Doubleheader in Tunica

Tunica, Mississippi, was a little town on the Mississippi River (about a half-hour drive from the Memphis, Tennessee, airport) that now has grown into a strip-mall version of Las Vegas. There are at least a half-dozen "shopping mall" areas, each having three or four large casinos (and hotels) with recognizable names and plenty of free parking. And like Las Vegas, each casino has the usual amenities and entertainment.

Once again, in September, I attended the huge Tunica Regional Bridge Tournament being held at Sam's Town Hotel and Casino. But once there, I became aware that there were two big back-to-back poker tournaments in town. Harrah's Hotel and Casino (formerly the Grand Casino) was hosting the Mid-South Poker Open, and then the Horseshoe Casino (also owned by Harrah's) was hosting the Mid-America Poker Classic.

Both poker tournaments featured medium-priced events, ranging from $340 to $550, and each had one $2,600 buy-in final event. There also were daily secondary events (typically with a $125 buy-in at 6 p.m. and 11 p.m.), and many satellites and supersatellites. Most of the players I met were staying for both tournaments and were playing in many events. And the room rate for tournament players was only $39 per night.

On several nights after the evening bridge session, I and several other bridge players raced over to the 11 p.m. poker tournaments (and great live action). I managed to finish in the money about half of the time. On my way to a fourth-place finish in one tournament, two interesting hands with a common theme occurred at the final table.



With seven players remaining in a no-limit hold'em event, the blinds at 600-1,200, and two limpers, I chose to defend my small blind while looking at an "Oldsmobile," the 9 8. A very nice flop came, 10 7 2. So, I had a flush draw and an open-end straight draw. With two cards coming, I would hit more than half of the time (the flush almost 35 percent of the time, and the straight almost 18 percent of the time).

I had about 18,000 in chips, which was only about half of the average chip holding and less than each of the other three players in this pot. In first position, I considered moving all in at the 4,800 pot, but since I liked my hand and I needed a lot of chips, not just a few, I decided to check and see which way the wind was blowing.

The big blind checked, the first limper bet 3,000, and the second limper folded. I had noticed that this particular bettor was very aggressive, and often had made speculative bets after the flop; and he probably would have raised before the flop if he held a high pocket pair or even A-10. I had been playing rather tight. So, I chose to move all in, which could be right in one of two ways: Maybe the opposition would fold, or maybe I would hit. Both players folded, so my check-raise approach picked up an extra 3,000 in chips.

Somewhat later, with six players remaining, in middle position and looking at the K Q, I raised three times the big blind preflop. Only the chip-leading big blind called. The flop came J 10 4. He checked to me, I bet 5,000, and he called.

The turn card was the 6, giving me a flush draw in addition to my open-end straight draw. I would hit a flush or straight on the river about one-third of the time (20 percent plus 13 percent). He checked. What would you do now in this position? I had about 25,000 in chips left, which was below average, and my opponent was the chip leader with more than 150,000 in chips.

Since he had called my preflop raise and my flop bet, I thought it was fairly likely that he had two high cards, possibly including a jack or a 10. If I went all in, would he call me? I decided that my best chance to win was by going all in. He asked for a count, pondered my bet for a while, then folded.

It's true that I lucked out, in that he apparently did not have enough to call me. But, going all in clearly maximized my chances for a win; and in view of my anemic chip holding, it was probably the best percentage opportunity that I was likely to have. There is an old theory in no-limit poker that when you are short-stacked and want to play your hand, your best option is usually to go all in.

Formerly a career lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice, Mike Cappelletti has written numerous books on poker and bridge, and is considered to be one of the leading authorities on Omaha. Mike has also represented the U.S. in international bridge competition, and he and his wife were featured in a four-page Couples Section in People magazine. His books include Cappelletti on Omaha, Poker at the Millennium (with Mike Caro), and Omaha High Low Poker.