K of C tournament 2

Carol, the second place finisherJack and Chad enjoying being shortstacked.

Another table.

The final table.

K of C tournament pics 1

Dan shows us his game face. He has a big tell here. I think he needs to use the bathroom.

Marla playing with chips. I am the "little shit" that can't deal cards.

The final 3! Jack (background green shirt) won a bottle of conyac. Congrats.

Walter, member of the Knights of Colombus and eventual winner. Congratulations!

More pictures to come.

Arguably - - -

See the S J-R article about Eric Seiz (front page) on Sunday, August 20th.
Or look at; www.sj-r.com

Thats no misquote. I said it just like it's written.

"Eric is arguably the best tournament no limit hold'em player in Springfield"

Actually I could have said that he's probably the best tournament OR no limit player in town. That would make even more people cranky.

The newspaper article is good for poker, and so would be any discussion about who IS the best player.

I used the word "arguably" because it has four syllables. Those are rarely heard in poker games. Its an anomaly

Hand of the Week: Tournament Edition

Hi guys. It's me again, and it's been awhile since I've posted a hand of the week. I've been a bit busy.

Primarily, I am a cash game player. But there is a surprising amount of local tournaments, as well as the abundance of online donkey-hunting-fests. I hear things from the various poker sites about the difference between cash game players and tournament players. And apart from the obvious strategic differences, there must be some sort of other difference in the swings one takes as a tournament player or as a cash game player. So I tried an experiment. I tried to see if I could make it for one week playing only local tournaments and the s&gs online.

Here is a hand that I played in a s&g which demonstrates the way I believe the early stages of a s&g should be played:

It's the first level of the tournament. There hasn't been much action at all yet, so all the chip stacks are about equal. I don't really have a bead yet on how the other players play, but I have played enough of these s&gs to know that there will be plenty of gamble early. I have [8c 8d] one off the cutoff, there is one limper in early position. I limp.

I think this is a standard play in the first level. There is no need to raise here to "steal the blinds". They are so inconsequentially small that they don't add any sort of leverage to your chip stack. The time for stealing blinds will come when the blinds will add 10-25% of your chip stack. At that point, stealing the blinds will be the same as winnning 3-4 medium sized pots at the beginning levels. Which is easier stealing one blind? Or having to show down 3 or 4 hands at the river, and risking more chips?

The cutoff and SB limp, and the BB checks. The flop comes up [As 6s Ah] pot:100. They check to me. I bet 50.

This is actually a bit more aggressive than I usually play in this spot. But at the same time, my stab isn't that many chips, and by no means commits me. Plus if more than one player puts money in the pot, I don't put another penny in. Maybe I pay off a 30 bet on the river ;) I know my hand might be good anyway. But the downside is that, because I don't gamble early, it's easy for a hand to outplay me on the later streets.

Anyway...

The cutoff calls, and the rest fold.

The cutoff voluntarily put money in the pot before the flop, so while I might have the best hand, the range of hands he could have here on average has me beat. He could be slowplaying an ace, have a pocket pair like me (he might limp w/ nines, or tens however unlikely. I haven't played with him enough to know.) He could have a hand like Js Ts which has me beat on the flop (two live overs and spades) which is certainly a play I've seen people make early in a tournie. The hands I can beat are unlikely to improve, or call much more money to me. So, my plan is not to put another cent in the pot, maybe I call a small river bet and pray he has a 6 or two 7s. If a spade comes, or a paint card or a ten comes, I fold.

The turn is the [8s] for a board of [As 6s Ah] [8s] pot: 200. I check (trapping. I "fear the spade") and he checks behind me.

The 8s is a HUGE gins card for me. It completes spades and gives me full. So I get paid by spades. I think a trap here is right, because I don't need to pick up the pot just yet, as it doesn't represent a large percentage add to my stack. He is unlikely to catch up, and I represent weakness.

The river is [As 6s Ah 8s] [Qh] pot:200. I check again. He bets 100. I check raise move-in for 1330 more. He calls instantly and shows [7d Ad]. And he is knocked out.

My check is very questionable. Because of my check on the turn AND on the river, he might bet 7-7, or lull him into betting his ace, and some people slowplay the spades on the turn, so he will have to bet there anyway. If he's weak he might also feel obligated to bet. That being said, I already missed bets on 4th street, and it's far too easy for him to check a hand like 5-6 on the river, when he might pay off a value bet. All the other likely hands he could have will probably pay off a bet on the river. I do not like my check on the river.

