The Poker Lab Rat

Allen Cunningham claimed his fifth career WSOP bracelet in Event #13, the $5,000 Pot Limit Hold ‘Em event.

Cunningham came from third place to triumph over one of the stronger  final-table lineups of the WSOP to date which also included early chip leader Jeff Lisandro, Gavin Griffin, Humberto Brenes, Keith Lehr, and last year’s champ in the same event, Jason Lester.

Cunningham moved up to challenge for the lead early, and he and Lisandro eventually battled heads-up for the title, with Brenes finishing third.

Cunningham also won a tidy US $487,287 to go along with his bracelet. 

Another day - and another huge field with 2,628 pro players and wannabees taking part in Event #15 - the $1,500 No Limit Holdem Event.

The first day was a bit of a bloodbath with only 161 players surviving to come back for day two - meaning that all the survivers are will inside the money bubble.

One of those players was Phil Hellmuth who finished the day in 33rd spot, meaning that his own record for WSOP career cashes is now extended to 59.

The top ten in chips at the end of Day One:
Jason Beasley —- 184,200
Stuart Kemble — 143,700
Sam Sangjinda — 138,300
Fabrice Soulier — 135,300
Raj Sawant —— 134,500
Rick Fuller ——- 111,500
Derek Peyrot —- 111,400
Matthew LaGarde 107,600
Jeff Miller ——– 106,100
Mich Dumas —– 103,800

Day two is underway now and will whittle the players down to the final nine players who will take part in the final table …

Right now (just before 10pm PDT) the players are on a dinner break - there are 27 players left in the tournament and Phil Hellmuth is still in the hunt for his 11th WSOP bracelet.

High Stakes Poker 3 - 2006 WSOP Champion Jamie Gold’s first hand.

Doyle Brunson raises to 2K with AQ, everyone folds around to Jamie Gold, who calls with QT. Always the gambler Daniel Negreau also calls with 5-2 Clubs and we see a flop.

The flop lands 6-K-J and its checks all round. The turn is the ten of clubs, giving Doyle the absolute nuts.

Doyle fires out of the gates and raises to $8,000, Gold decides to try to make a move and re-raises to $20,000. Negreau quickly gets out of the way folding over to Doyle, who begins his poker lesson.

Doyle looks at Gold and casually jokes “This is real money here Jamie. How much did you start with…” Jaime replies “$100,000″. Doyle pretends to have forgotten his cards, re-checks his cards and replies “OK, lets go” and re-raises to $100,000.

Gold quickly folds muttering, “I’m not ready for that!” Now that was an understatement.

This post is from Carbon Poker - one of the the 4 online poker rooms we recommend for US poker players.

>>check out Carbon Poker directly here

>>read our comprehensive poker site review of CarbonPoker.com here or

>>compare all 4 US rated poker rooms at PokerLabRat.com here.

OK - seven days into the 2007 World Series OF Poker (WSOP) and we’re really just sitting here twiddling our thumbs.

Without too much disrespect to Michael Spiegel, Steve Billirakis, Alexander Kravchenko, Cairan O’Leary, Gary Styczynski, Frederick Narciso and Tom Schneider who have all won bracelets so far … can we just say … “who cares !!!??”

The massive fields have meant that only a few established poker pros are going deep into events - and that we’re seeing little of the hoped for clashes of major names.

The WSOP is rapidly degenerating into a massive convention of poker wannabees who just happen to get lucky on the day - and their post win interviews are as dull as dish water.

The “Biggest News” of the WSOP so far is that Phil Hellmuth cashed again this week - finishing 104th in Event #8 ($2,000 No Limit Holdem) for a prize of just $3,091.

That makes it his 58th cash in the WSOP - but since when is finishing 104th in a tournament make news? Do I feel a huge “SO WHAT ??!!” welling up inside ?  …

Yes - I think I do.

Perhaps it’s not too much of a surprise that it took a tournament with expensive rebuys before we finally saw the “poker stars” begin to stand out.

Event #7 is a $5,000 Pot Limit Omaha event with unlimited rebuys - and this is definately the realm of players who can afford to drop $5K repeatedly in order to try and score a major chip advantage.

145 players entered, and they took up a final total of 421 rebuys - throwing an extra $2.9 million into the prize pool. It wasn’t until final add-ons were taken that the action began to tighten up - with many players appearing to be prepared to gamble a measly $5,000 worth of chips early on.

There were plenty of early eliminations though wih Phil Ivey, Daniel Negreanu, Sammy Farha and Phil Hellmuth all eliminated on day one and there is plenty of quality about the final table. 

