Roots Revisited

Not having had my best year in tournaments in 2002, I decided to examine my game. For me, that meant research. Researching one's tournament game is not easy. It's not like there's film of the event, and there is no coach (except for, in my case, my friend Coach N) who can tell you what you might be doing wrong. And the other players who travel the tournament circuit aren't going to assist, as it's not in their best interests. One friend told me it was pure variance, that I was playing well and the hands I was playing should have been holding up, but just weren't during this stretch. Jeff had won five supersatellites at the World Series of Poker and the best all-around supersatellite player award at the Legends of Poker, so I figured he might be worth listening to.

I started my research by returning to my roots. I went back to playing some of the small buy-in ($15) events that are held around town. In some previous columns, I've written about what a great learning ground these events are for players venturing into the tournament world for the first time. They generally are multiple rebuy tournaments, so you get lots of chips and plenty of play.

The level of play was not what I'm used to. The players in these events have a long way to go if they ever want to step up to the major events. However, that's not to say that I could easily beat these folks because of my skills. In fact, I didn't even make a final table. The play was so erratic that I never adjusted to the level. I made the money a couple of times, but never got a win.

I found that these players, many of whom I used to play with when I was in my roots, do not do their research. They don't choose to use the math, they don't choose to read the books, and they don't choose to try the poker software. They just play (this in no way is a knock on them, as I was once there, and believe that you need to start there to learn).

Many a hard-luck story is heard at these events - things like, "I flopped sevens and fours and got beat when the board paired deuces," or, "I flopped a 9-high flush and the fourth club came, and he had 10-5 offsuit with the 10." Many a hard-luck story is heard at major events, as well, but they are of a different nature. They are mostly mathematical in scope. You'll hear things like, "I was a 3-to-1 favorite, but he got there," or, "He hit a 22-to-1 shot on the river to win the hand."

Both types of stories are valid for the skill level of the players in each kind of tournament. So, the question is, did I learn anything from going back to my roots?

Yes. The key is getting back to the basics, and playing in these smaller events showed me, by way of seeing what these players weren't doing, what I needed to get back to or concentrate more on, such as:

• Setting the game plan; this comes after all rebuys have been made and the field is set.

• Breaking down the table you're at, and then adjusting as people get eliminated and others moved in (and readjusting if your table breaks and you're moved).

• Checking the amount of chips in play, and understanding what you need to get into the money and then to the final table.

• Establishing a table image with players you've never seen before.

• Concentrating on the action, even when you're out of a hand.

• Keeping an eye on the clock for limit changes.

• Looking for short stacks when getting close to the money tables.

• Gambling on the bubble, or when you're hand for hand.

Going back to my roots reminded me of these and many other very important components to winning. It also can remind you of what tools you need to sharpen to step up from daily tournaments and have a legitimate shot at winning a major.

In the last couple of months, I've been fortunate to win a few of the larger tournaments, and I attribute that success to going back to my roots (the basics).

I want to thank guys like Coach N, Jeff Yoak, and others, who made me look deeper.

When you've decided to do the work and remember the basics, come and join us.