Seventeen ex basketball players that were my teammates from 1950 to 1954 at Hardin Simmons University descended on Flathead Lake this week for a three day visit. The years rolled back and it wasn’t like we had been apart for over 50 years except for a couple of earlier reunions. The guys brought their wives and we had a terrific time. What a great group of people! We had a cookout on the lake each night and we had a lot of laughs and memories. We took a lot of rides on my pontoon boat that seats 15 people. A couple of us got on the jet skis and I called the rest a bunch of wimps because they wouldn’t get on them. Those things go 60 miles an hour and really give you a rush when you hit a few bumps caused by the wind and other boats. The ex-teammates came from as far away as Florida but most were from Texas. The youngest was 71 and the oldest, who was an army vet before he entered school, was 82.

Even though it was nice to get together, I felt my real age, perhaps for the first time. There is no getting around it, I’m as old as most of them. I do happen to have a youthful spirit, but the body is getting older and older. Oh well, it’s supposed to. Now it’s back to Vegas and getting ready to go to Macau with Todd. We are going to play in the APT and promote DoylesRoom online poker in Asia. We are looking forward to going and enjoying ourselves. It’s a long plane ride and it will be my first time there. The farthest east I have been is the Philippines and I remember how surprised I was that the public seemed to know who I was. They tell me to expect the same in Macau. We also plan on playing in a big cash game while we are there. The minimum buy in is $150,000 but a lot of the rich Chinese buy in for a million dollars. Should be interesting!

Doyle Brunson on Life in Montana

If you have ever driven over 1,000 miles in two days, you know the exact same feeling you have experienced with jet lag. I’ve been sitting around the past few days just chilling out and enjoying the slow paced life here in Montana.

Reflecting on the drive up here, it was pretty boring driving out of Vegas on Interstate 15 North. Mesquite was a nice break in the scenery but when I got to St George, Utah things really changed. The mountains and deep passes were breathtaking with their change of colors. I guess whatever ore was present gave a different hue to the land. There were blue, black, gold and red streaks running through the mountains and all of them were nice.

I had a bittersweet memory as I drove through St George. There is a health spa a few miles outside of town, and my pal the late Chip Reese and I were determined to stay there a few weeks until we lost some weight. It was an expensive spa and we paid a month in advance, about 6,000 dollars each. It was baseball season and we were betting a lot of games so we put a 4,000 dollar satellite system in our rooms where we could sweat the games. We felt it was well worth it. The next day we went to all their exercise classes, even the swimming classes. We ate all our meals at the cafeteria where the diet food was reasonably good. The second night Chip asked me if I had noticed the Sizzler Restaurant where we turned off the highway. When I said yes, he suggested we go eat our last meal there before we really got into this diet. Naturally I said yes, let’s go, so we went there and knocked a hole in their salad bar along with 2 or 3 entrees each. When we finished Chip looked at me, and I looked at him. Without a word being said, we got in his new BMW and drove 120 miles an hour back to Las Vegas. We laughed about that many times afterward because we never attempted to recover any of our money from the spa.

As we drove into the upper part of Utah, I was surprised to see the landscape change from mountains to plains and rolling hills. It looked like a scene from a Western movie with mesas on the hills and the ridges were almost crying for an Indian or a Cowboy riding across the skyline.

When I was a kid I used to read all of Zane Grey’s books about the old west. I always wondered what he was talking about when he talked about the purple mountains. When I got into Idaho it was obvious because the mountains had a deep purplish color. They were gorgeous and the farms were everywhere and the crops, mostly Alfalfa, were in full bloom. Each farmhouse had trees planted on the north side of their houses to keep the cold winter winds from blowing directly on the house.

We saw every kind of animal on our trip. We saw all kinds of cows and horses, lamas, buffalo, sheep, elk, deer and believe it or not, we saw a camel farm near Butte, Montana. I saw an old Texas Longhorn Steer as we came into Montana and I couldn’t help wondering if his ancestors came from Lonesome Dove with the old Texas Rangers Gus McRae and Woodrow Call.

Don’t be surprised if Obama or McCain neither one win Montana in the upcoming presidential election. There are Ron Paul billboards and posters everywhere. All the locals are talking Paul up and encouraging everyone to write him in when they vote. I kinda wish some other states would do the same because he is pro gambling.

Louise Brunson worked her way through the University Of Kentucky and pharmacy school at the University Of Georgia. She was the number 1 pharmacist at a chain of 150 drugstores. She gave birth to 4 great children and she has been a terrific wife and companion to me for 46 years. I say all this so you can see the good far, far outweighs the bad. But she had me captive in an automobile for two long days and she talked my ears off. My eardrums felt like Sitting Bull was having his tom-toms send out messages to all his tribes and I was the messenger. I’m sure some of you guys out there know what I’m talking about!

The Editors Blog The WPTL Makes Its TV Debut

By Eric Raskin
Aug. 19, 2008

A few quick thoughts on the surprisingly entertaining first-ever televised WPTL (World Poker Tour Ladies) tournament that premiered on GSN last night:

It’s interesting to see the contrast in looks when six women have to earn their way to a WPT final table vs. when the WPT picks out who the six will be …

The broadcast included a WPT executive noting that women are the fastest growing segment of the poker population, which has become one of those oft-repeated statements that nobody ever seems to back up with facts. Just once, I want to hear someone say that, then provide some hard data to support it. But as far as I can tell, the entrance of women into poker is not currently moving at a faster rate than the entrance of men. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t, I just want some proof. The estimation that only 3% of the WSOP Main Event field this year was female leaves it unclear at best.

Say what you want about Nancy Todd Tyner’s poker skills, but you have to give her credit for creating an image and using it to her advantage. Everything about the way she looks, dresses, and acts screams “donkey,” and when a talented, experienced player like Vanessa Selbst starts losing to someone whose game she doesn’t respect, the result can be serious tilt—which is exactly what Tyner produced. Selbst truly believed she couldn’t be outplayed, she could only be outrun, and that led her to make mistakes she wouldn’t have made if she’d ignored Tyner’s exterior and viewed her as a capable player.

In the end, Selbst embarrassed herself a bit with her utter disrespect for Tyner, including some snide comments. But there shouldn’t be a double-standard here; when a male player gets whiny and abusive, like Phil Hellmuth, Mike Matusow, etc., we criticize him but we also suggest that it’s good for TV. The same goes here. Maybe Selbst wasn’t ladylike, maybe it was uncomfortable at times, but the flying sparks made it a little more gripping to watch.

