The Inside Straight

Pros Due for a World Series of Poker Bracelet
Erick Lindgren and David Singer Get Crossed Off the List
By Kristy Arnett

In what many in the poker community would consider long overdue accomplishments, both Erick Lindgren and David Singer won their first World Series of Poker bracelets within the first few events this year. With two more longtime and highly respected pros crossed off the zero-bracelet list, who's next?

One of the most obvious choices would be Gus Hansen. Despite having cashed only three times at the WSOP, he has won almost $5.7 million in major tournaments over the span of his poker career. He owns the record for most World Poker Tour titles at three, and just recently finished second in the WPT Championship at Bellagio. He also won the 2007 Aussie Millions main event.

Remember the phrase, "Always a bridesmaid, never a bride"? That applies to Andy Bloch. He's cashed 15 times at the WSOP, with eight top-10 finishes. Two years ago, he finished second to Chip Reese in the $50,000 buy-in H.O.R.S.E. event, and in the first WSOP tournament this year, the $10,000 buy-in world championship pot-limit hold'em event, he finished as the runner-up once again. Bloch has almost $3.2 million in tournament winnings, and still has plenty of chances to win a bracelet this year.

J.C. Tran, with almost $5.9 million in tournament winnings and a WPT title, is also a big contender for a bracelet. He's proven his consistency by finishing third in 2006 and second in 2007 in the Card Player Player of the Year race. He has six top-10 finishes at the WSOP out of 19 cashes.

Recently appointed Team Full Tilt member Patrik Antonius is another pro without a bracelet. It is obvious the man can play poker, as he boasts nearly $3 million in lifetime tournament winnings. He is recognized by his peers as one of the fiercest competitors in the world, with the skill set needed to win a bracelet.

Also deserving mention are Marcel Luske, Nam Le, John Phan, Tuan Le, Phil Laak, Gavin Smith, Greg Mueller, David Benyamine, and Michael Binger, who cashed seven times in the WSOP last year. Binger also has been on a hot streak lately, winning two preliminary events of WPT tournaments.

Follow all of the WSOP action on CardPlayer.com's WSOP Updates to see if any of these pros snag their first bracelet.

PokerStars APPT Season II Schedule Set
New Stop in Auckland, New Zealand
By Kristy Arnett

The highly successful debut of the Asia Pacific Poker Tour (APPT) last year has gotten PokerStars amped up for its second season, including a new location and bigger buy-ins, meaning bigger prize pools.

The first stop on the APPT will be the People's Republic of China. The Grand Waldo Hotel and Casino in Macau will host the event, Sept. 1-9, which will feature both a $3,200 buy-in main event and a $19,250 buy-in high-rollers event.

The next event will take place in Seoul, South Korea, at the Paradise Walkerhill Casino, Sept. 26-28. The buy-in is $2,870. Next, the APPT will travel to Auckland, New Zealand, Oct. 9-12, where the Skycity Casino will host the $2,400 buy-in main event. The APPT also will be stopping at the Hyatt Hotel and Casino in Manila, Philippines, for a $2,350 buy-in tournament, but the dates have yet to be announced.

This year's APPT will conclude in Sydney, Australia, Dec. 2-7. Star City Casino will max out at 900 entrants for the $5,930 buy-in main event.

Of course, PokerStars will be running numerous satellites to give away prize packages for each of these events.

David Saab Wins First Asian Poker Tour Event in Manila
Takes Home $280,000 of the $1Million-Guaranteed Prize Pool
By Kristy Arnett

Australian David Saab topped more than 300 entrants in the debut event of the Asian Poker Tour in the Philippines.
At the Dusit Thani Manila Hotel in Makati City, the 35-year-old poker pro defeated Chris Roh of South Korea heads up to take home $280,000. Roh was awarded $150,000 for his runner-up finish.

The next stop on the APT is in Macau at the StarWorld Hotel and Casino, Aug. 27-31. The buy-in is $5,300, and the event will boast a $1.5 million-guaranteed prize pool.

WPT Spanish Championship Concludes
Casper Hansen of Denmark wins $662,592
By Bob Pajich

The World Poker Tour Spanish Championship attracted 253 international players, generating a prize pool just shy of $2 million. Casper Hansen of Denmark left Casino Barcelona the last week of May as the winner of this non-televised event and its $662,592 top prize. Before this, Hansen's biggest cash came in the European Poker Tour's 2007 Dublin event, in which he finished ninth for $42,882.

The next WPT event is the Bellagio Cup IV, July 2-17. The $15,000 buy-in championship event will take place July 11-17.

Ask Jack

Mark: I was at a final table of a tournament, and the blinds were 400-800. A player moved all in for 1,300, and there were two callers. When the action got to me, I tried to move all in for my remaining 3,000 and was told by the dealer that I could not reraise because the original raiser had not doubled the big blind. I wanted to isolate the all-in player but was not permitted to do so. The floorman came over and agreed with the dealer. I thought I should have been able to raise since I was the big blind, and the other players in the hand had chips left. Am I wrong?