I think moving in on a check-raise isn't that bad. I've already got his 100 bet locked up and added to my stack. Another 150 will not make a big difference at this stage, so I went for the whole thing, by representing a big muscle move bluff, instead of a squeezing bet.

As bad as I played my trap, I think he might've played his hand worse. I don't mind limping in w/ the suited ace in the cutoff, because at the early stage of the tournament you're trying to make nuts for cheap and double through. You have to give up if you just hit top pair though (kicker problems and no need to gamble early). The thing is though, he hits a big flop in a multiway pot and when someone bets into him, he flat calls. The board is fairly safe, but you do not want to price spades into calling here. Plus, three aces is a hand you usually want to play a small to medium sized pot with. The 7 is a terrible kicker, if a big pot comes up he's probably beat and who knows what back door draws he let in by flat calling and charging more money. However he gets lucky when everyone else folds. When he checks behind on the turn, he's completely in the dark to where he's at. A small pair would check there, maybe a big trap, like spades or aces full would trap check there (or in my case 8s full). And if he gets check raised on the turn, he looks at the price, and if it's right he calls, and if he fills on the river, he might get paid. I don't think that calling the check-raise all-in is a big mistake, because that move is used in these s&gs. Also since he didn't define his hand on the earlier streets he doesn't know if it's a big bluff move or a big hand representing a big bluff move. The problem is that the tournament is very very early, and there is no need to gambel there. Let's assume that 60% of the time that move will be a real hand, and 40% of the time it's a real hand. He's still not getting the right price to call there. It's very close to a break even play. AND if he folds he still has plenty of chips to play, considering the blinds.

That's the hand of the week.

Which Hand Do You Like?

An interesting NL situation from this week.

A raise and a call preflop. Two players see flop of;
6c 3c 2h
More bets, raises and all chips get in pot.

"Sleazylawyer" has Ac Kc
"SIU grad" has 6h 4h

The two players disagree about who has the advantage in this situation. Others at the table also disagreed about which is the better hand in this situation. What do you think?

Sleazylawyer has 9 flush card outs to win, and the other 6 Aces and Kings. So -- 15 outs/twice.

SIUgrad has top pair - a winner right now, if neither improve. He also has "redraws" which can beat sleazylawyers 6 outs for one pair. Those are an inside str8 draw (only 3 of which are good) a backdoor flush draw, plus two 6's and two 4's.

Which hand would YOU rather have? Opinions at the table varied from 53% - 47% to the reverse of 47%- 53%.

Don't look it up. I already did that, and the results will surprise you.

A NO LIMIT Lesson from Las Vegas

Playing 1-2 NL with a bunch of young guys.

Dealt T 8s on the button and theres 3 limpers to me. I call, the sb folds, and the bb checks.

Flop is a T 8 8. UTG limper bets out (pot size) 10. Two folders to me, and I am looking at my hole cards. Showing him -- hmmm, do I have a T or an inside straight draw? I call, bb folds.

Turn is a 5. He bets 30. I look at board and call.

River is another 5. I am shaking my head no and looking at my hole cards. He goes all in for 45-ish and I call. He shows KK and leaves in disgust.

Game is now 6 handed and the worst player just left. One other large stack - and he seems a good player. Other players are very short stacks on the table. I play around to my bb and leave. Game is now 5 handed and it breaks up.

So ---- whats the No Limit LESSON here? Well, its the same no limit lesson thats been extensively written about in the '80s and '90s. Its been discussed on many online discussion groups and by knowledgable "old timers" in poker matters.

In NO LIMIT, the money moves (quickly) from the bad players to the good players. The good players are NOT going to put this money back into the game. The bad players will leave the game (sometimes rapidly) when they run out of money. The games will then die out - or decrease in number. Sometimes this takes a little while as the games get tougher and the prior winners become losers. As the games become tougher, even the good players find it less worthwhile.

No Limit games are good for everyone. The losers lose their money quickly - and oftentimes think they've been cheated. The winners get a worse and worse game. The people running the game get less and less of a game to run. Everyone has known this for years - except the young guys who are nowadays running and playing the no limit games.