Four Queens Classic - Day One

If you have been a regular reader of my columns, you may have noticed a recent change in themes. Coming up with new, fresh material every two weeks is a difficult task, so I've decided to use my column as a tournament diary of sorts. Of course, if I have something on my mind, I'll share it with you; otherwise, you can expect to see more columns that relate directly to the World Poker Tour, as well as other major events I choose to play in.

Hopefully, you'll get something out of these columns, whether it's strategy tips or simply an inside look at what it's like to follow the tour to all of its fabulous destinations worldwide. Years ago, I heard talk from some of the higher-profile tournament players that they'd like to play in a $5,000-$10,000 buy-in event every month. Well, that day has arrived.

One of the keys to holding a well-attended championship event is television coverage. If it's on TV, players will travel to Timbuktu if they have to. Going into the championship event at the Four Queens, I would have been surprised to see more than 70 entrants, since it wasn't going to be televised. Well, I was pleasantly surprised when I saw 97 entrants and a prize pool of almost $500,000!

Going into the tournament, I'm not so sure that I was really all that prepared. It had been a while since I'd played a tournament, and no-limit hold'em is never in the mix of games at Bellagio. In fact, it's a rare occurrence when we play hold'em at all. Stud, yes; triple-draw, for sure; but there are not too many hold'em fans amongst the high-limit players at Bellagio.

So, starting out I felt a little rusty. I had decent focus, but I lacked a little bit of confidence, I think. It was nothing a good, quick start couldn't fix, however. Now, the Four Queens offered a very unique option: You started with $5,000 in chips, but you could add $5,000 more to your stack at any time – for no additional cost.

Popular wisdom says that it's correct to wait until you go broke with the first $5,000 before adding on. If you don't go broke, you simply add the $5,000 to your stack after a certain level. This offers you the opportunity to take a very bad beat yet still have life. As everyone has heard many times, I'm sure, tournament poker is all about survival, so having an extra life can only help you.

While that is probably true, it just doesn't work for me. Waiting to add on would simply exploit my personal weakness, so I decided to take the additional $5,000 right off the bat. I know that seems silly, but I'd played in tournaments with this structure before and found that I splashed around too much with the first buy-in. Figuring, "What the heck, if I lose this, I always have my $5,000 add-on," I'd call. If you read my column "Atlantic City Week – Part I" (Nov. 7, 2003), you'd know that is a personal weakness I need to avoid. I'm by no means endorsing my approach or suggesting that you should do the same. It works for me, but you are probably better off going the traditional route, unless you have similar weaknesses.

So, right off the bat I was the chip leader, and was ready to "dance." Things were going pretty smoothly when an interesting hand came up. I was in a spot in which I held a marginal hand in a marginal situation. It's these types of hands that I find most interesting, as opposed to those A-K versus Q-Q situations.

A straightforward, tightish, early-position player limped in. I was in third position with the Q 10 and decided to limp in also for $100 (the blinds were $50-$100). The small blind called and the big blind said, "Let's go."

The flop came 9 8 3, giving me two overcards and a gutshot-straight draw. As I said, it was a marginal hand in a marginal situation. Both blinds checked and the first limper overbet the pot, betting $500. It was now up to me, and the correct play was obvious; it was a clear fold.

Of course, stubborn mule that I am, I had some plans for this hand. I wasn't about to give up on this pot quite yet, not when so many good things could happen. I decided to call, trying to hit a jack, but more importantly, to see how my opponent would react to the turn card.

The first thing I needed to consider, of course, was what my opponent had. Based on the size of his bet, I ruled out a flush draw or a set. It felt like he had either 10-9 suited or possibly even A-A. When he bet the flop, he seemed genuinely vulnerable, and deathly afraid of the many potential draws out there. It was clear to me that he didn't want a call, so of course, that's precisely what I did!

The turn brought the Q, the ultimate scare card. It filled the J-10 straight draw as well as the flush draw. It also gave me a pair of queens, which very well could be the best hand. I was still unsure of what to do with this hand, until my opponent bet $350!

I thought, "What? What is that bet all about?" It took me quite a while to figure it out. I wasn't going to fold for such a cheap bet; the only question was if there was any value in raising. As far as I was concerned, that bet either screamed of the absolute nuts or was a weak attempt to get me out with a marginal hand. After cutting my chips several times, I decided that I didn't want to lose too much on the hand, but I wanted to define his hand right now. Now, I wasn't at all sure if I had the best hand, but I felt I'd know for sure if I raised and put him to the test. It was sort of a half bluff/half value bet.

If my hand was good, I wanted to make him pay to outdraw me. If I was in fact beat, I wanted to bluff him off the best hand. It wasn't clear which situation I was in here, but I was convinced that I needed to raise; I made it $1,200 to go.

At this point, my opponent was doing fine, with about $7,000 in chips, while I had about $9,000. If I lost this pot, it wasn't the end of the world. Once I put that $1,200 out there, I didn't plan on losing another nickel. This play was similar to the turn play I discussed in a previous column, "The Turn" (Nov. 8, 2002). I was probably going to call a small bet on the river anyway, so why not raise now? If you read that column, you'd know how many good things can happen if you make this speculative yet aggressive turn play.

So, the ball was back in my opponent's court, and he went into a long study.

Now, I was sure I was beat. If he called, I was either going to have to shut down or make a gutsy bluff on the river. While he was contemplating the bet I made, I was already thinking about whether I should make a big bluff on the river. He was showing so much weakness that I almost had to, but I had to be careful that it wasn't an Oscar-winning performance looking for me to hang myself on the river.

Just as I decided to follow through with a bet on the river, my opponent folded two red aces faceup. Phew! For the next round or so, my opponent was clearly still thinking about whether or not he folded a winner. I didn't want him to go through the agony any longer, so I finally told him exactly what I had: "King-10 of spades, I had. I couldn't just call in case you had the ace of spades or a set."

"Yeah, I figured that's what you had. I knew my aces weren't going to hold up, the way my luck runs. I never win with aces, and I mean, never," said my dejected opponent.

"I hear you, my man, I hear you … "

Other than this hand, not much happened for me on day one. I ended the day with $12,750, good for 33rd place out of a remaining 42 players.

In the next issue, you can look forward to some commentary about a hard-fought battle with Mike Laing, which would see one of us meet our demise.

Daniel can be reached through his website, www.fullcontactpoker.com; just click on "Ask Daniel."