Jack: No; anytime you are the big blind, you always should have an opportunity to raise.

Nenad Medic Tops WSOP Leader Board After 14 Events
By Shawn Patrick Green

The first 14 events of the 2008 World Series of Poker have prompted such remarks from the captivated audience as, "Finally, he won a bracelet," to "How can that many people even fit into the room?" That's because big names like Nenad Medic, Erick Lindgren, and David Singer have taken down events, earning their first bracelets, and enormous fields have amassed, including event No. 2's incredible 3,929 entrants, which made it the fourth-biggest tournament field of all time.

So, the biggest question out there, aside from "Who will win the main event?" is, "Who will lead the 2008 WSOP leader board as the most consistent player over the 55-event tournament? Will it be a double (or triple) bracelet winner? Will it be a player who makes an amazing number of final tables?"

The WSOP leader board, taking its criteria from the Card Player Player of the Year race and with results in from a quarter of the WSOP events, is topped by poker pro Nenad Medic.

Medic already has taken down one event (the first event of the Series, the $10,000 pot-limit hold'em world championship) and finished deep in another (24th in event No. 5, a $1,000 no-limit hold'em rebuy tournament). Those two finishes earned him more than $800,000 early on in the Series, but only the first-place finish gave him points toward the WSOP leader-board race. He earned 2,100 points for his bracelet win.

Following right behind him on the WSOP leader board is Duncan Bell, who won a bracelet in event No. 13, a $2,500 no-limit hold'em tournament in which he outlasted 1,396 other entrants. He snagged 1,800 leader-board points for that win.

Next up is Andy Bloch, who sits close behind Bell with 1,750 points. Bloch has become the newest "Man Who Would be King" with his string of so-close-but-so-far runner-up finishes. It was his runner-up finish to Medic in event No. 1 that landed him in third place on this leader board. Bloch is one of numerous big-name poker pros still on the "needs to win a bracelet" list. (See the story on Page 32.)

But those who are earning points during the Series aren't using them only to vie for the top spot on the WSOP leader board; they're accumulating them for the overall Card Player Player of the Year (POY) race, as well. Interestingly, none of the top three WSOP players have broken the top 20 in the POY standings, but other players have scored points during the Series to cause some movement within those 20 spots.

One of those players is Erick Lindgren, who won his first WSOP bracelet this year. His win (in a $5,000 mixed-hold'em event) earned him 1,584 points. That, along with his two other major-tournament final tables this year, vaulted him into 13th place in the POY race. Justin Bonomo finished as the runner-up to Lindgren in his bracelet event, and Bonomo now sits just two spots below Lindgren in the POY standings in 15th place. Bonomo also has three other final tables this year that have contributed to his POY points. Finally, Steven Merrifield has made three POY-worthy final-table appearances already this year, including a runner-up finish in WSOP event No. 13, $2,500 no-limit hold'em. That finish earned him 1,500 points, putting him in 18th place in the POY standings.





Bellagio Cup VI at Hand
The first tournament of season VII of the World Poker Tour is almost upon us. The $15,000 buy-in WPT Bellagio Cup VI main event kicks off on July 11, and the Bellagio Cup VI prelims are running as you read this.

As of this writing, the WPT contract was not renewed at GSN for the airing of the seventh season, and WPT Enterprises was in discussions with other major networks to broadcast the episodes.

Spade Club News




SpadeClub Spotlight
A WPT Boot Camp seat was awarded to Denys "Winndealer" Danley, 54, the winner of SpadeClub's Profile Completion Tournament. Danley is a poker and blackjack dealer at a Winnemucca, Nevada, casino and has been playing poker for two years. After taking sixth place in his first live poker tournament in Elko, Nevada, he was hooked. Danley enjoys the tournaments on SpadeClub and thinks the hand helper and odds calculator are great learning tools. In September, he will be attending the two-day tournament camp taught by Clonie Gowen in Las Vegas, and is excited to have received this opportunity from SpadeClub.

To view complete interviews with SpadeClub winners, please visit www.spadeclub.com/news/landing.

Benefits of the Club
Elevate your game by learning from top online pros with Card Player Pro. Card Player Pro offers instructional online poker videos designed to make you a better player. You can receive substantial discounts on Card Player Pro and many other products by becoming a SpadeClub Exclusive member.

Check out www.spadeclub.com/club-rewards to learn more about all of the rewards that SpadeClub has to offer.

