1988 Bicycle Club Tournament

In 1988, at the Bicycle Club Casino in L.A., I entered a $1,000 buy-in no-limit hold'em rebuy tournament, along with 104 other players, and after I lost my first $1,000 buy-in, I bought in one more time (there were 132 rebuys). If I lost that second buy-in, I was going to fly back to my home in Madison, Wisconsin, and skip the Bicycle Club's $5,000 buy-in "major" event (one of the few big tournaments other than the World Series of Poker at that time) two days later.

Somehow, I made it to day two of this preliminary event with eight other players, including Erik Seidel (who is now an eight-time WSOP bracelet winner), Ralph Morton (another great top 10 tournament player in the world in 1988), Mike Sexton (a poker legend), Dewey Tomko (who was recently inducted into the Poker Hall of Fame), Curt Knight, Glenn Cozen, Wally Wong, and Fred White.

With five players remaining (Sexton, Morton, Cozen, Seidel, and I), we talked about making a deal. Throughout the 1980s and the 1990s, when you hit the final three or four players in a tournament, a deal was commonplace. In fact, it was unusual when a deal wasn't made. Officially, first place paid $100,800, second place paid $44,800, third place paid $26,880, fourth place paid $15,680, and fifth place paid $11,200. You can see that the difference between first-place prize money ($100,800) and fifth-place prize money ($11,200) was almost $90,000! And when you make a deal, you eliminate some of the financial swings that exist in poker tournaments. The proposal on the table was that the five of us would get paid "according to the value of our chips." We all would get $11,200 minimum (fifth-place money), and then would get paid according to a simple formula, whereby you multiply your chip stack by the value of each chip.

For you aspiring tournament poker players, here is how the math works: You add up the total amount of prize money that remains ($100,800 + $44,800 + $26,880 + $15,680 + $11,200 = $199,360), then you deduct the guaranteed minimum ($11,200 x 5 = $56,000) from that total prize pool ($199,360 - $56,000 = $143,360). That day, there was 237,000 in chips on the table. So, then you divide the $143,360 by 237,000 ($143,360 ÷ 237,000 = $.60489) to determine how much each chip is worth: $.60489. Then, you multiply your chip stack by that amount and add $11,200 to that number to determine your "fair value." So, if I had 40,000 in chips, I would be entitled to receive $24,195 (40,000 x $.60489) plus $11,200, or $35,395, which is more than third-place money, even though there were five of us remaining, and a lot more than I would receive if I was the next one to be eliminated ($11,200).

Back in 1988, with such a huge disparity between first- and fifth-place prize money, you can see why deals were so commonplace. Sexton, Morton, Cozen, and I agreed, but Seidel didn't. He insisted that he receive a little extra money, an extra $4,000 or so ($1,000 a man from the other four players), and everyone except me agreed to his demands; instead, I said, "Deal!" That is, deal the cards! So, no deal was made, and eventually, Erik and I were playing heads up for the title.

With the blinds at 4,000-8,000, Seidel moved all in from the button for 28,000, and I looked down at 4-2 offsuit. It would cost 20,000 to call, and after 30 seconds, I decided to call. The cards came off A-A-Q-Q-6, and Seidel showed me 7-7. The fact is that Seidel won the pot with 7 high! Even though I had him all in eight times that day, he went on to win the tournament.

Later, when I looked back at my heads-up performance, I questioned that hand. One good reason for me to call was that I had a chance to win the tournament right then and there. But with Seidel that short, wasn't I almost guaranteed to get at least one more chance to call and win the tournament? Of course! I mean, the blinds were still reasonable relative to the chips in play, and Seidel would have had only 36,000 in chips if I had folded. So, the "chance to win right then and there" reason isn't enough to make the call correct. Another OK reason to call was that, mathematically, I could call 20,000 and have a chance to win 36,000, so I was getting laid a little less than 2-1 (9-5). Against a random hand, I'm about a 2-1 underdog, so the math wasn't that far off. But the reason that I hate the call is that I gave Seidel an excellent chance to double up to 56,000, and with 56,000, he is back in the ballgame. Why not wait a hand or two for a favorable situation before I put my chips into the pot? Why not wait until I have a hand with which I have to call or move all in, like Q-9 or a small pair, or a better hand? I should have waited!

Epilogue: Seidel and I ended up making a deal, whereby I received roughly $70,000. Then, the next day, I entered and wound up winning the $5,000 buy-in event for $145,000, so instead of leaving town broke, I left with $215,000!


Learn more about Phil by going to his website, www.PhilHellmuth.com, and visit his webstore at www.PokerBrat.com.