Greg Raymer - No Fluke

GO AHEAD AND BLUFF GREG RAYMER. Give it shot. Feel free to expose yourself to a world of hurt. But after the hand plays out, be prepared to look like a complete fool.

Maybe he cripples your stack. Maybe you flee from the casino. Maybe you land in the slammer.

Little good can come from it.

Because it doesn’t matter whether you’re holding 9-4 offsuit or a .44 Magnum, he’ll cram it down your throat so fast you’ll wish you hadn’t gotten out of bed that day.

Yet they keep trying to bully him. Inaccurate perceptions have a way of tricking people into silly endeavors. They take what they’ve seen on ESPN and size him up as a doughy, middle-aged egghead who lucked his way to the 2004 World Series of Poker Main Event championship behind novelty glasses that might as well have come with a pocket protector. They remember a milquetoast with sweat rings, thrusting bundles of that $5-million bounty above his head.

No freaking way I wouldn’t crush that geek if I played him. Or at least that’s what some think. And if they don’t play poker … I’ll just kick his flabby ass and take that money. Whatever.

Observers have been quick to label recent World Series of Poker champions such as Raymer, Chris Moneymaker, and Robert Varkonyi as one-hit wonders, erstwhile amateurs who merely won the lottery. But the days of armchair rounders considering Raymer a pushover are coming to end. In the past year, the former scientist and pharmaceutical patent attorney fought off two men in an armed robbery attempt, harbored thoughts of killing a man who threatened his family, and vindicated his 2004 title by making a long run in this year’s World Series of Poker Main Event, where he finished 25th out of a record field of 5,619 players.

“Part of the attraction of poker is that people can sit at home and feel like they could do as well or better than the players that are having success,” said Erik Seidel, owner of seven World Series bracelets. “I think going so deep this year will give many more people the sense that maybe that guy with the funny glasses isn’t just a lucky goofball, but is a highly experienced and skilled player.”

True enough, Raymer’s reputation has evolved. Whereas many opponents previously have been tempted to test the unassuming fossil collector, he’s now viewed as someone not to be screwed with under any circumstances. An alarming situation unfolded during a World Series of Poker preliminary event in which Raymer, amid a sea of players and tables, stood up and loudly warned an unidentified man he would murder him if the creep didn’t stop harassing Raymer’s wife and making ominous overtures about their young daughter.

And those who witnessed the scene are convinced Raymer meant it. Cheryl Raymer had been watching her husband play cards when a deranged man squatted next to her and started asking questions about the Raymers’ daughter, Sophie, now nine years old. He wanted to know what Sophie looked like, where she was staying during the tournament—questions no parent wants to discuss. A tournament official asked the man to leave, and although the stranger left Cheryl’s side, he remained in the room. By this time, Greg Raymer had been informed of the menace.

“I look over and see him with this totally angry look, like he’s ready to get into a fist fight,” Raymer recalled. “His face was just twisted with hate. He’s talking to people near him and pointing to Cheryl and pointing to me. That’s when I stood up and said something to him. He said something back, and I said ‘If you mess with my family I’m going to f—ing kill you.’”

Even after Raymer had the chance to cool down, and with the benefit of measuring each word on a computer keyboard, he followed up the day’s disconcerting events with a post on the 2+2 Internet Magazine forum to address what happened.

“I told him that if he messed with my daughter or family, I would kill him,” Raymer wrote. “I shouted all this across a 20-foot gap, and, yes, everyone could hear it, and it happened.

“And I wasn’t lying. If anybody messes with my family, I’m going to kill them as certainly as I possibly can.”

Last December, he was walking back to his hotel room at the Bellagio in Las Vegas with $150,000 in chips and found himself staring down the barrel of a hand cannon. “We’re talking Dirty Harry-style,” Raymer told the Baltimore Sun.

Hotel hallways and poker tables apparently are similar settings in Raymer’s world because those chips were just as difficult to pry away from him as they would be in a tourney. Although Raymer declined to discuss with ALL IN the specifics of what transpired that night because of pending litigation, the Baltimore Sun reported that Raymer fought off his two assailants until they fled. Surveillance cameras led to their arrest in California, and they were extradited back to Las Vegas for trial.

“He looks like a big teddy bear, but he’s dangerous,” said young gun Antonio Esfandiari, making a statement that applies to Raymer both at and away from the table. “He plays without fear. He goes with his gut and is willing to put in all his money when he thinks he has the best hand. He doesn’t let anybody push him around.”

RAYMER ADMITS HE doesn’t understand fame. Now, don’t get him wrong. He appreciates most aspects of it. He just doesn’t fully grasp it.

“I enjoy it more than I hate it,” the 41-year-old poker icon said, looking very little like a celebrity while leaning back on a sofa in the living room of his soon-to-be-former home in Stonington, Connecticut. Raymer, wearing a baby blue PokerStars golf shirt, khakis, and sandals with white socks, was the picture of unpretentiousness while taking a break from arranging his family’s move to a golf-course community in the Raleigh, North Carolina, area.

Before Raymer moved down the Eastern seaboard, he kept his home number unlisted. But he gets a charge out of being recognized in public, shakes every hand thrust at him, answers the countless poker questions thrown his way, and graciously listens to the bad-beat tales.

Of course, there are jokers who run into him at the grocery store and ask him why he isn’t wearing his trademark reptile-hologram glasses, or autograph hounds who clearly intend to sell his signature for a profit.

“I always personalize everything I sign,” Raymer said. “People think I’m being nice because I’m taking the time to personalize it, but in reality I just don’t want you to sell it on eBay. That just annoys me.”

He says this with a smile because he knows these are trivial complaints. He realizes he’s living a dream.

“They say every dark cloud has a silver lining,” Raymer said. “I have a silver cloud with a gray lining. Things are mostly highly positive with little to complain about.”

It’s easy to have that sort of attitude when you’re moving from chilly New England to a new house along a North Carolina golf course. And moving is nothing new for Raymer. His existence has been that of a vagabond for much of his life. The son of a mainframe computer technician and a homemaker, he was born in North Dakota and bounced from Michigan to Florida to Missouri, where he graduated from high school in suburban St. Louis.

It wasn’t until after Raymer received his undergraduate degree in chemistry from the University of Missouri-Rolla and started working on his master’s degree in biochemistry and a law degree at the University of Minnesota that he was introduced to the beauty of a 52-card deck. A relative had given him a blackjack strategy book as a gift. That helped him earn about seven dollars an hour counting cards at the native-American casinos in Minnesota.

Raymer was 28 by the time he finished school and began the frustrating pursuit of finding a pleasant career. He found he loathed the tedium of lab work, and took a job in Chicago as a patent attorney for a litigation firm. It was in the Windy City that Raymer discovered his affinity for poker. Unable to locate a good blackjack game, he stumbled across a $3-$6 poker game and studied David Sklansky’s masterwork The Theory Of Poker.