Tips From the Table
SpadeClub member Rob "jetlifer31" Galletto said, "Hall of Fame catcher Yogi Berra once said, 'You can observe a lot just by watching.' That statement just as easily could have been uttered about the poker table. Pay close attention to a few rounds at the table. Does a player slow-play monsters, overbet vulnerable hands, or call you down with any piece of the board? When you notice these trends, make a note of your observations by using the easy note-taking feature on SpadeClub. This information will come in handy when tough decisions arise. Yogi also said, 'It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future.' Fortunately, you can tilt the future in your favor by paying attention to each hand, because the past is a good predictor of the future. Don't forget to mix up your play, because your opponent just might be watching."

Submit your own tips from the table along with your SpadeClub screen name to: [email protected]. If we publish your tip or tale, you'll receive a free SpadeClub T-shirt along with the pride of being published.

Promotions
Gear Up in Las Vegas
This summer, SpadeClub will be keeping a close eye on the final tables of the World Series of Poker, Bellagio Cup IV, Venetian Deep-Stack Extravaganza, and Mega Stack Series at Caesars Palace to see if you or any of SpadeClub's loyal Exclusive members are wearing their official SpadeClub gear. If you make a final table in any of these tournaments while wearing SpadeClub gear, you'll walk away with no less than $1,000. If you make a televised final table, you could earn up to $100,000. Visit www.spadeclub.com/promotions to let us know when, where, and what you'll be playing, and SpadeClub will provide you with the apparel.

Aggression Pays in Pot-Limit Omaha
By Mike Matusow

I provide exclusive coaching videos for Card Player Pro, powered by PokerSavvy Plus. My columns will center on hands taken from my videos and will cover strategy concepts in Omaha and mixed games. As a Card Player reader, you'll have access to clips of these hands and many others.

In one of my recent videos, an interesting multiway pot developed that demonstrates the power of aggression and representation in pot-limit Omaha.

Game: Sixhanded $25-$50, $2,000 cap pot-limit Omaha cash game
Opponents: Unknown high-stakes players
Stacks: $5,601 (me), $12,391 (cutoff), and $6,000 (small blind)
My Cards: K J 10 8
My Position: Under the gun plus one

The under-the-gun player limped in, and I decided to limp behind with a medium-strength hand that could make a lot of straights. This was a good hand to play in a limped pot, but not strong enough to play in a raised pot. Had anyone behind me raised, I would have folded. The cutoff and small blind both called, and the big blind checked.

The flop came 10 7 3, giving me top pair and a gutshot-straight draw. The first three players checked to me, and I decided to bet half the pot. In a multiway limped pot, you need to be very careful not to go broke without the strongest of holdings. With the first three players showing weakness, my half-pot bet was a "feeler" bet. Had anyone come over the top, it again would have been an easy fold, as my hand was not that strong.

The cutoff called right behind me. This instantly told me that he had a drawing hand but not the nut-flush draw, as the majority of players will (correctly) raise with it in this spot. Because I held the K, I also knew that he could not be drawing to the second-nut flush. Knowing this, my plan was to bet the pot on the turn if any heart came and represent a big flush.

The small blind also called. The turn card was the 9, completing my gutshot straight but also putting the flush out there. A lot of players in this spot would instinctively think, "I have a straight, but the flush just got there, and I'm in a multiway pot and it's probably no good." In reality, while it's possible that my straight may be the best hand, I'm actually expecting to make weaker flushes fold. I bet the pot and both players folded.

This play worked because my pot bet on the turn showed tremendous strength, and because I was confident that neither opponent had the nuts or second nuts. It is important to note that this type of play is successful against only good, thinking opponents. Many players at lower stakes are simply not good enough to fold most flushes. Yet, regardless of what stakes you play, you should employ this type of thought process. You'll end up winning some hands that you otherwise would have given up on. Good luck at the tables.

To watch Mike Matusow comment on and play this hand, point your browser to Card Player Pro, the complete online poker training site, at www.CardPlayer.com/link/matusow2.

Hand 2 Hand Combat
'Kenny Rap' Risks Elimination on the River on a Solid Read
By Craig Tapscott

Want to study real poker hands with the Internet's most successful players? In this series, Card Player offers hand analysis with online poker's leading talent.

Event: $200 PokerStars Sunday Warm-Up no-limit hold'em tournament
Players: 2,104
First place: $82,561
Stacks: "Kenny Rap" -- 11,600; Villain -- 28,975
Blinds: 150-300

"Kenny Rap" is in middle position and raises to 900 with the Q 8. Villain, in the small blind, calls.

Craig Tapscott: Why raise initially with this hand with so many players behind you?

Kenny "Kenny Rap" Weinstein: With almost 40 big blinds, I am opening with a huge range of hands. Of course, the Q 8 is a very bad hand, as it's hard to make the nuts and easily can get you in a lot of trouble. However, I had been quiet so far, and it seemed like an OK spot to just take down the blinds. Making it 850 also would have been OK, but nothing over 900. I'm not too happy that the small blind came along for the ride, but at least I'll have position the whole hand. Players should be constantly mixing up their game to avoid being predictable. Remember, every time you show a marginal hand, it's that much easier to get paid when you have a premium hand. Of course, you have to stop stealing after showing something like Q-8.

