Inside Straight

Senator Introduces Act That Would License Online Poker
Internet Skill Game Licensing and Control Act of 2008 Would License Internet Skill Games
By Bob Pajich

An act that would establish a legal framework to license and regulate online poker in the United States was introduced by Sen. Robert Menendez (New Jersey) on Oct. 1. If passed, S. 3616, called the "Internet Skill Game Licensing and Control Act of 2008," would amend current U.S. Code to "provide for the licensing of Internet skill game facilities."

The text of the proposed bill defines "Internet skill game" as "an Internet-based game that uses simulated cards, dice, or tiles in which success is predominantly determined by the skill of the players, including poker, bridge, and mahjong."

"This is really a bill that poker players could love. It's written to directly help the online poker-playing community to establish licensed and regulated poker in the U.S.," said John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance. "We believe that it is a great marker for the next Congress and the new administration."

The government would look at companies' primary owners, financial holdings, history of following the law in foreign jurisdictions, and corporate structure, among many other things, before granting them licenses to operate here. If passed, the secretary of the Treasury will be responsible for prescribing the licenses, and all the safeguards, regulations, and testing mechanisms necessary for the government to begin licensing Internet "skill games" within 180 days of the vote.

The act also calls for the secretary of the Treasury to constantly monitor the licensed sites, to make sure that the games remain fair and that the companies are following the rules of the licensing agreement, as defined by S. 3616.

The proposed bill also gives states and Indian lands the right to refuse to allow their residents to access the federally licensed sites, if they so choose.

The PPA, which through a great lobbying effort has bent the ear of many congressional members for the past three years, worked with Sen. Menendez's staff to help draft this proposed law change.

"One of the things that Sen. Menendez really gravitated to is the fact that, under the current environment, consumers aren't getting the protection that they deserve, and he wanted to introduce a bill that would provide a regulatory framework that protected U.S. consumers from fraud and abuse, and also to ensure that children don't get access to the websites, and to protect problem gamblers, as well," Pappas said.

This is the first time a senator has written a proposition that tries to clarify which games should be considered skillful from among those for which money is wagered on the Internet, and therefore would be protected by this bill. House members, particularly Barney Frank, have tried to take on this issue since the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was passed.

Husband and Wife Both Capture Heartland Poker Tour Titles
Mary Jo Belcore-Zogman Wins Main Event at Grand Casino Mille Lacs
By Kristy Arnett

It's been said that a couple who plays together, stays together, and nothing could be truer for the Zogmans.

At the most recent Heartland Poker Tour event, Mary Jo Belcore-Zogman won first place, outlasting 201 players at the Grand Casino Mille Lacs in Minnesota. Not only did she take home nearly $86,000, she also joined her husband on the list of HPT champions.

"It was more exciting to watch her win it than to win it myself," said husband Dan Zogman, winner of an HPT event in 2007 at the Majestic Star Casino in Gary, Indiana.

The couple from McHenry, Illinois, has been traveling the country playing poker for the past four years. The first time they played together was on Valentine's Day, coincidently, at the Majestic Star Casino. They started playing $3-$6 limit hold'em, not knowing that Dan would win nearly $228,000 in a televised poker tournament there a couple of years later.

"Before the main event he played in, I was so mad because I didn't qualify," said Mary Jo. "But when he made it to the final table, I was so excited. It was so fun to watch him."

Even though she didn't qualify for the event that Dan won, she was bound and determined to play in the next event. She qualified not just once, but twice. She won two seats, and gave one to Dan to play.

While most couples choose exotic locations for vacations, the Zogmans choose the hottest poker destinations. They compete in several tournaments a year together, and have gotten heads up six times, including one tournament that awarded Dan a $25,000 seat in the World Poker Tour Championship at Bellagio for first place, and Mary Jo a $10,000 seat in the Bay 101 Shooting Star event for second place.

The two would like to continue to travel and play bigger events. Both have full-time jobs, but play an average of five times per week.

"It is the healthiest relationship, and we have a ball," said Mary Jo, "but we aren't giving up our day jobs."

IMEGA Getting Ready for Legal Showdown
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Will Hear Case
By Bob Pajich

The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA) has retained attorney Stephen Saltzburg to help it present its case to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act should be abolished because it violates portions of the Constitution.

In April, a federal circuit court judge allowed iMEGA's previously dismissed case to advance to the court that, judicially speaking, sits one floor below the Supreme Court. IMEGA is asking the court for an extension of a deadline to file its intent to sue the government, which is set to pass at the end of September.

The government will then have time to prepare its own argument before the judge makes a ruling. It will take until well into 2009 before this case is close to being resolved.

IMEGA is a professional association that counts as members those companies within the online gambling and commerce industry. It was formed in 2007 with the primary goal of challenging the legality of the UIGEA, which affected so many of its members' bottom lines.

Saltzburg is a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and chairman of the ABA Criminal Justice Section from 2007 to 2008. He is also a professor of law at Georgetown University.

Ask Jack

Randy: I play in a local cardroom in which players deal the cards. Lately, some players have started to wait until others show their hands on the river, regardless of who bet and who called. When these players see a hand that beats them, they muck, and if someone asks to see their hand, an argument often ensues. How can I get players to expose their hands in the order they should be shown?
Jack: Have the manager make it a house rule and enforce it.

Bill: I was in a live sit-and-go with three players left when the small blind's phone rang. It was folded to him, and he answered the phone while completing the bet. I was the big blind. The dealer did not say anything, but could I have had his hand called dead because of the one-player-to-a-hand rule?
Jack: In my sit-and-gos, the player would have been able to finish the hand and then would have received a penalty for abusing the cellphone rule.