Raymer continued to move around the country, but he never stopped playing poker, always finding bigger and better action. He took a biotechnology patent preparation and prosecution job in San Diego. Thus he graduated to $10-$20 and occasionally $20-$40 games at the Oceanside Card Club. Cheryl, however, wasn’t particularly keen on her husband’s ever-growing hobby.

“I think she was afraid of the concept that people who get really involved in gambling, as a general rule, are degenerate, addictive gamblers who lose all their money,” Raymer said. “She doesn’t want to be married to that guy.” Her opinion slowly changed as Raymer’s proficiency climbed. One night at the Oceanside, he managed to pile up $2,500 in a $3-$5 Pot-Limit Hold ’Em game.

“It was by far the most money I had won in one day playing poker,” he said. “So I came home in the middle of the night and I wake her up by sprinkling $100 bills over her in bed.”

It was a thrilling moment, to be sure. Until …

“The next day, I wanted to go back and play in the game again and end up losing $500,” Raymer said.

His wife hit the roof.

“She said, ‘That money was in your pocket! You lost that money!’ I said, ‘Wait a minute. If I won $1,000 yesterday and $1,000 today, would you be mad at me?’ She said, ‘Well, of course not, but it’s not the same thing.’” The argument was a seminal moment in Raymer’s poker development. He and his wife made a deal. He would set aside from the family finances a $1,000 bankroll. If the fund ever got depleted, he would quit.

By the time he entered the 2004 World Series of Poker, he was maintaining a $50,000 bankroll. Shortly after he accepted a job at the Pfizer pharmaceutical research facility in Connecticut—Foxwoods became his home casino—he won a World Poker Finals tournament and used the $22,000 prize money as the down payment on their house.

“That was certainly the biggest turning point in terms of my wife’s view of poker,” Raymer said. “After that she was much more positive of me playing.”

RAYMER WAS AN accomplished tournament player before his monumental victory in 2004, but he wasn’t viewed as such.

Although he was lined up to pay the $10,000 entry fee to the Main Event and had already booked his flight and room at the Horseshoe, he caught a significant break six days before the tournament. He won his seat through a $160 double-shootout satellite on PokerStars.

His well-chronicled run to what was then the richest title in poker history was distorted slightly by the stigma placed on him as just another Internet longshot.

“From the point of view of almost everyone out there, I did almost come out of nowhere,” Raymer said. “But just because I qualified online doesn’t mean I only play online or that I’m new to this. People are totally amazed when they ask how many tournaments I played before winning the World Series. ‘Oh, about 500.’ They’re, like, ‘Wow!’”

And they were, like, “wow” when they saw Raymer come darned close to repeating this year. He was the chip leader at various times throughout the 2005 Main Event.

“Everybody would have been calling him a bum if he had been knocked out early,” said Tom Sartori, a true Internet thunderbolt who finished one spot behind Raymer after winning his seat in a $200 PokerRoom.com satellite. “A lot of people were calling his championship a fluke, but you don’t get that far on luck. With his performance this year he really solidified himself as a true pro as far as getting a lot of people’s respect and being taken more seriously.”

Sartori played alongside Raymer on ESPN’s feature table for nearly two straight days. The acoustic musician from Buffalo, New York, experienced first-hand what it was like to try to bluff “Fossilman.”

“As soon as he sensed weakness, he went after me hard,” Sartori said. “He was intimidating because of his reputation from watching him on TV. He’s got those glasses on, and he’s staring right at you from three feet away. It was surreal.”

So the image is changing. The more poker fans follow Raymer’s exploits on the tournament circuit or watch him on television, they’ll start to realize his championship was no freak occurrence.

Raymer gleefully recalls how in the days immediately after he won the bracelet, one Foxwoods regular who never moved above the $20-$40 game had belittled his skills. It’s safe to assume those perceptions are dying quickly.

“The World Series of Poker is a different tournament than any other tournament because of all the opponents you’re against, the structure, the exposure, the money,” said two-time World Series of Poker bracelet winner Scott Fischman. “Everything is different, and guys that play like Raymer are made for it. He’ll probably be good every year at the Main Event.

“He’s very aggressive, non-stop, relentless. At the beginning of the tournament, if he ever gets to double or triple his stack, it’ll be damn near impossible to get those chips away from him.”

Even if his opponent is holding a gun.

Action Dan Harrington - Bullying The Bully

By “Action” Dan Harrington

IT ISN’T EASY PLAYING AGAINST A SUPER AGGRESSIVE PLAYER. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but I enjoy playing against a player that’s weak-passive, into a lot of pots, and just gives me the pots all the time. That’s the kind of player I like playing against. Against aggressive players, I have to play in a way that I’m not necessarily comfortable playing. But a lot of it is just a matter of will. Your will has to be stronger than their will. You have to force them to conform to what’s happening at the table, rather than having them force you to conform.

The best way to fight aggression is with aggression of your own—as long as you’re in the right position. You want the aggressive player to be in front of you. If you have the aggressive player behind you, well, you’re out of luck, because he’ll have position on you most of the time and it’s going to be tough to make moves.

But let’s assume he’s in front of you. When he opens up in middle position, you can adjust your play based on the fact that he doesn’t necessarily have as good a hand as a more conservative player who just opened up in middle position. If you have a hand like K-Q, you probably wouldn’t play that against a raise from a conservative player. You have to have a stronger hand than what your opponent has in order to play from that position, and K-Q doesn’t quite fit the bill. But against an aggressive player, who could be playing garbage, K-Q becomes a good starting hand.

You can choose a couple of ways of playing it. You can call and see if you can use your position to beat him after the flop—but because he’s an aggressive player, he might be able to maneuver and do things against you. So there’s a simple solution to that: Instead of calling, you take a chance and make a decent re-raise, like three times his raise or four times his raise, with the knowledge that (a) you rate to have a better hand, and (b) the aggressive player is not used to having a player re-raise him. Believe it or not, as aggressive as they are, they don’t want to play big pots. They want to play small- to medium-sized pots, manipulate the pots, and be able to outmaneuver you. This way, you’re telling him, You ain’t playing a small pot this time, you’re playing a big pot, and now you’re going to have to call or come back over the top of me.

Now, some of the aggressive players, if you do this too much to them, they’re going to say to themselves, he’s fooling around with me, and they’re going to make a stand. They are either going to call you, and then do something after the flop, pretend they have a hand; or they’re going to raise right away, and then you have to make up your mind whether to call or not.

