Sky Satellite

   I've been playing in a few online satellites to the Aussie Millions over the past year. But I recently came to the conclusion that if I were to win a seat in this tournament it would involve a considerable expense for me to travel to Melbourne and stay for the time required to play. I decided that I'd be better off to play in satellites to  local 'big events' like the ones that are occasionally played at Auckland's Sky City Casino. But there's a catch. Satellites to these live events are bound to be much more expensive to enter than the super-cheap online games. And I didn't want to play outside of my buy-in limits.
   Then at the end of last year, I came into some money. The organisers of my regular Friday night tournament gave away some prizes to the top points scorers for the year. Although I had been told that there wouldn't be a third prize, that turned out to be wrong. So I was pleasantly surprised to discover that I had won $250 for coming in third. Although some of this money was used for other purposes, I also had some other cash from my Interclub Poker team prize, leaving me with a little pool of spare poker cash. I decided that this would become my 'shadow bankroll', to be used to buy in to a satellite tournament if I could find a suitable one.
   I checked out the Sky City tournament schedule in December and found that there were a number of satellites to the $1500 buy-in 'Waitangi Weekend Deep Stack Tournament', running through December and January. But although I knew that Waitangi Day (New Zealand's national day) was on February 6th, there was no mention on the website of when exactly the target event was to be played. So I sent an email to the Sky City poker section and they replied with the information I needed.

  The cheapest satellites available had a $70 buy-in with prizes consisting of tickets to the main event, tickets to the $350 'Mega Satellite' and tickets to other $70 satellites, depending on the number of entries. They also featured one re-buy for $30 and one add-on for $30. According to the website, the re-buys were available if a player had less than their starting stack. I'd never come across this format before: I'd call it a 'top-up' rather than a re-buy. There was also a 're-entry' for $70 if you lost all your chips (what I would call a re-buy). The starting stack was 10,000 with the blinds starting at 25/50.
    These tournaments were playing on Thursday nights and Sunday afternoons, so I turned up on the Sunday and registered. I was careful to ask plenty of questions of the poker cashier first, as I'd had problems in the past with a lack of information provided by Sky City regarding their tournaments. After waiting around for quite a while I went back and asked what was happening and was told the tournament had been cancelled because there weren't enough entries. But the cashier told me that Thursday nights often had more people entering.
Thursday
   Four days later I was back up at the casino, looking to play in the 7pm satellite tournament. I could see that there were already a few people registered when I got there, so I paid my money and got my cash chips for the expected re-buy and add-on. I nearly missed the start because I didn't realise I had to get a seat assignment, and I was still standing in line when the announcement was made to start dealing. But I found my seat and settled in at a table of 6 other players, in a field of 15. I was starting with 200 big blinds and the blinds changed every 15 minutes. I started out by familiarising myself with the chip colours. There were also 2 different coloured chips with letters on them. I asked my neighbour what they were for he told me they were the tokens to be used for the re-buy and add-on.
   I started out by playing pretty tight and observing the play of my table-mates. I was surprised to see quite a lot of limping in and even limp-calling. Not at all what I expected. I'd originally decided to re-buy as soon as my stack dropped below the starting level, but no-one else seemed to be doing that so I thought I'd just hold off for a bit. Over the next hour or so there were more entries and we ended up with a total of 23 players.  I lost a lot of chips in the following hand: I raised with J J and got called by a player who had position on me. The flop was K J x, giving me trips. I bet and got called. The turn was a 3, putting three hearts on the board. Hoping I was still good, I bet and got called. The river put a fourth heart out there. I knew if I checked my opponent would bet, whether he had the flush or not. So I put in the smallest bet I thought I could get away with. He called and showed the King of hearts with a Queen. I got some cash chips out and used my re-buy token. A little while later we reached the end of the third blind level and everyone added on.
   Most stacks were around 20,000 at this point, with the blinds at 100/200.  My stack was a bit shorter than that, but not too bad. There was not much action for me during this period and the number of players dropped down to five. I'd just got used to playing on a short-handed table when one more player was knocked out and we were down to a final table of ten. So I had to re-adjust to full table play. By this stage the prizes had been posted. First prize was a ticket to the main event, second was a ticket to the Mega Satellite, 3rd, 4th and 5th were all $70 satellite tickets, and sixth prize was $35.

    As it got later my stack got shorter and I ended up reaching the push or fold level. I lost a lot of chips early in this stage in a coin flip versus a shorter-stacked player. Then, a while later, I got most of my chips back in another coin flip against the same player. As it got later the other players' stacks diminished and it became an all-in fest. I was mostly just keeping out of the way, but I was always looking for the right spot to get my chips in the middle, constantly checking my stack size and the progress of the clock. At some point we crossed the bubble, but I didn't want another $70 ticket, I wanted the big prize. Some time after the second break we were down to three players, myself, a young woman in her twenties, and a man older even than me who was knocking back quite a few beers, which appeared to have no obvious effect on him. At this point he offered us a deal, but I had no idea how you would split a prize that consists of tournament tickets, so I declined, as did the other  player.