World Series of Poker Circuit Begins New Season
First Event Takes Place at the Horseshoe Southern Indiana
By Kristy Arnett

The World Series of Poker Circuit is beginning its newest season, with plenty of events to take players into the new year.
The first stop is at the Horseshoe Southern Indiana, beginning on Oct. 2. The event's preliminary tournaments have buy-ins ranging from $340 to $1,060. The main event is a $5,150 buy-in no-limit hold'em tournament that starts on Oct. 12.

The next stop is also in Indiana at the Horseshoe Hammond. The tournament runs Oct. 24-Nov. 2. The $5,150 buy-in main event will start on Halloween, Oct. 31.

Harveys Lake Tahoe in Nevada is hosting its Circuit series Nov. 6-16, with the $5,150 buy-in main event taking place on Nov. 15. Twelve smaller preliminary events will run before and after the championship tournament.

Across the country, Harrah's Resort in Atlantic City is the home of the last WSOP Circuit event of the year. Preliminary events begin on Dec. 5, and the main event starts on Dec. 14.

The first WSOP Circuit action in 2009 will be at Harrah's Tunica in Mississippi. The tournament begins on Jan. 20, with a full schedule yet to be announced.

Poker and Table Games Fueling Florida's Gambling Industry
Cards Have Overtaken Horses
By Bob Pajich

Poker and table games are changing the casino industry in Florida.

Once a state that allowed only jai alai and race books, it now ranks sixth nationwide in gaming-industry revenue, with $3.7 billion in 2007, a 5.4 percent increase from 2006.

The increase was a direct result of the state changing the rules on how its existing cardrooms could operate in 2007. Legislators allowed operators to extend hours, and changed betting rules to allow bigger games and tournaments, and this caused existing poker rooms to undergo massive expansions to satisfy the larger crowds.

From 2006 to 2007, casino and cardroom revenue increased 379 percent in Florida, to $274 million. During this same time, revenue at horse and dog tracks decreased 43 percent to $159 million.

Payments System Protection Act Passed by House Committee
Bill Would Force Government to Define 'Unlawful Internet Gambling'
By Bob Pajich

Congressman Barney Frank has again gone to bat for both online poker players and financial institutions of America by introducing yet another bill that concerns his opposition to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).

And this one even made it through the House Financial Services Committee only two business days after Frank introduced it.
H.R. 6870, the Payments System Protection Act, is the second version of a Barney Frank bill that failed to get through committee in 2007. The goal of H.R. 6870 is to provide financial institutions with direction as to what exactly constitutes the "unlawful online gambling" that the UIGEA charges them to stop.

If passed, the bill would require formal rule-making, overseen by an administrative law judge, to provide the clarification requested by the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve System, among others, as to the definition of "unlawful Internet gambling."

It's the hope of poker players that online poker, which is no doubt a game of skill, will be left off that list.

The Scoop
with Adam & Diego

Welcome to The Scoop, the Card Player TV weekly program that features poker's old-school superstars and new-school Internet hotshots. Every episode of The Scoop discusses in-depth strategies and explores important issues within the poker world.

Phil Galfond is regarded as one of the most talented high-stakes players, and although he is still in his early 20s, he appeared on GSN's High Stakes Poker last year. "OMGClayAiken," as he is known online, cut his poker teeth playing no-limit hold'em, but he has since expanded his repertoire. Galfond captured his first World Series of Poker bracelet this past June when he took down the pot-limit Omaha rebuy event. Of late, his cash game of choice has become pot-limit Omaha, and one of the reasons is that the big no-limit hold'em games that he used to play just don't fill up online anymore.

Adam Schoenfeld: Phil, you mentioned that high-stakes no-limit hold'em games are not running online, and when they do, they are sporadic. In your assessment, why is this, and will it continue?

Phil Galfond: I think that it will continue because too many people have lost money. The weaker players have lost their money and the stronger players won't play against each other. The stronger players get a lot of criticism for that - or should I say, we do, since I guess I am one of them. I think it is smart because I don't want to play someone if my edge is not that big. There are better spots; I make more by six-tabling $25-$50 [no-limit] against weaker players than I do by playing $200-$400 [no-limit] heads up against a stronger player.

AS: It is certainly not anyone's place to tell you where to put your $40,000 or $60,000 buy-in. You guys may have decided not to play each other heads up, but I will use a term that Chip [Reese] and Doyle [Brunson] used: "Opening the store" [playing against other strong opponents in order to entice weaker players into the game]. Do you also avoid playing the stronger players when it is four- or five-handed, or do you just not get enough customers?

PG: If there was a weak player playing four-handed with Cole [South], Urindanger [Di Dang], and durrr [Tom Dwan], I would probably sit in the game.

AS: But you won't start a game with those guys to try to attract a weak player?

PG: I would if I thought there was a good chance that weak players were waiting for a game to start. I just don't think there are people out there looking at the $200-$400 games and waiting for a spot to sit.

AS: I look at those games; I just don't sit [laughing].

Diego Cordovez: It seems that if someone is watching a game, and he sees a hand where it appears a player is on tilt, he might sit, even without knowing the background on that hand. He might not know you too well and think you are terrible, or he might know that you are a good player but think you are off of your game. When I see a good player who has just lost a lot of money, I think that he can't be playing his best, and I will try to play against him, no matter who it is, if I can afford it. That hasn't been your experience?

PG: No. People just don't sit [with me] that much. These days, people have trouble seeing the stronger players as fish, because of the database sites that keep track of winnings.

DC: [Live players] sometimes look at Internet pros as players with one gear. It doesn't seem accurate in terms of what you write about and the way that you play in general.

PG: I guess that all of us probably seem to have one gear - overaggressive. I'm probably one of the less aggressive online high-stakes players, but I am probably more aggressive than most of the live pros.

DC: There has been an evolution online, because initially, pure aggression carried the day, and then people made adjustments. Have you seen that phenomenon, and have you had to make any big adjustments to your own game?