The only consolation I can give you is, the aggressive player doesn’t want to get into this. So, if you think he’s a better player than you, that’s what you want to do, you want to make him uncomfortable. You do that a few times to him, and believe me, he’ll stop dead in his tracks. Aggressive players just don’t want to fool around with someone that does that to them.

There’s also a third option, besides calling or putting in a substantial raise, and that’s to put in a small raise. If you do this, the aggressive player will typically re-raise you, and since he probably has a weaker hand than normal for a re-raise, you can now carry it to the next level and re-raise him. Of course, you’re running into the risk that, this time around, he does have the good hand. Remember, just because an aggressive player raises all the time doesn’t mean when you get into a raising match with him he can’t have aces. He can have aces or kings, and you’re just out of luck.

Again, playing this aggressively isn’t really my style, and I’m not comfortable with it. But as long as I know the other guy is going to be uncomfortable, then that’s fine—I’m willing to suffer through it to force him to suffer through it.

Dan Harrington won the World Series of Poker Main Event in 1995, and pulled off the astonishing feat of reaching the final table in both 2003 and 2004. His books, Harrington On Hold ’Em Volume I and Volume II, can be ordered through Two Plus Two Publishing.

2008 NHUPC Mike Matusow vs Chris Ferguson Third Round

“The Mouth Sinks His Own Boat,” By Scott Tharler

PRE-FLOP
Pot: $6,000
Action: “Jesus” (63%) limps for $2,000 with ajax on the button, “The Mouth” (37%) checks his option with 8-4 suited.
Ferguson’s Analysis: “If he has A-K, there’s no way he’s going to just check there. He’d have to raise me—especially because he’d re-raised me two of the previous four hands. So I know my kicker’s good.”

FLOP
Pot: $8,000
Action: Matusow (78%) checks, Ferguson (22%) bets $6,000; Matusow calls.
Ferguson’s Analysis: “I played it very much like I had a queen. I limped before the flop. I bet on the flop—that’s fine if I have a queen.”

TURN
Pot: $20,000
Action: Dead to a four, Matusow (5%) sets out $8,000, Ferguson (95%) calls.
Ferguson’s Analysis: “He bets out into me for a little less than half the pot. So I’m pretty worried he has the queen. But it’s kind of weird, I can’t fold the hand.”

RIVER
Pot: $36,000
Action: Not knowing his two-outer put him ahead, Matusow checks, Ferguson bets out $30,000; Matusow folds a full house, believing he was making a brilliant and disciplined laydown rather than a match-altering error.
Ferguson’s Analysis: “He’s really putting me on this queen. I was kind of contemplating between him having an ace or a four. And I just felt it was more likely he had an ace than a four—an ace that I would have outkicked. So I bet my aces and queens with a jack kicker for value.”

FERGUSON’S LESSON: “Sometimes you’re bluffing, whether you know it or not. That was the key hand in the match, no question.”

2008 NHUPC Orel Hershiser vs. Freddy Deeb Third Round

“Orel Fans Freddy,” By Scott Tharler

PRE-FLOP
Pot: $1,800
Action: Hershiser (66%) raises to $3,000 with 9-6 suited on the button, Deeb (24%) calls with 8-6 from the big.
Analysis: A standard raise by Hershiser, hoping to flush and/or straighten on the flop. Deeb assumes he’s live, but is actually quite dominated.

FLOP
Pot: $7,200
Action: Deeb (11%) checks, Hershiser (79%) bets out $5,000; Deeb raises to $16,000, Hershiser calls.
Analysis: Deeb totally whiffs and Hershiser picks up a flush draw. It’s debatable whether he was getting the right pot odds to call Deeb’s raise with only a draw, but Hershiser actually had the best hand.

TURN
Pot: $39,200
Action: Deeb (50%) checks, Hershiser (7%) checks back.
Andy Bloch’s Analysis: “Deeb’s problem was that he didn’t follow through with his bluff on the turn. His betting didn’t tell a consistent story. If he had a five or two, he’d have bet the turn. So Orel put Freddy on a draw or a complete bluff on the flop.”

RIVER
Pot: $39,200
Action: Playing the board, Deeb sets out $18,000, Hershiser, playing the same board, min-raises to $36,000; Deeb folds.
Bloch’s Analysis: “Betting the river doesn’t make sense with just about anything but a full house, since Orel most likely also had either a busted draw or a full house.”

THE LESSON: Make sure the story you tell with your betting adds up, even if you’re playing against an opponent you deem as less experienced. Along similar lines, don’t underestimate any opponent; as Hershiser showed, some amateurs are capable of making clever bluffs.

2008 NHUPC Chris Ferguson vs Andy Bloch Finals

“Twice A Bridesmaid, Now The Bride,” By Scott Tharler

PRE-FLOP
Pot: $15,000
Action: Ferguson (84%) raises to 2.5 times the big with hooks on the button, Bloch (16%) calls with 10-4 suited out of position.
Bloch’s Analysis: “Pre-flop, if you’re not calling with over half your hands, your opponent is going to run over you.”

FLOP
Pot: $50,000
Action: Bloch (all the way up to 45%) checks his top pair and spade draw, Ferguson (55%) sets out $35,000; Bloch pops it up to $105,000, Ferguson calls the extra $70K.
Bloch’s Analysis: “When Chris called my check raise, I had to assume he had either a pair or a flush or straight draw. He didn’t have to have top pair even—look at the hand that he busted Ivey with (pocket eights on a nine-high board).”

TURN
Pot: $260,000
Action: Bloch (23%) pushes $150,000, Ferguson (77%) goes all in; Bloch goes into the tank and winds up calling based on the result of flipping a coin!
Bloch’s Analysis: “When the board paired on the turn, I decided to make a decent bet in case Chris had a draw, or if he had a pair smaller than top pair.”

RIVER
Pot: $1,066,000
Action: With a higher full house, Chris Ferguson wins the 2008 National Heads-Up Poker Championship!
Ferguson’s Analysis: “When he takes his time calling—phew, he doesn’t have the seven!—I know I have the best hand with jacks. So I didn’t really care if he called. It was a very close decision for him [mathematically], so either way it was fine with me.”

BLOCH’S LESSON: “Occasionally, I will flip a coin (or at least pretend to) when I have a close decision. Sometimes I get a tell on my opponent when I flip the coin—or if I think my opponent had a good read on me and might be trying to bluff me, flipping a coin helps me be less exploitable.”

