressive with hands like A-Q and A-J. They put in huge raises with these hands thinking they’re making a smart move, but really they’re just scaring the dead money away. There are so many bad players in tournaments these days that there’s just no excuse for not being patient – eventually these players will make a mistake and ship you a lot of chips. There’s no need to risk such a large portion of your stack with a hand like that.
Many newer players are guilty of misusing aggression. They see their favorite player on TV pulling off a huge bluff or dominating their table with aggression, and they want to follow suit. The problem is that these newer players really have no idea how to be aggressive. You can’t just be randomly aggressive and hope to take control of the action; your aggression needs to be calculated.
Knowing when to be aggressive is something that comes with time and experience. If you lack that knowledge and have no feel for the game you’re playing, that aggression is going to come back to haunt you.
I would advise all newer players not to focus their game on aggression at first. You want to start out by playing solid, ABC poker. Focus on the basics and, when you have those down, you can start thinking about bringing aggression into your game.
Being aggressive in poker is a very fine art. Watching a player like Phil Ivey at the poker table can be every bit as awe inspiring as looking at a Picasso. But players like Ivey have honed their aggression over time, using their experience at the tables to shape the way they play. Put in your time at the tables, and you too may one day paint a masterpiece.

203

Don’t Waste Money on Advertising

Steve Zolotow

November 11th, 2009

Table image can be a very powerful tool at the poker table, especially in ring games where you can expect to play a long session against the same opponents. But when it comes to tournament play, trying to project a certain table image can often times prove to be a futile endeavor. Your attempt might end up costing you precious chips now without gaining a later advantage, since you may be at a different table against different opponents a few minutes later.
Many players try to project a table image that is exactly the opposite of how they actually play. Tight players might try to project a loose table image by showing a bluff early on, while loose players trying to project a tight image aim to showdown a hand with the nuts so other players think they only play premium hands.
While doing this might result in winning a big pot somewhere down the line, it can also cost you chips to “sell” this specific table image. You really have to ask yourself if losing this equity early in a tournament is worth the potential equity that may or may not be gained later. It is usually not worth making a suspect early bluff to convince your opponents that you’re a maniac. Even if they believe you, you might move tables. Are you really willing to invest more chips to sell that image again?
My advice, especially for novice players, is to let your cards determine your table image. If you’re running hot to start a tournament and winning a lot of pots without going to a showdown, you’ll develop an aggressive table image. This can lead to winning a few big pots down the line, especially if you run into a situation where you pick up a monster hand but your opponent puts you on a bluff. But be cautious about trying to steal pots, since your opponents are more likely to suspect your bets and raises.
Likewise, if you start a tournament by getting bad hands and folding a lot, you’ll develop a tight table image. If you pick your spots right, this tight image will enable you to pull off a few nice bluffs and pad your chip stack with some extra ammunition. You might also pick up a good hand that doesn’t get called. If you show it, it will reinforce their perception of you as a tight player, and create more bluffing opportunities.
I am by no means advocating playing poker strictly based on what hands you’re dealt. You always need to be aware of the other factors in play at your table. But letting the cards do the work for you is a risk-free and effective way to establish a table image. Otherwise, you’re essentially paying for a billboard above your head that either says, “Loose Player: I will bluff you,” or, “Tight Player: I’m waiting for Aces.” Image creating plays work best against moderate opponents who don’t know your game very well. Superior players will quickly work out your style – loose, tight, or a combination (gear-shifter). Playing well is a lot more important than creating an erroneous image.
Or, to put it another way, don’t waste your money on advertising. You are not a salesman, you’re a poker player.

202

Stack Size Limbo

Jeff Madsen

November 3rd, 2009

When you’re playing a tournament and sitting on around 15 big blinds, you can face some seriously tough pre-flop decisions. Welcome to stack size limbo. It feels likes you have too many chips to push all-in, but a standard pre-flop raise can prove disastrous if an aggressive player comes over the top and puts you to the test.

So, is it best to push or to raise in this kind of situation? First of all, it depends on what type of table you’re playing at. If it’s a table full of aggressive players who are likely to make a move if you come with a standard pre-flop raise, then pushing all-in is probably your best bet.

If you’re at a table that is playing tight, you might be able to get away with making a standard raise. Keep in mind, though, that if you do get re-raised at a tight table, it’s time to let that hand go.

I recently played in a tournament at the Bellagio where I found myself in stack size limbo. I was sitting on approximately 15 big blinds and, unfortunately, at a table full of aggressive players.