Flop: J 10 7 (2,100 pot)

CT: Do you automatically continuation-bet here?

KW: Yes, even though it's really a horrendous flop for me. There's a flush draw present, as well as many straight draws. Even if I hit my draw, it will be a rather obvious one-card straight.

Villain checks. Kenny Rap bets 900.

CT: Why that bet size?

KW: Perhaps betting 900 again is a bit weak, but I also do it with strong hands, and I thought I could get some information. In my eyes, he will fold if he has air and raise if he is going to raise.

Villain calls.

CT: With what range do you think he's calling you here?

KW: His call signals a weak draw, or perhaps a combo draw like 8-7 or 10-9, or a bad flush draw with which he wasn't comfortable raising. He could have something like A-10; I think most players would raise here with A-J, and would have folded Q-J and K-J preflop -- or at least they should have.

Turn: J (3,900)

Villain checks.

CT: Do you dare bluff at this pot once again?

KW: I very rarely double-barrel bluff. Despite the success rate actually being pretty high, I just believe it is too many chips to risk on a bluff. However, when discussing his range, remember that I thought it was very unlikely that he had a jack. And his combo draws just got a lot weaker, as he cannot hit two pair anymore, and one shot at a straight is gone. I thought I could get him to go away if I fired again, signaling either the third jack in my hand or a nice overpair with which I wasn't scared. For the record, I would check all hands with showdown value for fear of my read being wrong and him having a jack. Pot control is very important if you actually have a good one-pair hand, so I think I would check behind with queens through aces and call almost all river bets. However, with absolutely no showdown value, or so we think, it seems like a decent time to turn up the heat.

CT: So, you had no choice but to continue to bluff? And did you peg him as a weak player up to this point?

KW: Well, sometimes cutting your losses is wise, and usually I just give up here. However, I find calls out of the blinds often to be much weaker than calls by players who have nothing invested yet. I didn't necessarily peg him as a weak player, but the fact that I did not recognize his name influenced my decision. I think it is way more likely that a weaker player still may be drawing.

CT: What was your table image?

KW: I had not been playing berserk Rap style at this time. However, being a highly ranked player often leads people not to believe me, and they even go to great lengths to play pots with me. I think everyone thinks I'm a loose maniac. But this was not the case here.

CT: Could he be looking to get to a showdown with A-10 or something similar? Perhaps pocket sevens was a possibilty, though a small one; but that's how I would think he would play them there.

KW: Pocket sevens is certainly possible, but even bottom set was very vulnerable on the flop, and I would expect a raise. Remember, an 8, 9, or a diamond could turn that set into an underdog, or at least shut down the action. A-10 is possible post-flop, but it seems like such a bad call preflop when out of position versus a middle-position raiser. If I'm playing sanely, you don't want to be calling there with A-10 at all.

Kenny Rap bets 1,800. Villain calls.

KW: Why won't he go away? At this point, a baby flush draw is becoming a real possibility. He doesn't seem to care that the jack just paired and that I'm continuing to fire. That really appears to be a draw to me. However, most of this is a moot point, since I'm sitting with queen high.

CT: Why couldn't he have a huge hand and be trapping you?

KW: Well, by filling up, he doesn't have to worry too much about losing the hand, as perhaps only another jack or a 10 would really hurt him. However, in my opinion, it is too likely that the river will go check, check. Not every player raises the flop with sets, but almost always will let you know by the turn if he has one. It is very rare that someone slow-plays all the way to the river.

River: 10 (7,500 pot)

Villain bets 8,100.

CT: See? He was trapping you [laughing]. So how do you read this bet?

KW: I froze. But before I angrily mucked my cards and wondered what the hell I was doing in the first place in this pot, I took a second to replay the hand in my head. My read was the same throughout each street. I really believed he had a draw, with 8-7 being the hand with the most showdown value. He could have had a 10, but by shoving the river, he was going to get called by only a jack. Why eliminate all worse hands and get called by a better hand? If he actually has the jack, well, he played this hand great, and more power to him.

CT: That sounds about right. Can you call here?

KW: This appears to me that he has 8-7 and is stuck with 8 high. He also could have baby diamonds that didn't get there. I guess something like 4-4 is also possible, but that's not really where my thoughts were. The bottom line is that I thought that river shove was a complete panic move, and I actually thought my queen high might be good. I mean, he almost definitely would just check with an ace or even a king and try to win the showdown. It was time to take a deep breath, close my eyes, and call. Yikes! How did I get into this mess?

Kenny Rap calls and is all in. Villain shows the 6 4 for a missed flush draw. Kenny Rap wins the pot of 23,500.

Kenny Weinstein has been playing poker professionally for three years. He had more than $1 million in online cashes in 2007. He is constantly working on his game and loves discussing hands and trying to improve.