2008 NHUPC Scott Fischman vs Jamie Gold Second Round

“The Fisch Wriggles Off The Hook,” By Scott Tharler

PRE-FLOP
Pot: $1,200
Action: Gold (57%) limps on the button for an extra $400 with K-6, Fischman (42%) checks with J-8 out of position.
Fischman’s Analysis: “He limps pre, which meant nothing really at the time. I check from the big blind, which also meant nothing.”

FLOP
Pot: $1,600
Action: Fischman (24%) checks, Gold (75%) checks back.

TURN
Pot: $1,600
Action: Fischman (11%) and Gold (89%) both check their heart draws.
Fischman’s Analysis: “Normally I would make a very small bet in this spot as a semi-bluff to try and pick up the pot. However, I decided to check here, trying to wait for a spot where Jamie would be the aggressor and maybe chatting a bit.”

RIVER
Pot: $1,600
Action: Fischman checks the second nuts, Gold (with the nuts) goes all in, a massive overbet of more than 10 times the pot. As Fischman contemplates what to do, Gold asks, “You got the king?”—a ridiculous question, since Fischman would have called instantly if he had the king of hearts. Fischman says, “All right, you’ve got the king,” and folds.
Fischman’s Analysis: “I just about bet out, but then quickly realized this would be a mistake. If I didn’t think he had any kind of small flush that he would pay me with, I might as well check and try to induce a bluff, so that’s what I did. Once he put me all in for my remaining $18K, I didn’t have to think very long at all.”

FISCHMAN’S LESSON: “I knew I was folding instantly, but I wanted to chat him up a bit for future information. Sure enough, he gives me all the information I need, I fold, and he shows me the hand. This may have been one of his crucial mistakes, seeing as how it gave me confidence for the rest of the match, knowing that I had made a good fold and have gained valuable tools on reading him.”

David Williams - No Mucking Way

By David WIlliams

ABOUT 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME, I won’t show a hand if I don’t have to. I don’t want to give any information away for free, because when people have no clue how you work, that’s what gets them to do crazy things against you. But poker is all about playing the player, not just playing the cards, and if you know you can show someone something to get under their skin and it will make them play worse, then every now and then you should capitalize on that.

If I pulled off a bluff, I might like to needle the other player by showing it to him. Or maybe I’ll show my opponent one of my two cards, often the less significant card, just to make him wonder. I might show him a 3, just so he’ll say to himself, He raised me with a 3 in his hand?! When the other player is a target, someone whose head you can get into, then there are benefits to giving him that free information.

Here’s an example from an early-round hand at the World Poker Tour World Championship at the Bellagio in April: I had 10-7 and I raised from an early position, making it look like I had a big hand. The board came up K-9-7, giving me bottom pair, and I fired the flop, and one opponent called. On the turn came an A, so I bet it even bigger, hoping he’d think I had an A, and he called again. Then the river came a 7, and I bet it even bigger, because I now had trip 7s, which I was pretty sure was the best hand. The other guy folded. And I showed him my 10. So he was thinking, Did this maniac have pocket 10s and jam the whole way with an ace and a king up there, or did he have A-10, and how could he bet A-10 with a board of K-9-7? The guy just sat there thinking, What did you have? No clue I had 10-7. He couldn’t figure me out, and he just kept thinking about it, and it wore on him.

There’s something to be said for just mucking all the time, but there’s also something to be said for finding ways to create confusion and get guys on tilt. You establish yourself as an unpredictable player, so they just have no clue where you are and they always have to worry, What the hell does Dave have? He could have anything at any time!

It’s ironic, but you can make yourself harder to read by giving your opponent a little bit more information. And if he gets confused and angry, then you’ve put yourself at a huge advantage.

The Editor’s Blog–Poker And The Olympics

By Eric Raskin
Aug. 14, 2008

With the Beijing Olympics in full swing, this seems as good a time as any for me to weigh in on the talk that occasionally crops up about making poker an Olympic sport. My opinion on this matter is very clear: There’s no friggin’ way poker should be part of the Olympics.

Look, I love poker. I play a ton of it, I watch a ton of it, and it ultimately pays my bills. But it simply isn’t a sport. It’s a game. The argument that it requires physical endurance and is therefore a sport is flimsy at best. Hey, studying for exams in college required a lot of physical endurance, but that didn’t make Econ 101 a sport.

My father is a world-class bridge player, and I remember him telling me in ’92 that bridge was being considered for the Olympics. The mental image of my out-of-shape dad wearing a red, white, and blue warmup, walking alongside Michael, Magic, Larry, and the rest of the Dream Team during the opening ceremonies, was just too much to handle.

And it would be similarly absurd to see poker players competing in the Olympics. International competition in poker is wonderful, but the idea of someone who can’t even necessarily do a sit-up getting a gold medal draped around his neck is ridiculous.

On a side note about the Olympics, the Michael Phelps watch has been pretty absorbing … but if it’s a race he’s not involved in, I have to say, swimming bores me. It seems that around the country, Phelps has increased interest in swimming, and that’s great for the sport. (Yes, swimming most definitely is a sport.) But in my household, he’s increased interest in exactly eight races, and that’s all.

And lastly, on an unrelated side note, don’t forget about the ALL IN Free Poker Challenge tonight at 9:00 EST. Thanks to our friends at Wicked Chops Poker (www.wickedchopspoker.blogs.com) and Tao of Poker (www.taopoker.blogspot.com) for giving us a little plug this week. Definitely add their blogs to your daily surfing list if you haven’t already, and then join us tonight to win your share of $2,500 in cash and prizes in the free roll.

The Editor’s Blog–Feeling Good About Bad Beats

By Eric Raskin
August 11, 2008

A lot of poker players have a “no bad beat story” policy—they won’t tell the tales of their own bad beats, and they sure as hell don’t want to hear yours.

I mostly agree with that policy. I don’t want to hear the bad beat stories of random strangers, and I don’t want to subject them to my own. But my exception is that I have one close friend with whom I routinely discuss my play and his play after a session, and we’re allowed to vent about our bad beats with each other. Hey, when the beats are particularly brutal, it’s unhealthy not to tell someone.

Anyway, I won’t subject the allinmag.com readers to my bad beat stories, but I will just say that I had a two-day stretch last week where the beats were coming non-stop and, even though I’m very conservative with my bankroll management—I never put more than 5% at risk at once, and usually it’s more like 2%–I lost almost 15% of my bankroll at a particular Web site in just a couple of days.

Lately, I’ve been focusing on heads-up sit-n-gos, and it was just game after game where I got my opponents all in, frequently after the flop with five outs or less, and they just kept hitting their outs. It’s tough to beat an opponent twice in a heads-up match, and that’s precisely what you have to do when he sucks out and doubles up into the chip lead; you have to start over and find a way to beat him a second time. (And you have to pray that he doesn’t get lucky again and force you to beat him a third time.)