The action was folded around to me in late position, and I looked down to see pocket 4s. Not a bad hand, but also no reason to jump for joy, especially at a table full of players who have no problem re-popping you with something like 5-6 suited.

So, it was decision time. If I put in the standard pre-flop raise, there was a pretty good chance that someone would re-raise me and I’d have to make a decision for all of my chips. On the other hand, pushing all-in would pressure the other players and force them to make the tough decisions. Basically, going all-in takes the play away, which is to my advantage.

I decided to push and, although I wouldn’t have hated a call too much, wound up winning the pot when the rest of the players passed. If I’d had 20 big blinds in that situation, I would’ve felt more comfortable putting in a standard raise, since I’d still have enough chips left if I was forced to fold.

So, 20 big blinds for me is definitely too much to just push all-in. There are plenty of online players out there who’ll push with stacks as deep as 20 or even 25 big blinds, but I still feel like you have enough chips left at that point not to get trigger happy and ever have to make that decision.

If you read your table correctly and play your cards right, you should be able to move out of stack size limbo and into deep stack comfort.

Going With Your Gut

By Brandon Cantu

Although poker is a game of math, odds and optimal strategies, sometimes it all comes down to a feeling. Being able to trust that instinct and go with your read can be the difference between being a good player, and being a great player.

Let‘s look at a hand I played during the recent World Series of Poker Europe.

The blinds were 100/200 with a 25 ante and at my table was a Full Tilt red pro whose name escapes me. I was sitting on about 45,000 in chips and he had a little bit less with about 30,000. The action was folded around to me in fifth position and I made my standard preflop raise. The person in the cutoff called, and so did the pro that was on the button. The flop was 10-10-6, and although I missed it I felt that my opponents most likely missed as well, so I bet 1,600. The gentleman in the cutoff folded, and the red pro on the button just called.

As soon as he called my bet, my gut told me was floating. For those unfamiliar, floating, is calling a bet with absolutely nothing on the flop in hopes of either picking up a hand, or a draw on the turn or also to simply try and outplay their opponent, in this case me, on the turn or river.

Assuming he was going to play back at me no matter what the turn was, I decided to check raise before even seeing the turn card, which was an off-suit deuce. As I anticipated after I checked my opponent bet 3,000, a little smaller than a pot-sized bet and I raised it up to 10,000 total. My opponent than did something I was not quite expecting and put in another raise, making it 17,500 and leaving himself with 10,000 behind. Even though I had nothing in this situation, my instinct could not get past the initial feeling that he was floating the turn, and I decided to move all in causing my opponent to quickly fold his hand and watch I as I flipped over my ace-high with a seven kicker.

Playing this type of poker can be very stressful, as if you do get called a lot of the time people will give you odd looks and question your sanity. However when you do go with your gut, and it‘s correct it can give you a huge deal of confidence, which can help you focus even harder at the task at hand; winning the tournament.

Here are some tips to help you get your poker instincts finely tuned:

1. Don‘t be afraid to fail: So often you will here “I know your bluffing, but I just don‘t have a hand.” or I‘ll let you get away with it this time.” Instead of giving up, why not put your opponent to the test and go with your read. Sure there will be times that you are wrong, but that‘s OK. It‘s all part of the process of getting better as a player. Play some lower limit sit-n-go‘s or MTT‘s on Ultimate Bet and practice following your instincts. You‘ll be surprised at often your opponent will fold.


2. Understand the Situation: Its easy to get caught up in the moment when you are deciding to go with your gut, but be aware of all the factors at hand. If you move all-in, does your opponent have enough chips behind to fold, or will he have to call you? Is the player tilting due to losing a big hand just prior to this? Are there softer players at the table to pick on? Analyze everything, because although your read my be dead on, there are times when no matter what your gut says your opponent will call you, and his junky hand may even be ahead of your junky hand..


3. Mix it Up: Utilizing moves like this with no hand is extremely dangerous, because you can then use a similar play, or move when you actually have a monste.. In these cases, you‘ll still be using your instincts, but instead of feeling out if a player is weak, try and feel how strong he is. If you get a sense he can‘t get away from it, put him to the test, you‘ll happily take some huge pots on occasion.


4. It‘s ok to fold: Some times going with your gut means folding. We‘ve all been there wanting to just stick it in with aces, knowing full well our opponent out flopped us, but we still make the crying call. Stop it. If you think your beat, fold your hand and wait for a better spot. There is no reason to go broke when every ounce of you is screaming “Fold!”