PG: Definitely. For a while, people just didn't understand the game enough. At that point, pure aggression could win at just about any stakes online. The game has evolved, and you can see that a lot of the players from back in the Party [Poker] $10-$20 [no-limit] heyday haven't been able to beat the [current] high-stakes games. Back then, I was an average player at $5-$10 or $10-$20, but the game has evolved and I have kept up with it. Some of them just had the pure aggression, which they figured out before everyone else, but there is more to the game than that.

Head to CardPlayerTV.com for more of The Scoop.

Player of the Year

Binger Moves Back Into Fourth Place and Two Young Guns Jump Into the Mix
By Ryan Lucchesi

Michael Binger didn't make the biggest jump on the Player of the Year (POY) leader board during the past two weeks, but he did make the most important one. Binger finished in 10th place at the World Poker Tour Borgata Poker Open, and he received 120 POY points, along with $65,000 in prize money. This took Binger's winnings for the year up to $814,667 and his POY point total up to 3,720. This was just enough for him to regain fourth place from Sebastian Ruthenberg, who jumped into the top 10 in mid-September by winning the European Poker Tour Barcelona Open.

The player who accumulated the most POY points at the Borgata Poker Open was Vivek Rajkumar, who captured his first major tournament title in Atlantic City.

This was the second final table of the year for Rajkumar; he also won a $2,500 preliminary no-limit hold'em event at the L.A. Poker Classic in February to take home $113,425 and 612 points. Thanks to the big win at Borgata, Rajkumar now has 3,065 points and sits in 18th place on the leader board.

Another player who made some big strides was Jesper Hougaard, who won his second World Series of Poker gold bracelet of the year at the WSOP Europe. Hougaard won the £1,500 no-limit hold'em tournament, which gave him 1,440 points and £144,218 in prize money. He acquired his first WSOP gold bracelet during the summer, when he won event No. 36 ($1,500 no-limit hold'em) and took home $610,304 in prize money, as well as 1,440 POY points. By doubling his point total, Hougaard now sits in 23rd place on the leader board and has tournament winnings for the year totaling $877,817.

For the first time in a while, John Phan did not add any points to his 2008 total in the period since Card Player last went to press. He still holds a 2,097-point lead over Erik Seidel, who is in second place, and a 2,529-point lead over David Benyamine in third place.

Vivek Rajkumar Wins Borgata Poker Open

The sixth Borgata Poker Open on the World Poker Tour took place at the Borgata Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City recently. A field of 516 players entered the $10,000 no-limit hold'em championship event, which had a guaranteed prize pool of $5 million. The winner would walk away with $1,424,500. The championship event was the conclusion of a long tournament series that saw 15 preliminary events crown champions.

Here is a look at the final-table chip counts when play began:

Seat 1 Vivek Rajkumar - 6,480,000
Seat 2 Dan Heimiller - 3,360,000
Seat 3 Andrew Knee - 1,475,000
Seat 4 Mark Seif - 4,665,000
Seat 5 Jason Strochak - 1,650,000
Seat 6 Sang Kim - 3,085,000

The blinds began at 60,000-120,000 with a 10,000 ante, so things started quickly among the final six, and stayed that way. Six hands in, Andrew Knee was on his way out the door in sixth place, and then Jason Strochak staved off elimination for a while by doubling up and tripling up after his queens were cracked by a set of eights from Mark Seif.

Seif's luck ran sour 18 hands into the final table, when he and Vivek Rajkumar played the biggest pot of the tournament.
Rajkumar raised to 450,000 preflop and Seif reraised to 1,350,000. Rajkumar then reraised to 4,350,000 and Seif moved all in. Rajkumar called all in, and Seif showed down pocket aces. Rajkumar held pocket tens, the board came Q 10 5 Q 9, and Seif was crippled. Rajkumar moved well into the chip lead, and proceeded to put on a big-stack clinic after that.

He finished the job with Seif a few hands later, eliminating him in fifth place. Strochak was his next victim, when he was forced to move all in on a short stack with a meager holding (J 2) that was dominated by Rajkumar's Q J, which held up to send Strochak out in fourth place. Rajkumar then won a second pivotal hand at the final table to knock out the other big-name professional remaining. He went to war with Dan Heimiller while holding the A 5 to Heimiller's Q 3. Rajkumar paired his 5 on the flop, made trips on the turn, and finished with quads on the river to slam the door shut on Heimiller in third place.
Sang Kim had chosen to sit back and watch the carnage take place in the early going, and when heads-up play began, he was outchipped 4-to-1. Rajkumar made quick work of Kim in seven hands to take home the first-place prize in record time, just 48 hands. This beat the record set by Eugene Katchalov in December 2007, when he won the WPT Five-Diamond World Poker Classic in 53 hands.

Here are the final-table results:

1 Vivek Rajkumar - $1,424,500
2 Sang Kim - $750,000
3 Dan Heimiller - $387,500
4 Jason Strochak - $337,500
5 Mark Seif - $287,500
6 Andrew Knee - $237,500

Look Out:
Vinny Pahuja
By Julio Rodriguez

Many of the contenders in the 2008 Player of the Year race have been well-publicized, earning their points with big wins on the World Poker Tour, European Poker Tour or at the World Series of Poker. But the relative unknown on the leader board remains Vinny Pahuja, who sits in eighth place with 3,450 points.

Pahuja has earned his points the old-fashioned way, by grinding away in some of the smaller events in Las Vegas and in the Northeast, where he calls home. In March, Pahuja took second in a $1,000 WSOP Circuit event in Atlantic City to get the ball rolling. Over the next three weeks, he made three more final tables, including a win in event No. 1 of the Foxwoods Poker Classic for $75,000. He followed that up with another win in April, during the Venetian Deep-Stack Extravaganza, but his biggest score didn't come until this June, when he finished runner-up in the $5,000 championship event at the Borgata Summer Open for $289,800. Since then, he has made two more final tables, and has cashed a total of 15 times this year, earning more than $500,000.