But here’s the thing: When I’m taking an inordinate amount of bad beats, after I get over the initial anger, I start to feel good about my game. Only superior players take more bad beats than they dish out. When I’m on a run where I’ve been the one administering the suckouts, I have to take a step back and assess what I’m doing wrong to get myself into those situations. You can’t evaluate your game based on wins and losses. You have to evaluate it based on how you’re playing. And if you’re being victimized by one bad beat or another, yes, it’s frustrating, but it’s also a sign that you’re making a lot of correct decisions.

Speaking of decisions, here’s one that may or may not have been correct—judge for yourself. In a heads-up sit-n-go, with blinds at $15/$30 and about $1,000 in my stack and $2,000 in my opponent’s, I was dealt two black aces in the big blind. My opponent limped. Not wanting to lose him, but also wanting to build a little bit of a pot, I did something I rarely do: I min-raised. It kind of telegraphed the strength of my hand, but what the heck, there’s nothing wrong with playing that way on occasion, as long as you mix it up and don’t do the exact same thing with aces the next time. He called the extra $30, and we were off to the flop.

The flop came Q-7-3, all clubs. With the ace of clubs in my hand, I figured I probably had the best hand at that moment, and if I had been miraculously outflopped, I definitely had outs. I bet $60 into a $120 pot, and my opponent called. The turn was an offsuit jack. Same situation—I could be up against two pair, but most likely I had the best hand, and I certainly still had a nut draw. This time, I checked, hoping to look weak and draw a bet out of my opponent. He bit (or so I thought) and bet half the pot, $120. I came over the top, raising to $450. He put me all in for just a few hundred more, and I made the automatic call. He tabled the 9c-2c, I didn’t hit my club on the river, and that was that, game over.

This wasn’t a bad beat, mind you, and I’m not complaining. From the flop on, he had the best hand. But I’m curious for feedback: Could I have gotten away from the hand at any point? Obviously, a bigger pre-flop raise would have been advisable in hindsight. And if I’d just check-called all the way, I could have kept the pot small and held onto some chips. But all in all, I think it was one of those hands where I was almost destined to go broke. Opinions, however, are welcome. You can post a comment below and let me know what you think …

And keep those bad beat stories to yourselves!

Rumor-Busting With Barry Greenstein

You’ve heard all the myths and misinformation about Barry Greenstein. Now, get the truth–straight from the player himself

Author: Lena Katz

Low-key and no-nonsense, with the sartorial style of a CPA and a mind like a military computer, Barry Greenstein reminds you of every tough-cookie professor you ever had in school. But Greenstein’s about a million times cooler than the average college professor. He’s a famous philanthropist, a legendary cash game player, an occasional TV star–and one of the most misquoted men in poker. We gave Barry a chance to correct some of those misquotes, myths and rumors–and did he ever take it. And did we ever take notes! Now, we’re just waiting for our grade….

Rumor: Barry Greenstein made millions as one of the founders of Symantec.
“I wish it were true. I got a lot of satisfaction working at Symantec, but it was a big pay cut from being a poker player. I had children, and it seemed like a better lifestyle for my family.

“I played poker for my whole life from the age of 12–even while I was at Symantec–but because I worked so hard at Symantec, I didn’t get to play very often. When I got breaks between projects, I would play poker. I actually had to play poker between projects to supplement my income.

“Then Hold ‘Em became legal in California, and No-Limit Hold ‘Em was my strongest game. Once that became legal, I was leaving too much money on the table not playing poker, so I finished my last project and went back to playing full time.”

Rumor: Barry Greenstein gives all his profits to charity.
“I’m a professional poker player. My work is playing in side games. The last few years I started playing in tournaments, ‘cause I got this idea that I could donate tournament winnings to charity and also if I did well, I could publicize the charities that I was giving to, and then other people would donate to them as well.

“I’ve spent almost a million dollars each of these past two years on expenses and tournament entries, and when I’ve won, I’ve given my money away. It’s definitely put a dent in me financially. So this year instead of giving all my tournaments winnings away, at the end of the year, I’ll see what I’ve made from tournaments and give away the net profits.

“I always give half my tournament money to Children, Incorporated. Usually the other money goes to other organizations that help children because I like helping children the most.”

Rumor: Barry Greenstein is the most profitable cash game player in the world.
“Um. I had a good run from about 1997 to 2004 where I think that was true. But when people ask me who the most successful cash game players of all time were, I always say Doyle Brunson and Chip Reese. They are the ones who have played in the biggest games since the ‘70s. They’ve taken on all comers and they’ve obviously done well, because they’ve never had to go down to a lower limit. I’ve done well enough to where I’ve been able to give away lots of money to charity and take care of my family.”

Rumor: Barry Greenstein is the best “unknown” player in the world.
Yes, well, that was written initially because I didn’t play tournaments. The public knows only about who’s on television. So, until I made a televised final table, I was, from the public’s perspective, an unknown player–but from the pro poker player’s perspective, I was a well-known player.

Rumor: Barry Greenstein doesn’t really like playing poker.
“Poker is my job, and it’s a good job. The word “job” doesn’t bring up nice feelings — it’s something you have to do. I like my job. I also enjoyed being a computer programmer…

“I’m certainly not a pleasure player. I don’t play poker for the enjoyment. I do play for the money. Basically, if I didn’t need the money, I would stop working…and for me, the working is the side games.

“Even if I was financially independent, I would still play some tournaments, particularly the WSOP and the WPT, because it’s a lot of fun. I enjoy playing in those, and there’s a lot of emotional energy. A lot of highs and lows.”

Rumor: Barry Greenstein won a million bucks off Larry Flynt.
Over the course of years, Larry and I have exchanged millions. First of all, we play in a cash game together, and I have won money in that cash game. Not necessarily off Larry Flynt—he’s been a pretty tough opponent. But Larry and I were the top two finishers in a $125K buy-in tournament. I won, we split, I cashed $770K, he cashed $230K.

Rumor: Barry Greenstein appears on reality television shows like Daisy Does America.
“Well, I didn’t know I was appearing on a reality TV show. They tricked me and told me they were doing a documentary about me.

“At least once a month, I get asked to go on a TV show or to do some TV interview, and I’ve been on some poker shows. Like many poker players, I’ve even appeared in a couple movies (Lucky You and No Limit, both coming out in 2006).

“The producer of [Daisy Does America] said, ‘We want to show people what a day in the life of a professional poker player is like.’ So I said, ‘Okay, I can take a couple hours and talk to you guys.’