Becoming a winning poker player does not happen over night. While using your instincts is an imperative part of the game, like anything else you need to practice and hone in on your skills before putting them to use on the biggest stages. So get out there on the tables and play, but remember to use some of that time to work on new ways to improve your game and if that means going with your gut, then go for it.

150

Playing Over-Cards

Andy Bloch

June 11th, 2008

For many players, there's nothing prettier than peeking at their hole cards and seeing paint. A-K. K-Q. Q-J. They're all big hands and, often times, very playable ones, especially in position. Sometimes though, your masterpiece of a starting hand can lead to a very ugly result.

The fact is over-cards can be some of the trickiest hands to play well if they don't connect with the board. So how do you avoid going broke when you whiff with your overs? In the words of Kenny Rogers, "you gotta know when to hold 'em and you gotta know when to fold 'em."

Let's say you're in late position or in the blinds with over-cards and are facing an all-in bet after seeing a ragged flop like 8-5-3 rainbow. What do you do? The answer is an unequivocal "It depends". First of all, what could your opponent possibly be betting here? Top pair? An over-pair? A set? Your read of your opponent's hand should greatly influence your decision because if he's holding anything but a set, you may have odds to call.

That brings me to the next question: how much is he betting? If your opponent's all-in bet is worth half the pot or less, I think you have to call with any two over-cards so long as you think they're still live. Over-cards give you six potential outs to the board, meaning that you're only about a 3-1 dog against top pair if you have no straight or flush draw possibilities. Your over-cards may even be ahead if you think your opponent is pushing all-in on his own draw or is bluffing at the pot.

In situations where you're not facing an all-in bet, the decision becomes a little harder because you must not only consider the size of your opponent's current bet, but also the size of his next potential bet. If you're both deep stacked and you call on the flop, you could find yourself facing a sizable bet on the turn. In this situation, I believe mucking your hand and looking for a better spot is the preferred option.

Another thing to consider in this type of situation is your position relative to your opponent. If you're playing from position, you may want to consider staying in the hand even if you miss the flop – especially if you can do so cheaply. For one thing, calling a cheap bet on the flop might let you hit one of your overs, giving you what may likely be the best hand. For another thing, being in position can let you try and steal the pot away on the turn or river if your opponent shows further weakness on those streets.

Facing this same situation out of position is much riskier as your opponent has control of the hand and gets to act behind you on every street. I'm much more likely to throw my over-cards away here and look to play a better hand later on.

While position can be a key factor in determining if you carry on with your over-cards, the texture of the board is also something to be considered. On a flop like the one earlier – 8-5-3 rainbow – I'm much more likely to at least see the turn with my two over-cards than I am if the flop is more coordinated, like 9-8-7 or something that brings flush or straight draw possibilities. Why? Because unless my opponent is holding a pocket pair, it's just as likely that he missed the flop the same way I did. On a more coordinated flop, there are more ways for my opponent to connect and, even if I hit one of my cards, I could be drawing dead against a flush or straight.

If I'm in a pot with multiple opponents, I'm even more likely to play my over-cards conservatively because there are that many more hands that can easily beat me. Where I might try to continuation bet the flop against a single player, I'll almost certainly check against multiple players because I don't want to give someone the chance to raise behind me and force me to give up chips I don't need to waste.

If someone does bet and another player calls, I can very easily give up my hand without having lost too much. If, on the other hand, someone else bets and the action folds back to me, I can determine whether I want to fold, call or possibly even raise in an attempt to steal the pot myself.

When all is said and done, the key to playing over-cards successfully is not to fall in love with your starting hand no matter how pretty it may first appear. Play your hand smart after the flop and you can avoid an ugly result.

Playing Against Limpers

Playing Against Limpers

It’s common for beginners to set themselves up for disaster by misplaying hands before the flop. Then, they complain about their bad luck when they lose.

Well, bad luck has nothing to do with it. Rather, they likely committed a critical error by misplaying a pot against limpers who called their too small pre-flop raise.

Here’s an example from a recent tournament.

The blinds were 100-200 with a 25 ante. A beginner was in the small blind with pocket aces. He didn’t want to scare off the other players so he tossed in a very modest 300 chip raise.

Two players limped in and called, as did the big blind. They correctly believed it was worth risking a mere 300 chips to try to crack any hand, even pocket aces.

Here’s the first tip: When any player shows interest in a hand by calling the initial bet, they almost certainly will call a tiny pre-flop raise, too.