The native New Yorker got his start in poker in a rather familiar way, but he's always made sure to have a backup plan. "I was pretty much a by-product of the Moneymaker boom," recalled Pahuja. "We were watching ESPN in 2003, seeing him win it all, and we decided to have a weekly $20 game just for fun. I just took off with it and started playing in a lot of the New York City clubs. That's where I really learned the game, playing with all the best players in the city."

The poker bug had bit, but Pahuja still didn't have the time he wanted to devote to his new love. "I went to NYU and got two degrees during undergrad in finance and information systems," said Pahuja. "I then worked on Wall Street for five years, but then in May of 2007, I started to get really sick of it. I wanted to do something a little more entrepreneurial with my life. I ended up getting involved in real estate, which I still do on the side, but that freed up my time to play a lot more poker."

When asked about his incredible run this year, Pahuja played it coy. "It's not like I'm doing anything secretive," he stated. "I just keep playing, and things have been working out so far. I've also made it a point to surround myself with great players. You do that, and continue to work with a group of people you really respect, and you won't be able to help but get better."

Tournament Trail

What's My Line?
Vivek 'psyduck'
Rajkumar
By Julio Rodriguez

For the last two years Vivek Rajkumar has been getting closer and closer to the inevitable, a breakout victory on one of poker's biggest stages. A consistent threat on the tournament circuit, the 22-year-old has 18 cashes on his young resume. Rajkumar bested 516 players to earn the Borgata Poker Open title and a $1.4 million payday.

Rajkumar spoke to Card Player about the three hands that catapulted him to the win.



The Hand - Earning Every Chip With a Hero Call Gone Right

In a battle of the blinds, Howard Appledorf completed from the small blind and Vivek Rajkumar checked his option. The flop came A 9 9 and Appledorf led out for 35,000. Rajkumar made the call and the turn was the J. Appledorf bet 50,000, and Rajkumar called. The river was the K, and Appledorf moved all in for a total of 315,000.

Rajkumar stood up from his chair and studied his opponent for several minutes before questioning, "Seven high?" The clock was called and Rajkumar made the call, revealing his pair of jacks. Appledorf was eliminated and Rajkumar took over the chip lead with 1,403,000.

Julio Rodriguez: What was your opinion of Appledorf at this time?

Vivek Rajkumar: This opponent was talking to me at the table about how no-limit hold'em and poker in general were about having the balls and the ability to bluff. He already had shoved 50 big blinds over a short stack's raise without regard for who was behind him with A-10 offsuit, so I knew he was reckless.

JR: Did you think about raising him preflop, knowing you would have position on him for the rest of the hand?

VR: Against a lot of weak-tight opposition, I will raise this hand, because I will either win the pot preflop or take down an inflated pot with a continuation-bet. Against this opponent, I chose to play a smaller pot in position without preflop initiative. Also, raising a hand like J-3 offsuit is better than raising a hand with more flopping value, because if he reraises me preflop, I can just lay it down (whereas folding a hand like 10-9 suited sucks), but I decided to check here.

JR: Why float the flop? If you thought your hand was good, why not raise?

VR: I thought there was some chance this guy could rebluff me if I raised the flop. I thought calling the flop and raising the turn would look much stronger to this opponent. I definitely could raise the flop and four-bet small over his bluff three-bet, but I thought at the time that calling the flop and taking it away on the turn was the best choice. I also thought that my hand had a little bit of showdown value, which always helps in position. I thought he would lead the flop with hands like 7 high and 6 high, and check more often with king high and queen high, which is what a lot of people will do on dry boards that typically hit neither opponent, so king high or queen high is often good at showdown without improvement.

JR: You hit your hand on the turn, so are you turning it into a bluff-catcher?

VR: Yup, my hand for all intents and purposes is definitely a bluff-catcher, unless he happens to think he can bluff me off an ace with K-K or Q-Q, or bluff me off 9-X with an ace, which obviously seems ridiculous. I knew from my play with him thus far that he did not think like that.

JR: Were you surprised when he moved in on the river? Were you second-guessing your read?

VR: No, I basically thought the whole time that he was willing to go the whole way with a bluff. You have to realize how people think with an ace or a 9-X in this spot; they usually want to milk you for as much as they think you can call, and since almost everyone would fold A-X or J-X on this river, my opponent would have bet 100,000 instead of shoving for 300,000, in my opinion, so in some ways, calling 300,000 was easier than calling 100,000. Obviously, it's super exploitable if my opponents realize I think like this, because they can bet small with their bluffs and bet big with the hands they are value-betting, but I was confident in my stereotype that this opponent was not thinking like this. Against a lot of no-limit professionals who might balance bet-sizing in relation to nut-type, air-type, and middle-type hands, my call on the river is suicide, but I was sure that this opponent was not balancing bet-sizing at all. In the end, he held absolute air. He just got caught up in the bluff.



The Hand - Pulling Off a Huge Bluff With Two Tables Left

Vivek Rajkumar raised to 120,000 from under the gun and Stephen Vanauken made the call from the cutoff. The flop came Q 9 2, and Rajkumar continued with a bet of 185,000. Vanauken called, and the turn was the 7♥. Rajkumar bet 380,000. Again, Vanauken called, and the river was the K.

Rajkumar moved all in for 733,000, and Vanauken went into the tank and eventually folded. Rajkumar revealed the bluff and dragged a pot that vaulted him to 2,110,000 in chips.

JR: The flop brings no help to your hand, but you bet pretty strong. Is this a standard continuation-bet?