“I didn’t know what was going on, except the person who was interviewing me was hitting on me a lot. I told my son Joe, ‘You know, this girl’s hitting on me big time’. He says, ‘No, she’s just acting like that to get the interview.’ He was kind of making fun of me. But [in retrospect] I realize it was all a setup for the show.

“Next we go to a romantic dinner. Then we’re in the Venetian, and she said she thought it would be really romantic to go in the gondola, and to kiss under the bridge. They told me they wanted to show the lighthearted side of the poker player. By now Daisy and I had become friends, so I said ‘Okay.’ I was taking it easy–my girlfriend’s not jealous. But THEN, when I went to kiss her under the bridge, she turned her head away.

“Before the show aired, my son told me it’s like an Ali G thing, where they try to embarrass the people they interview. I lost a couple nights’ sleep thinking how they were going to make me look bad. I could just see them showing me going to kiss her in this tunnel, and her turning away, and people saying ‘Wow, can you believe that Barry Greenstein!’

“But the truth is, they were pretty fair with me. They fooled me, but they didn’t embarrass me.”

Rumor: You never want to play heads up against Barry Greenstein.
“When I was younger, I played a lot of heads up poker. It seemed like in those days, the bigger games would get to heads-up poker–basically because I would never quit. The other winners would quit, and I would be left with whoever was losing for the night, and I would play, often, till he gave up. I was stronger when I was young–I could easily go for more than 24 hours.

“I see that in Phil Ivey now. I see a lot of how I was when I was younger in Phil Ivey, and that’s probably one of the reasons we’re friends.

“Now I don’t have the stamina I had when I was younger. Our big games are more scheduled. We have families and other commitments, and typically we do quit at 2 or 3 in the morning.”.

Rumor: Barry Greenstein’s new book, Ace on the River, is for advanced players only.
“I think non-players have enjoyed my book more than poker players, because it’s very readable, and it lets them into a world that they were unaware existed. It’s about how to enjoy life as a poker player.

“But the advanced players are the ones who read it and say, ‘This is my life.’ It’s relevant to them from a first-hand basis, whereas for non-players, it’s more from a third-person perspective.

“Most poker books have the basics—defining the game, defining terms–starting from the assumption that some people reading don’t know how to play poker. I assume that the people reading the technical chapters of my book are already experienced players. However, I put the poker-intensive stuff in the back of the book so non-players can read up to that point.

“My book is advanced from a psychological perspective of poker—not necessarily mathematically advanced as some people assume. It’s necessary psychology and philosophy for anyone who’s going to be a professional poker player.”

Ace on the River is available at Barnes & Noble, Borders, Amazon.com or a poker room near you.

Men Nguyen - Down But Not Out, Words From The Master

By Men “The Master” Nguyen

PLAYING WITH A SHORT STACK might be a little bit different for me than it is for you. If you’re not a world-famous player with a bull’s eye on your head, then you don’t have to be so worried about people gunning for you, hoping to bust you. One time, a guy beat me and took an ordinary pot, and he acted like he just won the tournament. He jumped up and yelled, “I beat Men The Master! I’m going to go tell my son I beat Men The Master!” So when I’m short stacked, it’s risky for me to go all in, because I might get several players calling me, hoping to be the one to knock out Men The Master.

I was in a tournament recently in which I was down to my last $675 in chips. But I didn’t give up. I waited until I got a solid hand—in this case, a J-10. I knew if I limped in, people were going to raise. And I knew that if I pushed all in, several other players would call, trying to break me. So I was smart enough to just go in for $400, leaving myself $275. Then the guy behind me raised, everyone else got out of the way, and I was left with one-on-one, instead of having a bunch of people come in. It’s hard to win if you have four of five people in against you. But one-on-one, he’s holding two cards, you’re holding two cards, and whoever hits better on the flop, turn, and river wins it.

If you’re not a target, you can play differently, and there are situations where it’s wise to go all in instead of just raising a moderate amount. Here’s an example from the World Poker Tour Championship tournament in April, when I made a mistake—yes, even Men The Master makes mistakes sometimes—by not going all in with my short stack. I had K-6 of hearts. If I had a lot of chips, I might not have played it at all, but when you’re short stacked, you have to play some hands you’re not supposed to play.

I had about $10,000 left, and I raised $4,000. The big blind was $800, and my $4,000 wasn’t enough to discourage Tom Franklin in the big blind from calling me. If I had gone all in, Franklin might have thrown away his K-Q, but I didn’t raise enough, and both he and Phil Gordon called. The flop came K-3-3. I had no choice, I pushed all in. Phil Gordon mucked his hand, and Tom Franklin called. That was the end of it for me. I could have gotten Franklin out of the hand earlier by going all in, but instead I only raised about half of my stack and it backfired. When you’re short stacked, and you have a halfway decent hand, it can be a safer move to go all in before the flop, in the hope that some players holding better hands than you will choose to fold.

Here’s an important tip: When you’re short stacked, and the blinds are going to get to you and wipe you out before long, you should push it in the first decent hand you get where you’re not one of the blinds. The idea is, if you’re the big blind, and you get everyone to fold by going all in, then you’re not picking up many chips from other players—you’re mostly just collecting your own chips. But if you’re not one of the blinds, and you win, you’ve got the big blind and the small blind’s money.

Ultimately, you have to find some luck and some good cards to rally when you’re short stacked. Hopefully, some guy will think you don’t have a hand, think you’re acting out of desperation, and you can double your chips and come back. But you can’t wait too long for A-A or K-K or A-K. At some point, you have to take a risk. If you don’t take chances and make plays, you may last a little while, but you’re not going to win a tournament.

The Editor’s Blog — Appreciating The Genius Of Hellmuth

By Eric Raskin
August 4, 2008

I’ve met Phil Hellmuth several times, interviewed him a few times, even hung out with his parents once, and of course, I’ve watched him play hours upon hours of poker. And I still don’t quite know what to make of the guy. I can’t quite figure out where the shtick ends and the human being begins, and when he opens his mouth, I often find myself cringing over his social awkwardness while at the same time hanging on every word.

It took my wife all of about 30 seconds of watching him on TV to figure him out: “What a tool” was a her simple assessment. For me, it’s not that easy. Yes, he does come off as a tool most of the time. But he’s a tool who’s manipulating us all.

In any case, whatever direction the debate over his personality takes, there can be no debating this: The man is a sheer genius at the poker table. His dominance against elite players Ted Forrest and Chris Ferguson on last week’s special “Heads-Up Challenge” on Poker After Dark was all the proof you needed.