FINAL TABLE PLAYERS
Seat 1: Humberto Brenes - 275,000
Seat 2: John Juanda - 220,000
Seat 3: Larry Jonsson - 900,000
Seat 4: Minh Ly - 240,000
Seat 5: Burt Boutin - 460,000
Seat 6: Rob Keston - 335,000
Seat 7: Sirous Jamshieli - 865,000
Seat 8: Dave “Devilfish” Ulliott - 1,300,000
Seat 9: Erik Cajelais - 1,075,000

There is still penty to play for with 9th place “only” taking home $57,000 while the winner will tak home a tasty $825,000 prize.

UK pro Dave “Devilfish” Ulliott will start as chipleader with 1.3m chips … can he take out the bracelet? 

After a three of days of play we’ve seen over 2,900 players take part and get busted as Cairan O’Leary outlasts them all to win. 

2006 US Poker Championship winner Alex Jacob had a monster stack of 3.1m chips at the start of the final table - nearly twice as many as the next biggest stack of the remaining nine players.

But Jacob busted out in 3rd place after he fell in love with his pair of fours (!!) after the flop possibly feeling bullied by O’Leary who had just won a 2.3m pot preflop on the hand before.

Two hands later Paul Evans feels the heat and cracks calling a raise that put him all-in with only a pair of sixes after the flop and needing to hit or get runner-runner spades in order to beat O’Leary’s Kings.

No-one improves their hand and Ciaran O’Leary wins over $727,000 and the bracelet of course.

FINAL TABLE CHIPS AT START OF DAY
PLAYER —–— CHIPS
Alex Jacob — 3,100,000
Paul Evans — 1,690,000
Jeff Yoak — 965,000
Matt Vengrin — 930,000
Ciaran O’Leary — 610,000
Thad Smith — 555,000
Craig Crivello — 495,000
Andreas Krause — 490,000
Bart Hanson — 210,000

All-in-all, it was some some pretty average play at the business end of the tournament, but that does not matter to O’Leary who was obviously stocked to win the $1,500 no-limit event - the largest live poker tournament outside of the main event !!

Check out PokerNews interview with Ciaran O’Leary here.

Poker unknown Steve Billirakis wins World Series of Poker Event #1, earning $536,287, and of course a coveted WSOP bracelet.

Billirakis is just 21 years and 10 days old, which means that he becomes the youngest player in history to win a WSOP bracelet after taking out the $5,000 “mixed holdem” event.

This is the fourth straight year that the age record record has been broken at the WSOP - but given that you have to be at least 21 years old to play poker in Vegas it will be much tougher to beat it next year.

Billirakis went into the heads-up with Greg Mueller roughly at just over 2 milion chips each - and then played out 64 hands before winning with a pair of deuces on hand #157 of the day.

You can catch an interview with Steve Billirakis here - taken soon after he’s won the bracelet - but he’s pretty much like every other unknown poker player - and has nothing much to say.

Well done anyway Steve.

It hardly seems to have been 12 months since the last WSOP convention in Harrah’s in Vegas when we saw motor mouth Jamie GOld turn the  main event into a personal chip collecting exercise (actually it’s only technically been 11 months).

But there cannot be a poker player or poker fan that does not get excited about the World Series Of Poker.

During the event nothing seems impossible. 21yo’s can borrow money from their parents and end up winnig TWO gold bracelets. And Doyle Brunson might win his 11th bracelet to solidify his place in poker history.

And maybe a webmaster from Wellington can walk into Vegas with a dream and possibly walk out a world Champion. Ahem … oops. But that is why we love poker. Anyone can compete with the best in the world and have a chance to win.

Most of us will never win a gold medal at the olympics, or take part in the SuperBowl, or compete for the Stanley Cup - but with some determination and a “chip and a chair” we have the chance to create another poker legend.

So get online. Follow the WSOP. Learn your trade … and start paying attention to all those WSOP freerolls and satellite tournaments that offer the chance to win entry into the 2008 main event.

Who will win in 2008? It has to be someone. Maybe me. Maybe YOU. It might be a pro - but every year there is more and more chance that it will be an online player.

So .. do you feel lucky? See you on the felt.

There are many factors that affect your decisions at the poker table. Obviously, the cards you’re dealt often dictate whether you’ll even consider getting involved in a hand, but they’re just one part of the equation.

Once you’re playing, things like your physical state can also affect your play. If you’re hungry, tired or even a little drunk, you’re not likely to play your best, and your decisions may not be as smart. Emotion is a factor too. When you’re winning, you often feel like you can make any hand you need to win a pot. When you’re losing, however, a continued string of beats can seem unbearable. This can lead to tilt and keep you from playing at the top of your game.

Using this kind of information against your opponents is one of the keys to becoming a winning player. If you know they’re a little tired or a little tilted, you can determine if they’re likely to call a well-timed bet or bluff.