VR: It was a fairly uncoordinated board, with just a flush draw. I thought my continuation-bet in a vacuum, with no dynamics against this player, was profitable. Note that even if he's calling with a lot of suited connectors preflop, the only hands that can continue on this board are hands like Q-X, spades, J-10, and middle pairs like pocket tens. If his range is much wider than that preflop, my continuation-bet is profitable. Note that to balance my continuation-bet with air, I also would bet this flop with a queen, overpairs, and draws.

JR: The turn doesn't help either, yet you fire out again. Did you bet 380,000 knowing it would leave you enough to bluff again on the river? Did it cross your mind to give up?

VR: I thought I could get him to fold a lot of his naked spades or hands like J-J or 10-10 that called on the flop to see what I did on the turn. I also thought there was some chance I could get him to fold Q-J, since we had no history and I had not been seen bluffing. When he called the turn, I was done with the hand, more or less.

JR: You shoved the river and he tanked for a long time. Knowing what he had, are you surprised that he tanked for so long? What does that say of your bluff attempt?

VR: I thought he would fold A-Q and Q-J to my river shove with an overcard popping up for his tournament life. There are also a bunch of pair-plus-straight-draw hands and pair-plus-flush-draw hands that will call the flop and the turn but fold the river, so the only hand I was worried about that would call was K-Q. Against the entirety of his range, I thought my bet was profitable, so I went ahead and shoved all in. To balance my three-barreling range, I will often value-bet A-A or A-K like this, and often even A-Q if I think my opponent is ready to make a hero call with Q-J, J-J, or 10-10.



The Hand - Getting Lucky at the Final Table

Vivek Rajkumar raised to 450,000 from the cutoff and Dan Heimiller called from the button. Mark Seif then reraised to 1,350,000 from the small blind. Rajkumar reraised to 4,350,000. Heimiller folded, and Seif moved all in.

Rajkumar instantly called with the 10 10, only to see that he was up against Seif's A A. However, the board ran out Q 10 5 Q 9 to give Rajkumar the monster pot and complete control of the table with more than 13 million in chips.

JR: Raising with pocket tens is no mystery here, but then Heimiller calls from the button and Seif reraises. What are you putting Seif on? A squeeze? A smaller pair? Overcards?

VR: You have to realize that Seif is the most aggressive player at the table, definitely more aggressive than me overall. (I like to think I'm situationally aggressive.) I was putting Seif on a range of hands that included middle pairs, high pairs, overcards, and every once in a while a squeeze with air, because I raised from late position, followed by a flat-call, which is quite wide in and of itself. With 40 big blinds and tens at a five-handed table, I absolutely cannot fold. Also realize how exploitable it is if I folded tens to him every single time he raised me. In addition, Seif already had re-reraised all in with pocket eights, cracking queens behind him, so I knew he was three-betting and four-betting without super-premium hands.

JR: Heimiller folds and Seif moves all in. You have to call at this point, but do you have any regrets for your reraise?

VR: Given everything I knew, I would absolutely play this hand exactly the same way. People just don't realize how lightly stacks get in with two aggressive players at a five-handed table with 40 big blinds in play. Even if I had lost this hand, I would not have regretted it, but luckily I am a gigantic luck box, so I hit that set right on the flop with no sweat whatsoever.

Sit in Your Opponent's Chair - and Play His Chips, Too
By David Apostolico

I see the following situation happen all the time in poker. An otherwise tight player (let's call him Mr. A) makes a big bet with a weak hand when he knows his opponent has a mediocre hand. Mr. A believes that his tight image will buy him some respect, especially when his opponent has a very marginal hand. To Mr. A's surprise, his opponent calls. Well, if Mr. A had been paying attention, he would have realized that his opponent was calling bets all night with marginal hands. In fact, this opponent had a tough time laying down any mediocre hand. The mistake that Mr. A made is, in fact, a fairly common one - one that we all make to some degree, even if not as obvious as this mistake.

Mr. A projected his own frame of reference over to his opponent. Mr. A correctly put himself in his opponent's position. He put himself right there in his opponent's chair and imagined what it would be like to face the decision his opponent would face. The mistake that Mr. A then made was to answer the question himself rather than answer it how his opponent would have answered. To understand his opponent, Mr. A needed to not only understand his opponent's position, but also how his opponent would react. In other words, Mr. A needed to not only put himself in his opponent's chair, but also play his opponent's chips as his opponent would.

It is very hard to get away from our own frame of reference. We assume that we have a very logical way of thinking and a fair amount of common sense. When we imagine how others would react in a certain situation, we all think we can easily put ourselves in our opponents' shoes. When thinking how our opponent would react in that situation, however, most of us project our own thoughts and feelings over to our opponent. This is a big mistake. What we should be doing is trying to determine how our opponent thinks. We must imagine what he would do in that situation, completely independent of what we would do.

Take a minute to think of all the crazy things that people you have known have done. Now, think of things that friends of yours have done that may not be so crazy, but would not have been how you would have done them. Now, think of somebody who you think is very similar to you. Think of someone who shares your beliefs and values. Now, think of how different you are from that person. Think of your different opinions, likes, and dislikes. The point of this exercise is to show how very different we all are. Therefore, to really understand someone else's position requires a lot more than putting yourself in his shoes. You also must think as he would think, and not as you would think.

When you do that at the poker table, the entire game opens up. You can anticipate the likely next move of your opponents and recognize their vulnerabilities. You'll know when you should attack and when you should retreat. Knowing yourself and maintaining self-control is only half the battle. The ability to understand your opponents enables you to master the game. Betting, bluffing, raising, and folding become so much easier when you can grasp your opponents' motives, desires, and fears.

