This two-part column will look at some of the more interesting hands I played while winning the PokerStars
Nightly Hundred Grand tournament. These tournaments typically attract around 900 players, with first place paying approximately $30,000.
We started out with $2,000 in chips, and the blinds were $10-$20. On the third hand, I was dealt jacks in the big blind. A player in early-middle position raised to $60, and I called. The flop came 9-8-5 rainbow. I checked, my opponent bet $80, and I called. The turn was a deuce and we both checked. The river was a 3, I bet out $225 into a $290 pot, and my opponent folded.
This is a rather unexciting hand, but demonstrates a key no-limit hold'em principle: keeping the pot small. Several of the members of my forum - at InternetTexasHoldem.com - said that after they read the discussion of this hand, they realized that they probably were playing jacks too aggressively. One member stated, "I've been playing jacks more aggressively early on. This probably causes me to win smaller pots and lose bigger ones compared to the concept demonstrated here."
I couldn't have stated this better myself. The end result of playing the hand more aggressively is that your opponent will usually fold, except when he has you beat. I am willing to accept the risk of giving free cards to possible overcards in return for keeping the pot small. This strategy also will gain you bets sometimes by inducing your opponent to either bluff the turn or make a crying call on the river.
Hand No. 65 was an interesting one, as I got very lucky to win a big pot. The under-the-gun player, with $2,600 in chips, raised to $300 with $50-$100 blinds. I had $6,000 in chips and elected to call from the button with the 4
3
.
A lot of the members of my forum who saw my entire hand history asked about my strategy of calling raises while in late position with seemingly weak hands, such as 10-9 offsuit, 4-3 suited, and K-9 suited. Position is very powerful in no-limit hold'em. You can often win pots on the flop or turn simply by betting with nothing. And, of course, sometimes you'll hit a big hand. The tricky part is making sure that you don't lose a lot when you hit a mediocre hand and are up against a big hand.
In this particular hand, the flop comes A
A
3
. My opponent bets $355 into a pot of $750. I've hit a piece of the flop, but am obviously behind any hand except a bluff. I elect to make a raise, for several reasons. First, I want to see if I have the best hand now so that I won't lose any more chips later. It's generally cheaper to make a small raise on the flop than fire out a bet on the turn. If he reraises, it is an easy fold, as I have no outs. Second, if I do have the best hand, I prefer that my opponent fold so that he doesn't hit an overcard. Finally, I might actually get a better hand to fold, such as nines or tens.
My opponent calls, so I am basically finished with this hand. The turn actually helps me, though, when the 10
falls, giving me a flush draw. We both check, and the river completes my flush when the 8
falls. My opponent bets $650 and I decide to put him all in for his remaining $945. My opponent shows the A
Q
, yet another example of when slow-playing can sometimes backfire.
By hand No. 129, I had built my stack up to $8,300 and the blinds were now $150-$300 with $15 antes. We were eighthanded and I raised to $700 from middle position with A-J. The button, with $13,000 in chips, called, and the big blind moved all in to $2,100. There was now about $3,400 in the pot, and I was facing a $1,400 call. I could either call or reraise to isolate.
The problem with calling is that I would be playing A-J out of position against an opponent with a big stack. I am getting about 2.4-to-1 pot odds to call against the all-in player. He could have a wide range of hands, given that he is short-stacked, so A-J is certainly getting the odds to play.
I elect to reraise all in to isolate. Of course, there is the risk that the button was trapping with a big hand, but I'm willing to take that risk to get it heads up. If our stacks were, say, double what they were, I probably would just call. But in this case, we're talking about a $3,000 pot when I have $8,000. This situation came up several times in the tournament when I was holding A-J, and I reraised to isolate. The button folds, the player in the big blind has A-3 offsuit, and my hand holds up.
In hand No. 181, we were very close to making the money. I now had $18,000 in chips with the third-largest stack at the table. The blinds were $400-$800 with $40 antes. I raised to $2,200 from under the gun with the 9
9
. The big blind, with a huge stack of $42,000, called. The flop came 3
3
2
. There was $5,100 in the pot and I bet $3,000, leaving me with $13,000 in chips. My opponent put me all in. There was $24,000 in the pot, giving me about 1.8-to-1 pot odds to call. What should I do?
This is a tough question. The first thing is to try to narrow down the range of hands that he might be holding. The most obvious choices are a flush draw and pocket pairs. He also could have trips, or a pure bluff is always a possibility, although I suspect that is doubtful in this case. I believe that most opponents would reraise preflop with aces, kings, or queens. Of course, he could be slow-playing them, but most opponents probably would not. With fours, fives, sixes, sevens, or eights, some opponents might push, while some might not. Most opponents probably will push with nines, tens, or jacks on this board. There are many hands that make for an easy call, such as eights, sevens, 7-6 suited, A-X suited, and K-X suited.
Overall, I am probably behind, but I am also getting 1.8-to-1 pot odds, which seems like a call I should make, although reluctantly. It turns out that my opponent was sitting on tens, and I got very lucky to spike a 9 on the turn.
When on a mission to beat 900 players over the course of 500 hands, you need to have some lucky breaks. I had my fair share, while also using my stack to put pressure on my opponents to build more and more chips. My next column will take a look at the heads-up battle, which lasted about 50 hands.
Matthew's third book, co-authored with Ian Taylor, is titled The Poker Mindset: Essential Attitudes for Poker Success. You can ask Matthew questions in his forum at www.InternetTexasHoldem.com.