Online Zone
David Singer Comes Out Ahead at Heads-Up Championship
By Shawn Patrick Green

David Singer may have lost in the first round of the 2008 NBC National Heads-Up Poker Championship, but he traded that potential $500,000 win for a $560,000 win when he took down the recent $25,000 buy-in Full Tilt Heads-Up Championship. That tournament, with the highest buy-in of any heads-up tournament ever held online, consisted of an elite field of 64 entrants, representing one of the toughest tournament fields to date.

Singer, a former environmental lawyer, is no newcomer to heads-up poker. He took down the heads-up event in the 2006 Mirage Poker Showdown, earning more than $230,000, and his biggest-ever win was for $1 million in the Caesars Palace Classic main event last October. He has continued his hot play at the 2008 World Series of Poker, winning his first bracelet in a $1,500 pot-limit hold'em event, which added another $214,000 to his bankroll. Singer also has proven himself to be an excellent mixed-game player by making the final table of the $50,000 buy-in World Series H.O.R.S.E. championship two years in a row, finishing sixth both times.

Card Player recently caught up with David to talk about his huge heads-up online win.

Shawn Patrick Green: What was your hardest match?

David Singer: I'd say that the hardest match was the first match I had against OMGClayAiken [Phil Galfond]. I know that he plays the highest no-limit hold'em cash games on Full Tilt, and he's supposed to be one of the biggest winners on the site. I'd say that he was my toughest opponent.

SPG: Why so?

DS: He mixed things up more and he kept me off balance. Some of the other guys came out and played one style, and then they took a while to adjust, and I sort of saw how they were adjusting. A few of them came out with a style that is pretty common among young, successful Internet players, and they were just trying to run me over. I think I'm good at playing against people who come out with the mindset that they're going to run me over, because I know how to counter it pretty well.

SPG: Well, how do you counter it?

DS: Well, you trap them, and when they come over the top of you, you have to come over the top of them, sometimes even without a hand. I don't want to give away all of my secrets; the World Series heads-up tournament is coming up soon. I try not to have a style in no-limit. I just try to anticipate what my opponent is doing and counter his strategy.

So, if someone comes out with one set strategy, and it doesn't seem like he's varying his play that much, no matter what that strategy is, if you're thinking, you can take advantage of it. Some people were a little bit predictable; they'd come out with one strategy and see that it wasn't working, so they'd switch, and I think I was able to pick up on when they would switch. Obviously, the better players in poker are constantly changing gears and varying their styles.

SPG: Are you playing the player, rather than the cards, more in heads-up play than at a full table?

DS: Obviously, it's a mixture of both, but I think that when heads up, you're playing the player more, because you're seeing so many hands against the person that you should be picking up on how he plays certain hands, and you get much more of a feel for what he's likely to have if the structure is good and you're playing a lot of hands. So, you sort of know when you can take him off a hand or when he has just a medium hand, and you kind of know how he's going to play a strong hand, usually. It's not that you don't make mistakes, but you should be getting a lot more of an idea of how a player's going to play, and how he's going to play his hands in different situations. So, I think the cards become less important.

SPG: Given that, is it easier to play heads up live than online, because you have the physical tells and more of a sense, based on the atmosphere, of how he's playing?

DS: I guess it is, depending on how well you pick up on physical tells. Theoretically, your opponent can pick up on them as well as you can. Sometimes I think I'm good at picking up physical tells, but, mostly against more experienced players, I don't pick up that many tells these days. With newer players who haven't played that long and are inexperienced or play mostly on the Internet, I'm more likely to be able to find something that is worthwhile if I try to concentrate on them.

I guess I'm someone who just plays more by feel; I don't say that I'm going to look for this, this, and this. Actually, in the last tournament, when I tried to really concentrate on picking up physicals tells, I made two terrible reads and got knocked out quickly. In the last one, the guy was shaking a lot, and that's a classic sign of someone holding a big hand, but for some reason I thought he was just nervous and pulling a big bluff on me. So, I called him, and he had the nuts; that didn't work out too well.

So, I don't know, it varies. With different opponents, I'm going to do different things, but it's more of a feel thing - how a person is playing that day and whether I think he's a sophisticated player who is going to be acting or not.

SPG: You're easily one of the most well-rounded poker players out there, considering two final tables in a row in the $50,000 World Series H.O.R.S.E. championship. How did you go about becoming so well-versed in the various games?

DS: Well, in general, I think people who have played poker longer have picked up on the games and play a lot of the games, whereas the people who are learning now focus on just no-limit hold'em. So, it's just natural that I know so many more of those games. The first five years that I played, I played stud exclusively. So, picking up eight-or-better stud and razz was natural along the way. I'm still not as good as I should be at the flop games, for sure.

SPG: That's weird for a lot of people to hear [laughing].