Okay, so the rookie is now in a four-way action pot. He has exposed the strength of his hand by his pre-flop raise yet has failed to gather any information about what hands his opponents might have. To make matters worse, he’ll need to act first after the flop.

The flop comes 10c-8d-5c. This time he decides to make a stronger bet, throwing out 2,000 chips. The first two players fold but the next player shoves all-in for 10,000 more. The beginner calls.

His opponent turns over 8s-5s to win the pot. The beginner moans about his back luck and berates his opponent for playing a bad hand.

Let’s dissect this hand.

I rarely use the term never when it comes to poker but I’ll use it here -- never make a stingy raise before the flop after someone has called in front of you. If you want to raise, make it meaningful.

With two players already calling the 200 chip big blind, a post-flop raise to around 1,000 would have been considered standard. But the beginner’s initial small raise only served to reveal that he had a decent hand. With that knowledge, other players simply wouldn’t play the hand after the flop unless they’d caught a big piece of it.

Another error in the beginner’s play was that he raised from the small blind. It’s the worst seat at the table because you are forced to act first on every street after the flop.

Remember, position is a powerful tool. Avoid getting tangled up in tough situations after the flop when you are out of position. That, of course, doesn’t mean you should automatically fold pocket aces. But make a sizable raise that protects your hand.

Professional players would never play this hand the way the rookie did. Instead, they’d punish limpers by raising large amounts before the flop, especially when they had position. They’d use the power of position to isolate weak players and then try to outplay them heads-up after the flop.

Say a weak player limps in for 200. A pro in position would raise the bet to 800 with a hand like J-9. He wouldn’t necessarily be hoping to catch a straight or a full house; he’s simply trying to knock everyone else out of the hand and steal the pot away from the weakest player at the table.

Position in poker is similar to being the dealer in blackjack. The dealer has a big advantage because if you bust, he wins. At the poker table, when a weak player busts by missing the flop, a skilled player will go for the win with an aggressive bet on the flop.

© 2009 Card Shark Media. All rights reserved.

155

Two Sides to Every Coin (flip)

Team Full Tilt

July 16th, 2008

Poker is a game of choices. Some of these choices are fairly straight forward and simple while others take a lot of thought. The thing is that when all is said and done, there may not be just one correct path to winning a given hand; it's all up to you to decide what road to travel.

With that in mind, we asked Team Full Tilt's Howard Lederer and Chris Ferguson to share their thoughts on one of poker's trickiest decisions – the coin flip. Should players be willing to put everything on the line in a coin flip situation? Here are two different sides to the coin flip question:

Chris Says:

For the most part, coin flips are something that I tend to avoid. You never want to take on a negative EV proposition, so you can pretty easily fold a hand like A-K when you're certain your opponent is holding a high pocket pair like Jacks or Queens. Some players are willing to take a negative EV coin flip early on in a big tournament in order to accumulate chips, but this is an incorrect decision (unless you're trying to catch an early flight or make like Ivey to the golf course).

Of course, there are a couple of situations where pressing a coin flip can be the right move. For example, if you think your opponents are better players than you, then it might be correct to take a coin flip. When you're outclassed in a game and are certain that you'll be outplayed after the flop, taking a coin flip can help even the playing field.

By that same token, you should be willing to press a coin flip situation every chance you get against a player who thinks he's better than you. Make him avoid taking the coin flip by raising and putting a lot of pressure on him to make that decision. If he really thinks of himself as the superior player, he'll want to avoid that situation and keep folding until he gets the chance to try and outplay you after the flop. He may think he's the better player, but if you put a lot of pressure on him, you may end up outplaying him.

Howard Says:

I think people try to avoid them too much, especially after they've already committed chips to the pot. If the pot has 1,000 in it and you have to put your last 500 chips in to make the call, you're getting 2-1 on your money – yet people dodge this situation all the time. It's just wrong; you should love to take 2-1 on a coin flip even if you only have a 48% chance of winning.

When you have a hand like A-K and you could be running into Aces or Kings, committing chips to a coin flip is obviously not something you should be looking to do. But at the same time, when you're getting 2-1 on your money in a likely coin flip situation, I think its right to take the flip. It's a pretty big disaster if you're holding Jacks and don't want to flip against something like A-K, but it turns out your opponent has pocket 9s.

The whole point of a coin flip is that yes, sometimes you have the classic A-K versus Queens race. But what about all the times you have A-K and the other player has A-Q. When you have a hand where you aren't in a coin flip, you likely have your opponent dominated, and you should take that proposition every time.