The common, clichéd knock on Hellmuth is that he only seems great when he’s picking on bad players, but surely nobody would label Forrest and Ferguson as such. Against both of them, Hellmuth was always a step ahead. “The Poker Brat” does his homework on his opponents, and always comes in with a game plan suited to not only the other man’s style of play, but also to how that other man perceives Hellmuth.

Phil’s call on the turn with third pair against Forrest, in the hand that ended their match, was utterly brilliant. I’d say at least 80 percent of all top pros would make the laydown in that spot, and another 15 percent would push all in and fail to bust Forrest. Few could make the flatcall, as Hellmuth did, and wait for the river to finish the job.

In his first match against Ferguson, Hellmuth got lucky to draw out by making two pair (fives and sixes) on the river against Chris’ pocket queens, but there was no luck involved in his all-in river raise. That was just a great read telling him he had the best hand and was up against a hand that would pay him off.

The rematch with “Jesus” was as one-sided as it gets. There’s no such thing as playing “perfect poker,” but from the hands NBC showed, this was damned close to perfection. Nothing Ferguson tried against Hellmuth worked; Phil always had an answer, and was always plotting his next move before seeing the next card.

The bottom line is, we can rag on Hellmuth all we want, especially when he makes an embarrassing mis-read, like his famous two-fisted chip shove with a dominated two pair against Barry Greenstein on High Stakes Poker a couple of years ago. But deep down, most of us wish we could understand No-Limit Hold ’Em strategy the way Hellmuth does. Not that his ego needs this stroking from me, but Phil, you deserve everyone’s respect at this point. If not as a person, then at least as a poker player.

The Editor’s Blog — Poker On My Mind And My DVR

By Eric Raskin
July 31, 2008

In advance of allinmag.com adding regular blogs from some of your favorite poker pros (negotiations are ongoing, but we should have some blockbuster announcements soon), you’re stuck with the Editor-in-Chief of the ALL IN magazine kicking off the blogging. A professional poker player, I am not. What I am, however, is a professional writer and editor who loves poker, plays it at an assortment of levels and in an assortment of venues, and watches an unhealthy amount of it on TV (especially for a guy with a 19-month-old daughter who ought to be playing the role of attentive father a little better). And that TV watching is what I’ll focus on in today’s blog.

With the return of the World Series of Poker to ESPN’s airwaves two Tuesdays ago, not to mention new episodes of Poker After Dark every night, we’ve all reached that point where our DVRs are filling up faster than we can drain them. Add in World Poker Tour, and you’re talking about nine hours of new poker programming each week (okay, more like 7.5 hours without commercials), and as the editor of a poker magazine, I feel an obligation to watch it all. (It doesn’t hurt that I enjoy watching most of it.)

I’ll discuss the WPT and WSOP coverage some other time, but for now, I want to focus on Poker After Dark. In terms of personality and chatter, this week’s “Heads-Up Challenge” has been as boring as it comes. And yet, I’m still riveted, because the play has been excellent. It also doesn’t hurt that heads-up sit-n-gos are my bread and butter, and therefore I find myself watching Phil Hellmuth, Chris Ferguson, Ted Forrest, and Paul Wasicka play with an eye on how the decisions they make can help my game.

Obviously, you have to feel bad for Wasicka, who played just about perfectly against Forrest and got unlucky twice when calling all-in with the best hand. Meanwhile, how about Teddy throwing some insults in the direction of his highly respectful opponent—calling Wasicka “methodical” and then snarkily clarifying that it wasn’t meant as a compliment? Maybe that was meant to take Wasicka out of his patient game and encourage him to make a mistake. Or maybe Forrest just hadn’t gotten any action in a while (double meaning fully intended).

Easily the hand of the week, so far, was the hand on which Hellmuth eliminated Forrest. Forrest check-raised with fourth pair on the turn, and Hellmuth made a tough but tremendously sharp call with third pair. Forrest, sensing Phil’s hesitance, made up his mind to push all in on the river, expecting Hellmuth to have to lay down, but Hellmuth hit two pair, making his call automatic. So yes, Hellmuth got a little bit lucky on the end. But, love or hate the Poker Brat, you have to respect the read and gutsy call he made on the turn. As Hellmuth might say, you don’t win 11 bracelets by accident, boys and girls.

More blogging to come next week. For now, good luck to everyone who plays in tonight’s ALL IN Free Poker Challenge, where the grand prize is a spot in a WPT Boot Camp getaway, a prize valued at nearly $2,000. Yeah, I’m a little bit biased, but this is, bar none, the best free roll you’ll find anywhere on the Internet.

Online Poker Instruction

Chip Ferguson gives us some instruction for playing online poker. He is using Full Tilt in this example. Find more Poker Instruction Videos at SNGIcons.com

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

2008 NHUPC Phil Hellmuth vs Tom Dwan First Round

PRE-FLOP

Pot: $450

Action: Hellmuth (80%) limps for an extra $150 with bullets on the button, Dwan (20%) raises it $800 with pocket tens out of position; Hellmuth re-raises another $2,500, Dwan moves all in; Hellmuth quickly calls.

Analysis: As it’s just the third hand of the match, both players are even in chips—or to put it another way, both are covered and at risk!

FLOP

Pot: $40,000

Analysis: With an overpair to the board, Hellmuth (92%) is in great shape. Dwan (8%) is drawing thin to one of the two remaining tens.

TURN

Pot: $40,000

Analysis: Though Dwan (77%) hit his miracle set, Hellmuth (now just 23%) can still redraw with an ace or any spade except the king of spades.

RIVER

Pot: $40,000

Action: Dwan holds on and 2005 champ Hellmuth is quickly eliminated in the first round!

Hellmuth Preaches: “I would tell you this much, son, I would never have put more than $3,000 in with two tens.”

Dwan Retorts: “I was gonna say good game, sorry for the suckout, but … when you phrase it that way, it makes me not want to.”

THE LESSON: No matter how great a hand you have or how well you set the trap pre-flop, ultimately the community cards have the final say. If you want to whine about bad beats, that’s your prerogative. But the greats, even emotional players like Hellmuth, must accept it and move on before they sit down at the table again.

Tiffany Michelle Pops Her Cherry

Diary Of A Blackjack Virgin — By Tiffany Michelle

(note: Since writing this article for ALL IN, Tiffany has gone on to place 17th at the 2008 WSOP Main Event, winning $334,534.00)

WHEN I GOT THE CALL TO BE A CELEBRITY GUEST on the latest season of the World Series of Blackjack on GSN, I was pretty excited. I couldn’t wait to take a crack at that million-dollar pr