DS: [Laughing] Well, it's surprising to people who don't play poker that much that everyone who is a professional is not good at every game. That's just the way it is. If you play in a H.O.R.S.E. game, especially if you're not at the highest level, you can find that some of the people are just much weaker at one game than they are at the others. Since there are three stud games in the H.O.R.S.E. event at the World Series, I think that helps me more than the people who are better at the flop games.

Kenny Tran made the final table of the H.O.R.S.E. event last year, and he hardly ever plays stud; I think he'd admit that they're not his best games. So, even though he ended up finishing higher than me, I think he was giving up a lot in the stud games. And there are a lot of people like that, who play more flop games, so I think that's helped me some.

SPG: As far as stud is concerned, that's a game that gives you a wealth of information, because there are so many cards turned faceup. So, theoretically, it should be easier to play, because you have so much more information, but it becomes very overwhelming for people, because they kind of think they have to see everything and remember everything that they see. So, do you have any advice for people to kind of get acclimated to the stud games?

DS: If you were to give a month or two to playing just stud, if you were a professional player or play a lot, you'd find that it becomes pretty secondary to remember the cards. Once you play for a while, it's not even an issue. You could come up to me when I'm playing stud and talk to me, and even though I'm not in the hand, there's a good chance that I've seen all of the cards that have come out and remembered them. It's just like anything else, the more you work at it, the better it gets. After a while, you just start remembering the cards in stud.

The way I started was from the first book I ever read about it -- a book by Roy West called something like 42 Lessons in Stud. He said to just remember the cards in order. Remember the deuces that come out, and then the threes, and the fours, and just keep that in your head. But once you play for a while, that's not even something to worry about; it just comes naturally, remembering the cards.

Generation Next
Thayer Rasmussen: A Man With an Inquiring Mind
By Craig Tapscott

Thayer Rasmussen possesses an inquiring mind -- and believes that the process of asking questions can be more important than simply knowing the answers. The "why" of each hand is at the core of every decision made on poker's battlefield of felt. So, why ask why?

"I think people who struggle are the kind of players who want to be told what to do, as opposed to understanding why they are doing something," said Rasmussen. "They need to understand the reasons behind each strategy to properly improve as a player, and not just know how to do it. You can't just follow some cheat sheet and improve your game."

While knee-deep in a legal studies curriculum at the University of Central Florida, Rasmussen found live games with friends and online poker welcome diversions. Upon graduation, his passion for poker won out over the pursuit of a legal career. He's never looked back.

Over the next two years, he won more than $1 million playing online tournaments, and cashed three times in the 2007 World Series of Poker. Just prior to the Series, Rasmussen won a preliminary event at the Mandalay Bay Poker Championships and finished fourth in the $10,000 main event for $131,000.

Card Player sat down with him before the start of this year's WSOP to find out why he's so good.

Craig Tapscott: What do players need to pay more attention to at the table?

Thayer Rasmussen: Most people, when analyzing what an opponent would do, more often than not are thinking of what they themselves would do. Then, they react to that. Instead, they need to think about what their opponent is thinking. Their opponent certainly is not thinking the way they're thinking, so they have to adjust to that.

CT: Explain, please.

TR: You have to be more open to interpreting the available information. For example, you think that an opponent would never play aces a certain way during a hand. Why? Mainly because you think it's a horrible play and you would never do it. So? The metagame can become pretty intense when you're thinking on so many levels, so you have to adjust accordingly.

CT: Are you more math-oriented in most of your decisions?

TR: I'm really a solid combination of both. Even if players rely on feel, there's always a math core to it. All of poker is basically math, but you're the one controlling the variables. A player's poker skill is the thing that interprets what happens. If I told a good math player that a player is raising 50 percent of the time, he would know how to counteract and adjust. Yet, he can use his feel, instincts, and reads, and apply that information to the basic math of the game.

CT: What was a mistake that you consistently made as you learned how to play tournaments?

TR: When I got short-stacked, I would just sit around and wait for a hand. Eventually, I would blind down. Then I learned that the short-stack play of 10 big blinds is basically simple math. You have to figure out how often an opponent is raising, then figure out how often he is bluffing when he raises, so that you can figure out how often you can make him fold.

CT: At 15-20 big blinds, to chip up more, are you looking for a loose player to raise so that you can resteal, rather than just open-raise hands?

TR: Yes. That's much better than being in the mindset of having to wait for a hand. Online, it's especially important to understand how to play stacks of 20 big blinds and less. Generally, when I have an amount less than 15 big blinds, I almost never will raise and then fold. I'll pretty much always shove, or raise and call. It's a leak in your game to raise and fold when you're that short, because you're giving up so much of your stack.

CT: Any advice on dealing with bad beats and tough variance?