With that said, there are obviously times when you should not be looking to take a coin flip. When you're in a situation where you have a lot more chips than your opponent, this is a good time not to take that flip. The more of an advantage you have over the other player, the less willing you should be to take the coin flip. Avoid that situation by not committing too many chips to the pot and waiting until after the flop to outplay the competition.

As you can see, there's no one right way to approach a coin flip situation. There are always two sides to every coin.

Misplaying Low Pocket Pairs

By P0ker H0

For the beginning player, I would have to say the most common mistake is either in bet sizing or misplaying low pocket pairs. I can even remember what it felt like to get dealt 44 UTG, and not have any clue how to best play it. Know that I know folding is most likely the best option, although definitely not always. I’d like to share with you why.

Early in tournaments, I am never folding a low pocket pair in early position if it is an unopened pot. This is because in most tournaments you start with at least 100 big blinds, and you can always afford to see some flops and set mine, to try and win a big pot. What is tricky is late in tournaments with the same hand. Let’s say you are dealt 44 UTG, and you have 80k in chips at 1500 3000 blinds. The players in front of you all have 40k or less, and there are 5 of them. What do you do? Let’s say you open raise to 9k. Know there are 5 people in front of you , who if they re-shove all in, it’s not going to be a ton more to call, and you will more than likely force yourself to call with a pair, as you feel you are getting odds.

So honestly the best thing you can hope for is a fold from all players as you are essentially bluffing with 44. I try and just muck small pocket pairs in early position, in these situations, because I hate pricing myself to call short stack shoves in a situation where I am most likely racing at best. To be honest, someone who is shoving an early position raiser with little fold equity, almost certainly is ahead of 44, if not barely behind. For me, I have decided that raising Low pairs in early position, late in tournaments, just puts you spots where you are almost always unsure of your hand strength and how it matches up against your opponent.

Wow

Click here to view a larger version.

157

Early Tournament Strategies

Allen Cunningham

July 30th, 2008

Many players' first exposure to poker comes from watching WSOP and WPT tournaments on TV, and I think that's great. It's entertaining and you'll see some interesting plays, but viewers have to understand that they shouldn't model their games based on the action they see on TV.

Why? The answer is simple - what you're seeing is unrealistic and edited for television. Players in these televised tournaments often start with very deep stacks (sometimes 10,000 chips or more) and, most of the time, all you'll see on the broadcast is action from the final table where the blinds are high and play is fast. In contrast, the majority of the low buy-in ($1 to $20) tournaments you'll encounter online usually start with stacks of 1,500 and blinds of 10/20.

Because your approach to the early stages of these tournaments is key to whether you'll make the final table, the question is, what should your strategy be?

I suggest adopting a simple approach, especially if you're not a very experienced tournament player. Try not to play too many hands and aim to see a few cheap flops with small/medium pairs if possible because these can provide some the best chances for you to double or even triple up during the first couple of levels. There are many times when you may be able to put in 5% of your stack or less to see a flop and try and hit your set. You're 7-to-1 to flop a set, but you may be getting 20-to-1 implied odds early on since a flopped set will often be the best hand, and you'll have a good chance to double up against weaker players who may overplay top pair.

If you are expecting a few callers, you might want to limp with these hands pre-flop. You may also just want to flat call with these hands if there are already a couple of people in for a small raise when the action gets to you. But, if the action is folded to you in late position, you definitely want to raise and take down the blinds. If you want to play conservatively, you can safely throw away small pairs in early position. As I said previously, you don't want to commit more than about 5% of your stack pre-flop with small and medium pairs (maybe 6% or 7% max), and when you play from early position there's no guarantee that's going to happen.

Of course you also want to be playing your monsters like AA and KK, and other hands like QQ, JJ, AK and AQ. Remember early on when stacks are deep, you're not going to get a lot of action for all of your chips unless you're up against a pretty strong hand.

There are no concrete rules as to how fast you should try to build your stack in the early going, but the main thing you don't want to do is go broke by playing too loose. In smaller online tourneys you will either be in the money or close to the money without having to win too many pots if you can just play tight and hang around for a couple of hours. If you speculate too much or take too many coin-flips when you don't need to early on, chances are that you'll end up on the rail and miss that opportunity.

Even if you make it to the fourth or fifth level with just a little above starting stack, you'll usually be in good enough shape to take a run at the money. Remember, getting into the money and beyond is what counts - so learn how to start your tournaments the right way and give yourself the best chance to be the last player standing at the end.