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

Spadeclub Spotlight

SpadeClub's Festa al Lago satellite took place on Sept. 20, and Exclusive member Lachlin "nofussin" Hilburn won his free seat in event No. 1 of the Festa al Lago tournament series at Bellagio. Hilburn received a $500 buy-in to the SpadeClub no-limit hold'em preliminary event on Oct. 1, a room at the luxurious Bellagio, and up to $500 in travel expenses. Hilburn was excited to win the online satellite and get the opportunity to play at Bellagio. "Wow, I won! Too cool! It was an awesome tourney! Up, then down, then almost out, then rebuilt, then got way lucky, then got way lucky again. But, I'd like to think I got lucky in those spots because I played with skill and knowledge of the game. I can't wait to play in Vegas, and I will do my best to represent SpadeClub with class," said Hilburn.

SpadeClub member Andy "jackrabbit" Byers beat out more than 1,100 entrants on Sept. 28 to take home his share of the $5,000 weekly event prize pool. "SpadeClub is a wonderful way to get in a lot of play at minimal cost, and it is a great learning opportunity! I have never played tournaments before, and my experience [on SpadeClub] has given me a lot of confidence," said Byers.

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

Tournament Schedule

$5,000 Weekly
Oct. 26 4 p.m. ET
Nov. 9 4 p.m. ET

Bellagio Monthly Qualifiers
Oct. 26 6 p.m. ET
Nov. 30 6 p.m. ET

$40,000 Mega Monthly
Nov. 2 4 p.m. ET
Dec. 7 4 p.m. ET

To view a complete list of SpadeClub tournaments offered, please visit www.spadeclub.com/how-to-play/tournament-schedule.

Promotions

Bellagio Championship Series

SpadeClub's Bellagio Championship Series is well under way, with three of the nine monthly qualifiers successfully completed. So far, three Exclusive members have received their $2,500 satellite seat in the 2009 Five-Star World Poker Classic at Bellagio in Las Vegas, as a result of taking first place in the monthly qualifiers. These three members plus the players who reach the final tables of all nine monthly qualifiers will be playing in SpadeClub's Bellagio Championship Series finals in April, with the winner receiving a $25,000 seat in the 2009 WPT Championship. Become an Exclusive member to play in the next monthly qualifier on Nov. 30 for your chance to win.

For more information and to view more of SpadeClub's promotions, please visit www.spadeclub.com/promotions.

Tips From the Table

Member Gorav "g1istheman" Sangal says: SpadeClub is an excellent place to not only play poker, but also learn poker. The other players are great and make it fun to play. My tip for tournament play is to have patience. Oftentimes, people will get pocket rockets (A-A) or big slick (A-K) at the earlier stage of a tournament and will end up going out because someone else made a set with a much smaller pocket pair. There are too many people ready to "get rich quick" at the earlier stages. So, get closer to a final table by playing tight initially, even with premium hands, and loosening your tie (and game) as you near the finish line.

Submit your own SpadeClub tips and tales to: [email protected].

Benefit of the Club

Community Page

SpadeClub recently updated the community page to be more interactive and exciting for all SpadeClub members. Members can now view five featured blogs and the latest SpadeClub updates, browse players' profiles, and watch videos, including interviews and news with "This Week in SpadeClub." The new community page is SpadeClub's portal for all leader boards, including players with the most money won and final tables reached, and, most importantly, the new SpadeClub Player of the Year leader board. Even if you aren't a SpadeClub member yet, view SpadeClub's community page at www.SpadeClub.com/community and check out what you've been missing.

Hand 2 Hand Combat

'Boykee' Executes a Beautiful Semibluff in the WCOOP
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: 2008 PokerStars World Championship of Online Poker, event No. 6, $500 no-limit hold'em
Players: 7,351
First Prize: $452,086.50
Blinds: 750-1,500
Ante: 150
Stacks: Boykee - 117,102; Villain No. 1 - 233,805; Villain No. 2 - 72,854

Craig Tapscott: You're a championship bridge player. What bridge skills have you utilized successfully in poker, and what have you struggled with?

Gavin "Boykee" Wolpert: Deductive reasoning. The ability to know without wasting any energy what a person can or cannot have based on the actions in the hand up until your decision point. Many times, you can eliminate potential hands from your opponent's range based on your experience against him and your expert poker logic. This skill is required almost every single hand in bridge.

One of my biggest weaknesses was that when I thought I knew my opponent's hand, it took me so long to realize that I needed to decide how he would play it, not how I would. For so long, I tried to make people fold hands that I would fold. People play nothing like you do, and it's not easy to get used to that.

CT: Set this hand up for us.

GW: About 250 players remained, and the field was well into the money at this point. My stack was fairly healthy, and the Villain to my right had me covered by a good amount with a large stack. She also had been raising a lot of pots. When she began the hand by open-raising from early position, it was time to apply the pressure. And I had been dealt a great hand with which to make a move preflop.

Villain No. 1 raises to 4,225 from early position. Boykee reraises to 12,550 with the 6 4.

CT: You're obviously not reraising here for value with that hand.

GW: Well, I was committing only about 11 percent of my stack to try to take the pot down straight away. There are several reasons to reraise in this situation with such a hand. Most importantly, the initial raiser was likely to just fold without seeing a flop. She was raising loosely enough not to have a strong hand in the first place, and it helped that I hadn't been reraising her very much. Moreover, a small suited and connected hand plays fairly well against a hand that's strong enough to take a flop - as it isn't likely to be dominated, and it has a fair probability of cracking a big pair by flopping big. Finally, if anybody with a somewhat short stack decided to go all in behind me, I would almost always have 35 percent to 40 percent equity against their hand anyway, which is more than enough, considering that Villain No. 1 had put some money in the pot and the antes had made a big contribution.

Villain No. 2 smooth-calls 12,550 from the next seat to the left of Boykee. Everyone folds back around to Villain No. 1, who makes the call of 8,325.

CT: What now?