TR: I'm pretty laid-back. I don't really have high peaks and low valleys when it comes to emotions about the game. Reacting too emotionally tends to affect your life outside of poker more than it does within the game. Being stressed-out is certainly bad for your game, but being stressed-out when you're not playing is even worse. You really should be relaxing.

Mind Over Poker
Commander's Intent
By David Apostolico

I am reading a great book called Made to Stick, about why some ideas survive and others die. While I wasn't looking for poker analogies, one chapter was just way too applicable to ignore. In a nutshell, this chapter looked at how Army battle plans have evolved. Before the 1980s, the idea was to have detailed play-by-play instructions handed down.

The problem with this strategy, according to Col. Tom Kolditz, the head of behavioral sciences at West Point, was: "No plan survives contact with the enemy. You may start off trying to fight your plan, but the enemy gets a vote. Unpredictable things happen -- the weather changes, a key asset is destroyed, the enemy responds in a way that you don't expect. Many armies fail because they put all their emphasis into creating a plan that becomes useless ten minutes into the battle."

Sounds a lot like a poker game. Unpredictable things will happen: an opponent reraises, the turn card puts a flush on the board, you take a big dent to your chip stack, an opponent sets a trap. In short, your opponent always gets a vote. In fact, instead of one opponent, up to nine others have a say in dictating what happens on the felt. Certainly, even the best-laid plans will need major and continuous adjustments. How, then, does one properly prepare in order to align individual goals with the anticipated happenstance of the unexpected?

Well, in the 1980s, the Army adopted something called the Commander's Intent in order to address this very problem. The Army certainly didn't do away with the planning process, as it recognizes the value in thinking through all of the issues. Rather, the Commander's Intent is meant to strip a plan to its core. According to the authors of Made to Stick, the Commander's Intent "never specifies so much detail that it risks being rendered obsolete by unpredictable events."

"You can lose the ability to execute the original plan, but you never lose the responsibility of executing the intent," specifies Kolditz. Again, this seems like dead-on advice for a poker game -- especially in a tournament, when you don't have the luxury of waiting things out. In a poker tournament, you must make constant adjustments, as the situation is always changing. Blinds increase, chip stacks go up and down, tables break, and new players come and go.

A detailed plan may go something like this: After looking at the blinds structure, you decide that you will play extremely tight for the first three rounds and then capitalize on this image by becoming quite aggressive in round four, when the antes kick in. The problem with such a strategy is that you could find yourself being dealt great cards in the beginning and playing a lot of hands. Since your opponents may not see all of your hands, but only that you are playing a lot of hands, your hopes for a tight image are gone. Or, the table could break before you get to level four. Or, your chip stack may be so diminished by level four that you don't have the weaponry for aggressiveness. Or, perhaps your opponents are playing very tight in the beginning, and there is an opportunity to pick up chips by being more aggressive then.

Lots of things can change. How, then, can we come up with a poker version of the Commander's Intent? Army officers determine the Commander's Intent by completing two statements: 1. If we do nothing else during tomorrow's mission, we must , and 2. The single most important thing we must do tomorrow is .

Let's see how we can implement this for a poker tournament. Let's say you are preparing for day one of the main event of the World Series of Poker for the very first time. You may complete those statements as follows: 1. If I do nothing else tomorrow, I will not be intimidated, and 2. The single most important thing I must do tomorrow is survive. Then, your personal Commander's Intent could be something such as this: "I will hang tough and not be bullied, and ultimately will survive the day." Now, you have the responsibility to execute this intent. You can make adjustments as needed to show that you will protect your chips and do what's necessary to pick up chips without taking unnecessary risks in order to survive day one. As common wisdom goes, the WSOP can't be won on day one, but it certainly can be lost. The same analogy would apply to the early rounds of any decently structured tournament. The most important thing, however, is that no matter what your opponents throw at you, you can make adjustments that are aligned with your intent. Your plans won't be rendered useless by unpredictable events. Of course, this is only a simple example. It is up to you to establish your own individualized Commander's Intent for whatever game you are about to begin.

David Apostolico is the author of numerous poker books, including Tournament Poker and The Art of War and Poker Strategies for a Winning Edge in Business. You can contact him at [email protected].

WPT Academy
Pressing With Flush Draws at the Final Table
By Mike Sexton, the "Ambassador of Poker" and Commentator for the World Poker Tour

One of the homes of the World Poker Tour on the East Coast is the Borgata in Atlantic City. It truly is an amazing property with an incredible poker room, and if you've never been there, do yourself a favor and go. It also hosts great tournaments, with the premier event being the WPT's no-limit hold'em $10,000 buy-in Borgata Poker Open. Players from around the world descend on the the Borgata in hope of becoming a poker-made millionaire and capturing a coveted WPT title.

This final table was a doozy that included Mike "The Mouth" Matusow, Roy "The Oracle" Winston, Haralabos Voulgaris, and longtime high-stakes pro Mark Weitzman. It turned out to be another great WPT event.