For example, let’s say you river the nuts and want to induce your opponent to put more money into the pot. What do you do? The answer often depends on your opponent, and what size bet you think you can get them to call.

One factor to consider is how well your opponent is doing in the game. Are they winning or losing? Let’s say you know a player sat down with $500 and they now have $710. This player is much more likely to call a bet of $140 to $170 on the river than a bet of $220 or $250, because the additional money pushes them through what I like to call their “pain barrier”.

For your opponent, calling a $170 bet means they’ll still be up for the session, even if they lose the pot. Calling $220 or more means they’ll be down. For many players, the psychological difference between these two scenarios is huge, even if they don’t realize it.

There are other factors that can help you manipulate your opponent’s pain barrier at the table. For example, a player who is sitting with case money (i.e., they don’t have any more money in their pocket or stored in the cashier) is much more likely to be pushed off a hand by a big bet if they’re holding any kind of marginal hand. The pain barrier becomes even more effective if you know your opponent is about to quit the game. They might have had a phone call from a spouse or be going to dinner soon; then the $250 bet in the situation above works even more often, as most players don’t want to finish their session on a losing note.

Obviously, using the pain barrier won’t work every time but, if used properly, it’s a great weapon to have in your arsenal.

Joe Beevers

>>Joe plays online at Full Tilt Poker, meet Joe and many other top professionals over the tables today! You might as well learn from the best…

I’d like to share some strategies for playing short-handed Limit Hold ‘em.

You’ll probably know that hand values change in short-handed play and that it’s proper to play a greater percentage of hands than would be wise at a full ring game. In these games, I play a lot of hands. So many, in fact, I’ve gotten the reputation of being something of a maniac. But there is a method to my madness. By the end of this article, I think you’ll agree.

Button Play

In a three- or four-handed Limit Hold ‘em cash game, I will raise about two of every three times I have the button. The quality of my hand is essentially irrelevant. The position raise puts me in control of the hand and, even if I’m holding total trash, the pressure puts the blinds in a spot where they need to catch a piece of the flop.

For example, say I raise on the button and the big blind calls with a modest but playable hand, maybe Qc-Td. Now, if the flop comes with any Ace or King, the blind is going to have a very difficult time continuing with the hand if he checks and I bet the flop. In fact, the blind is going to have a very difficult time continuing on any board that doesn’t contain a Queen or Ten.

If I follow up my raise and bet the flop with, say, 7-high, and get called or check-raised, it’s very easy to lay down the hand. I know this is going to happen at times, but I pick up the pot often enough to make the constant button aggression profitable.

Small Blind Play

When playing against opponents who raise frequently in position, I’m sure to respond with aggression in the small blind. If I’m holding a hand that’s likely best at a three-handed table - something as modest as A-9 might qualify - and I’m facing a button raise, I take control of the hand and three-bet. That puts additional pressure on the big blind. If I only call the button raise, the big blind will be getting great odds (5:1) to call the additional bet. And I’d far prefer to play the hand heads-up.

After three-betting from the small blind, I follow up with a bet on the flop almost 100 percent of the time. Since I represented a big hand pre-flop, I want to put my opponent to a decision immediately. Once I see how my opponent reacts, I can decide how I should proceed with the hand. I’ll have to give it up sometimes, but the pressure will force a lot of folds.

Big Blind Play

The big blind is the only place where I’m content to call bets pre-flop. In fact, a call is my usual reaction to a button raise. If I start with a moderate hand, I can see the flop and decide how to proceed. If I start with a strong hand, like pocket Aces or Kings, I’ll still call and look to check-raise the flop. I don’t like to three-bet from the big blind because it tends to announce my hand. My opponents know that I’m starting with a very big hand.

Overall Goal

As you can probably tell by now, I believe that aggression is key to success in short-handed Limit Hold ‘em. I think the constant bets and raises create two dynamics that can be exploited for profit. First, by being the aggressor, I have the opportunity to pick up a number of pots where both my opponent and I miss the flop.

Second, the aggression has the tendency to lead opponents to make some very bad decisions. After some time, opponents may call bets on every street with nothing more than Ace- or King-high. When they start doing that, I can tighten up and only bet hands that are likely to be winners at showdown.

At times my style may look maniacal. But in short-handed limit play, it works.

John

[John D’Agostino is Nicknamed “Jdags” if you come across him onsite at Full Tilt Poker. He has won 2 WPT final tables in the last 12 months]

John, like a growing number of poker professionals and aspiring poker professionals plays exclusively online at Full Tilt Poker. Click through on the link below to see if Full Tilt Poker is right for you!
>> GO TO FULL TILT