GW: Well, first of all I try to give Villain No. 2 a range. In my mind, the flat-call is generally a high or medium pair, A-K, or A-Q.

Villain No. 1's range, however, is much wider, as his pot odds are far greater.

Flop: A 5 3 (41,250 pot)

GW: "Excellent!" I thought. "This pot is going to be cheap to steal."

CT: Really? You received two callers, remember?

GW: With the ace on board and no other high cards, very few hands are likely to see a showdown. Besides, I have an open-end straight draw to back me up.

Villain No. 1 checks. Boykee bets 9,000.

CT: Why this bet size?

GW: I bet just 22 percent of the pot. There was no reason to make a strong bet. If they were going to be scared that I might be strong, it wouldn't take a whole lot to convince them. Despite offering excellent pot odds to any callers, I thought that I was capitalizing on a great opportunity to make a cheap and effective semibluff. Besides, if anybody decided to just call such a small bet, I would proceed with confidence that they were unlikely to commit many more chips to a showdown.

CT: Please explain.

GW: I believe that when Villain No. 2 doesn't raise my small bet, he is unlikely to have a hand that he's worried about protecting. He left Villain No. 1 with a very cheap turn card by flat-calling. When he folds and Villain No. 1 calls, it's similar. I don't think Villain No. 1 has A-K, from his preflop call, so he has either a weak ace or a random hand with a few outs, both of which I can price out on the turn with a solid bet.

CT: Bet-sizing is so important in no-limit hold'em. Can you explain the strategies of how much to bet and when, according to different situations? It's such a situational answer, I'm sure.

GW: Yes, it isn't an easy question to answer, and what I try to do is quite simple, but it varies from situation to situation. Online tournaments often play 20-40 big blinds deep in the late stages. I try to threaten my opponents' entire stacks with the minimum amount of chips required. I want to make it so that their options are to go all in or fold. I'm a big fan of small bets in tournaments. I'm constantly looking for good spots to bet small; it's the best way to get value-calls and bluff-raises out of hands that would normally just fold. Also, as your opponents see you having good hands with small bets, you can get away with cheaper and cheaper bluffs.

Villain No. 2 folds. Villain No. 1 calls 9,000.

CT: What range of hands do you put Villain No. 1 on after another call like this?

GW: Well, (a) a weak ace; this is unlikely because I think he's a good player and would have folded preflop; (b) a flush draw; (c) a low pair plus a gutshot; (d) a low pair (connected cards). The latter two are unlikely because I have 6-4, so the likelihood of my opponent holding 6-5, 5-4, or 4-3 goes down quite considerably, so I would tend to think he's on a flush draw.
Turn: 3 (59,250 pot)

GW: A complete brick. Perfect.

Villain No. 1 checks.

CT: Does this check give you pause at all? Perhaps a trap with A-A?

GW: The truth is, I don't give a relatively unknown player credit for coming up with a creative trap in a huge pot. Most people panic with their good hands in spots like this and get the money in quickly. My turn bet doesn't have to win 100 percent of the time for it to be a good bet.

Boykee bets 27,000.

GW: I bet just under half the pot size. Given the action thus far, it is nearly impossible that the Villain will be willing to see a river, even for such a good price.

Villain No. 1 folds. Boykee wins the pot of 59,250.

GW: This pot boosted my stack by more than 50 percent, and I never had to show anybody my meager 6-high.

CT: In regard to the action up to this point, why was it improbable that the Villain would want to see a river card?

GW: The flush draw, which is very likely to have been the Villain's hand, is no longer a draw to the nuts. I could have A-A. It would be consistent with my line, along with the fact that this Villain hasn't seen me reraise up to this point.

Gavin Wolpert, 26, is a two-time North American Bridge Champion, and also has won the Canadian Bridge Championship. Bridge and poker wizard Steve "thorladen" Weinstein recognized Wolpert's talents and convinced him to give poker a try. With a little mentoring and a lot of hard work, Wolpert has flourished, with tournament cashes for more than $500,000. He recently took down the PokerStars $5,000 freezeout for $50,000.

Final-Table Takedown

Steve 'stevesbets' Jacobs Shares Strategy in the $25,000 WCOOP Heads-Up Event vs. 'ElkY'
By Craig Tapscott With Steve Jacobs

In this series, Card Player offers an in-depth analysis of the key hands that catapulted a player to a top finish, online or live. We also will reveal key concepts and strategies from the world's best tournament players, as we venture inside their sometimes devious and always razor-sharp poker minds.

Steven Jacobs was born and raised in the Philadelphia suburbs, graduated from high school in 2001, and then attended the University of Pennsylvania. After graduating in 2005, he embarked on a career as a professional online poker player. Jacobs specializes in heads-up play, high-stakes sit-and-gos and tournaments, but often plays up to six-max in cash games. In terms of limits, Jacobs can be found all over the place. In the last year, he has played anywhere from $3-$6 no-limit hold'em to $200-$400 pot-limit Omaha. However, his "typical" limits are $10-$20 to $50-$100 no-limit hold'em and pot-limit Omaha, and $200-$400 limit Omaha eight-or-better.

Event: 2008 PokerStars $25,000 World Championship of Online Poker heads-up no-limit hold'em
Players: 64
First Prize: $560,000
Finish: First
Key Concepts: It's a deep-stack tournament, so you need to be patient; knowing opponents is important, adjusting to their tendencies is paramount, and paying close attention to game flow is critical. Also, realize that players may be tentative, due to the large buy-in.

Hand No. 1
Stacks: stevesbets - 336,640; Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier - 303,360
Blinds: 800-1,600

ElkY raises to 3,200 from the button; stevesbets calls from the big blind, holding the K 9.

Craig Tapscott: Is this a standard play to min-raise preflop from the button in heads-up play?