Early at the final table, with a 5,000 ante and blinds at 40,000-80,000, chip leader Roy Winston (with nearly 5 million) opened the pot from under the gun for 230,000 with the A 7. Voulgaris and Weitzman folded, and Matusow called from the button with the A Q. The two blinds folded.

The flop came A-Q-4 with two diamonds! This gave Winston top pair and the nut-flush draw, while Matusow had flopped the top two pair. Winston checked and Matusow bet 325,000 (about half the size of the pot). Winston then came back over the top for 1.2 million, and Matusow was glad to get it all in with aces and queens. Winston made the call, and everyone in the stands was on his feet, sweating the turn and river cards in the 4.45 million pot.

Once again, it was heartbreak at a WPT final table for Mike Matusow, as the 2 appeared on the turn, giving Winston the flush and the lead. Matusow, visibly deflated, needed an ace or a queen on the river to stay alive in the tournament, but that didn't happen. The K appeared on the river, and that quieted The Mouth and sent him to the rail in sixth place.

With these chip stacks and this kind of flop, there aren't many players in the world who wouldn't commit all of their chips with either of these hands. Sometimes, you just have to go with a hand, hold your breath, and hope to get lucky -- or, I should say, hope not to get unlucky. Here, Matusow got unlucky.

Congratulations to Roy Winston, who, with the help of this diamond flush, went on to capture his first World Poker Tour title.

Book Review
Poker Lore From A to Z
By Tim Peters

The Poker Encyclopedia by Elkan Allan and Hannah Mackay, with a preface by Anthony Holden (Portico Books, London; £14.99 [about $30])

It's time for a poker pop quiz (answers at the end of the review):

1. Who is Felton McCorquodale?
2. Why did Johnny Chan keep a fresh orange on the felt?
3. What is "the devil's bedpost"?

Those are a few of the bits of arcana to be discovered -- and savored -- in The Poker Encyclopedia, a terrific new book by the late Elkan Allan, a British writer and poker enthusiast who passed away in 2006, and Hannah Mackay, a former poker dealer now writing for the BBC.

The first thing you notice is the book's strikingly clever design: It's bound in green felt. But as much as I liked the packaging, I liked the contents even more, from the definition of "A-B-C" ("a predictable player") to the poker meaning of the term "zombie" ("a player with no discernible tells"). In between are 400 pages of poker definitions, quotes, anecdotes, biographies, and essays. This must be the most exhaustive compilation of poker facts, lore, and legend ever to find its way into print.

Some of this stuff is useless but fun, like explications of some of the more bizarre poker variants ("Chowaha: A more complicated version of double-flop hold'em"), or the mathematical analysis of the climactic hand in The Cincinnati Kid, or the slang terms for various poker hands (yes, I'm sure you know the derivation of "Anna Kournikova," but do you know which hand goes by the name "Barely Legal"? See Page 45 in the book). But the book is also filled with more meaty topics, including cogent, insightful profiles of poker's legendary players, such as Daniel Negreanu, Doyle Brunson, and Barry Greenstein.

The profiles and definitions are punctuated by poker-related quotations, many of which will be familiar to poker nerds. But I had never before read Shane Smith's definition of Omaha: "a game that was invented by a Sadist and is played by Masochists." Another good one is by the legendary noir writer Raymond Chandler, who wrote that poker is "as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as you could find outside an advertising agency."

The authors also include plenty of strategic material to help your game, with discussions on the conventional wisdom for playing specific hands to longer essays on topics like tells, aggression, and bluffing. But the real pleasure in this book is to be had by dipping into it and finding the unexpected. You might look up Phil Gordon, for example, and find, one entry previous, "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" (not the spaghetti Western, but "a non-standard version of seven-card stud"). Another example: I'd heard the term "brush" before to describe the person who directs people to tables in a cardroom, but I didn't know its derivation: Part of the brush's job was to brush down the felt at the end of the day.

The Poker Encyclopedia was published late last year, and is reasonably up-to-date (circa 2006: Jamie Gold is in; Jerry Yang isn't). It reflects the onset of the UIGEA debacle, but that's about as much recent history as it contains, and it would be very useful, not to mention entertaining, if the publisher could somehow extend the life of the book (on the Web, perhaps, or simply plan on a revised edition every couple of years).

This book is impressively researched, but it's also written with great clarity, as well as the kind of droll humor that I associate with the British. And it's the kind of book that every poker nerd (a group of which I am a member) should have on his or her shelf.

Answers:
Question No. 1: McCorquodale is credited with introducing Texas hold'em to Las Vegas cardrooms in 1963.
Question No. 2: Cardrooms were smoky places until recently; the citrus smell of the orange masked the odor of cigarette smoke for Chan.
Question No. 3: The 4, considered unlucky by those who believe in luck, is also known as "the devil's bedpost."