Steve Jacobs: It's pretty standard along with raising three times the big blind. The thinking is that you're in position, so you want to make the pot a little bigger while also giving your opponent irresistible odds to call and play pots out of position.

CT: I recently read an interview in which you talk about the flow of heads-up poker. You make huge decisions within seconds. Does the flow of a match take precedence over assigning hand ranges, pot calculations, and so on?

SJ: Well, it would be wrong to say I don't do those latter things. I do them quickly because I've played literally tens of thousands of heads-up sit-and-gos. As far as flow goes, though, it's the most important - because it enables me to feel the way the opponent may be thinking and really get into his head.

Flop: Q♥ 7♠ 3♣ (6,400 pot)

stevesbets checks.

SJ: This hand was relatively early in the match with relatively even stacks, and it is pretty interesting, since we both are making plays with no hands on the flop. My thinking was that ElkY continuation-bets pretty much every flop in position, and this flop doesn't hit that many hands.

ElkY bets 3,200; stevesbets raises to 6,400.

SJ: I decided to check-raise, thinking I would just take it down right there.

ElkY calls.

SJ: His call definitely slows me down, since it wasn't really like him to peel. As it turned out, he did in fact call the raise with no hand and no draw, just to make a play later by utilizing his position. But his plan was thwarted when I hit my king on the turn.

Turn: K (19,200 pot)

stevesbets bets 11,600; ElkY calls.

River: J (42,400 pot)

stevesbets bets 21,600; ElkY calls and reveals the J 10; stevesbets wins the pot of 85,600.

SJ: When the king on the turn hit, it also gave ElkY a draw. But at that point, I was pretty sure I had the best hand, putting him on most likely a 7. When he called my bet and a jack rivered, it didn't seem to change much, so I bet again. It turned out to be the perfect river card for me, because he hit his pair to make a somewhat loose river call. I have to give ElkY credit in this hand, as whatever move he was going to make most likely would have worked if I hadn't hit my king on the turn.

Hand No. 2
Stacks: stevesbets - 312,080; Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier - 327,920
Blinds: 3,200-6,400

stevesbets raises to 12,800 from the button with the Q 10. ElkY calls.

CT: Let's take this opportunity to talk about some of the major mistakes that players make during heads-up play.

SJ: There are two major mistakes that most people make when beginning to play heads-up sit-and-gos, and they are equal and opposite. The first is that they think that since it's suddenly heads up - when they are used to a table with more players - they're always being bullied by their opponent and have to fight back in kind. They don't fully grasp the number of times that the opponent may actually have a real hand, despite the unlikelihood in a heads-up game. The other mistake is that they don't adjust enough from full games, and simply fold too much. The latter opponents are probably the easiest to beat, but the former are far more common.

Flop: 10 5 3 (25,600 pot)

ElkY checks; stevesbets bets 19,200; ElkY calls.

SJ: Standard.

Turn: Q (64,000 pot)

ElkY checks; stevesbets bets 46,400; ElkY calls.

SJ: Standard bet with two pair.

River: 10 (156,800 pot)

ElkY checks; stevesbets bets 116,400; ElkY calls, showing the A 3; stevesbets wins the pot of 389,600 with a full house.

SJ: While I gave ElkY credit on the last hand, I feel the exact opposite about this hand. From my point of view, it's really not that interesting a hand. I made a standard raise preflop, a standard flop bet with top pair, a standard turn bet with top two, and a standard river value-bet when I filled up. I think this hand is notable for two reasons: It was the biggest pot of our match by a wide margin, and it was so despite Elky's incredibly meager holding of bottom pair.

His flop call is pretty standard, but I'm fairly shocked that he didn't let it go on the turn when I showed strength, or on the river when I made a huge bet! I suppose he put me on something like 6-4, K-J, or 7-4, but this was pretty much the deciding hand of the match. For him to be making such a passive move of a loose call of three barrels with bottom pair is pretty insane.

Hand No. 3
Stacks: stevesbets - 423,680 Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier - 216,320
Blinds: 3,200-6,400

stevesbets raises to 19,200 from the button, holding the 4♣ 2♦; ElkY calls.

CT: I'm assuming this is a standard heads-up raise from the button. Were there any other factors in play?

SJ: The blinds were huge and I had ElkY outchipped. He was playing pretty tight out of position, so I raised three times the big blind, hoping to simply take down his blind.

Flop: 8 8 7 (38,400 pot)

SJ: This hand was pretty important, because of the chip stacks and blinds at this point in the match. I had him almost 2-to-1 and the blinds were huge.

ElkY checks; stevesbets bets 25,600; ElkY calls.

SJ: I make a continuation-bet, and I'm unhappy when he calls.

Turn: 10 (89,600 pot)

CT: Can you take a stab at it here?

SJ: The 10 on the turn completed a lot of hands he may have called with on the flop; so, I decided to pretty much give up, despite the fact that the pot was a significant percentage of ElkY's stack.

ElkY checks; stevesbets checks.

River: Q (89,600 pot)

ElkY checks.

SJ: When he checked again, I figured he could have a hand as weak as 6-5, so I have to bet. But his hand could be as strong as a 7 or ace high, and he may fold if I bet big enough.

stevesbets bets 66,400; ElkY folds; stevesbets takes down the pot of 89,600.

CT: Mission accomplished. How did the match proceed from here?

SJ: That bet did the trick and pretty much "ended" the match, putting him on the ropes with only a little over 100,000 in chips left.

CT: Congratulations on the huge win.

Online Zone

PokerStars Delivers Big-Time With Huge 2008 WCOOP
By Shawn Patrick Green

Possibly the least surprising news of 2008 so far is that this year's PokerStars World Championship of Online Poker (WCOOP) was incredibly successful. While the news may not have been surprising, it certainly was impressive. When the series came to a close, a bunch of ridiculously large numbers had been tallied for prize pools and attendance, some interesting story li