    At this point the woman had the big stack, but we all had at least 20 big blinds each. Despite these reasonable stack sizes, the other two just wanted to play push or fold. Mostly I just stayed out of their way, as I wasn't hitting much, but I lost a few chips by raising pre-flop and then having to fold to an all-in shove. But eventually the other two settled down a bit and we actually started  playing  some hands. The man seemed to have a talent for hitting flops and the         woman  started making some questionable calls, what she called 'spite  calls'.  His stack got bigger and hers smaller and eventually she was eliminated.                                                                                                                           

    With two of us left, my opponent offered me a deal. I realised that what he was proposing was that the winner agree to pay the second place-getter $200. It was basically an insurance proposition. Even if I had the money to spare, I wasn't really interested, and declined the offer. Even though I was the short stack I figured I still had a decent chance at winning the top prize. But the cards were not good to me. I couldn't seem to hit anything. In the end I pushed all-in with K Q and got called by A K and that was it. Although I didn't win the big ticket, I was still pretty happy to win entry to the second-level satellite. So I went over to the cashier's counter, expecting to get some sort of ticket or confirmation of my qualifying. Instead, he wrote my name and phone number down on a scrap of paper, and that was it. Really? It was 12.30. I'd been playing for about 5 hours and I was pretty happy with the result. So I took a taxi home. Just before I went to bed I got a text message from Sky City confirming my entry in the Mega Satellite event.

Saturday
   There were a number of Mega Satellite games available, but I decided to play in the Saturday afternoon game. My wife dropped me off at the casino and I registered using my confirmation number. When we got started there were 15 players involved. This tournament had an even deeper stack than the previous one, starting at 15,000 with the blinds at 25/50, and the levels changing every 30 minutes. There were only 7 players at my table, so I was playing at a short-handed table with a 300 BB stack. Interesting. Looking around, I recognised a couple of faces from the stage 1 satellite, including the guy sitting at my table with the Macau Casino hat on.
   After some thought I decided to just play the game the same way I would a ring game, at least until I was down to about 100 BB. There was a lot less limping in this time around, with more raising and folding pre-flop. One player in particular, sitting across from me (let's call him Agro Joe), was raising pretty frequently, and seemed to be a serial blind-defender. I had to fold to him a couple of times after initially raising and then getting re-raised. But I managed to get a few chips back off him once I realised he was raising light pre-flop, by betting in position post-flop. With late entries the total number of players climbed up to 17.
   We had a little comic relief at our table when I folded my hand clumsily and my K 5 was exposed on the table. Then the flop was K 5 x. Someone suggested that the turn would be a King, but they were wrong. It was a 5. Ha ha.  Apart from this I wasn't hitting much, but I managed to drag in a few pots without having to go to showdown. Meanwhile Agro Joe seemed to have quietened down a bit and wasn't playing many hands. Maybe he'd been trying to double-up early? Who knows. Once I dropped down to 100 BB I tightened up my range and started folding a lot.
   When the organisers posted the prizes I saw that there were three $1500 tournament tickets up for grabs. Fourth prize was another $350 ticket and fifth was $250 in cash. With a few players eliminated my table dropped down to 6 players briefly, then another player dropped out and we were a final table of ten players. My stack was down to about 20 BB and I started looking for spots to push the action. With a small Ace in my hand I raised and got called by one player. The flop was K K x and I immediately pushed all-in. My opponent, sitting across the table from me and wearing big dark glasses was obviously thinking about calling. I tried to put on my best poker face, but he was sitting there looking at me for quite a while. They were showing the cricket, NZ vs Pakistan, on the big screen and I suddenly developed an intense interest in the match. Eventually he decided to fold and I let out a quiet sigh of relief.
   After 4 hours of play it was time for our second 10 minute break, so I rushed off to the Bistro on the other side of the casino to get something to eat and drink. With one 10 minute break every 2 hours, you don't have much time to take care of bodily needs. But I managed to get back to the table with my pie and beer just in time for the start of blind level five. At this point we were approaching the bubble. I was getting short-stacked so I decided to take a punt and in the face of a minimum raise I pushed all-in with J Ts.. I was called by K Q. Not good. There was a King on the flop, then a Queen on the turn, then an Ace on the river, giving me a straight. Now that's lucky! This elimination put us across the bubble.
   After playing for a while my stack was dropping down again, and I was down to about 7 BB. Mr Macau Hat pushed all-in and I looked down at Q J. With such a short stack, I was running out of options. What's more, I didn't want to win fourth prize and find myself having to play in another one of these Mega Satellites. Even though I suspected that I was behind, I figured that I was better off to try and double-up and go for the top prize, or bust out and go home with $250 cash. So I called and Macau Hat showed A J. My hand was dominated. Neither one of us hit the flop or the turn and I was looking for one of three remaining Queens to turn up on the river. The river was a Queen. Mr Macau was knocked out and he was not happy. Sometimes you just have to get lucky.
   Despite my chip-up, I was still a reasonably short stack, so I just continued in push or fold mode, and tried to stay out of trouble. After a short period of play the smallest stack was eliminated, leaving just three of us at the table. The other two players started congratulating each other and it took me a moment to realise that I'd just won a $1500 ticket to the Waitangi Weekend Deep Stack Tournament. Not bad for my first attempt at a big game satellite. I wandered over to the cashier and picked up my ticket. Yes, this time I actually got a printed ticket confirmation. I was told that I'd be playing on day 1A, next Friday night. After 6 hours of play I decided that I deserved a couple of celebratory drinks at the bar before heading back home to share the good news.
  
  
  
  

Collusion

   Collusion is when two or more players at the same table work together as a team to help each other and therefore gain an unfair advantage over the other players.
                                                                   Dictionary and Glossary of Poker terms
                                                                   www.pokerdictionary.net

   In all the time that I've been playing poker, I've been accused of collusion twice, and both of these times involved online games. The first time was when I was playing a tournament on Fulltilt Poker.  This was a few years ago now but I can recall the basic details. I'd been in a couple of big hands with 'Player A', and ended up losing chips each time. Then, when I found myself once again folding to a big bet on the river from this player, I typed a joking comment into the chat box, something like, 'just trying to chip you up mate'. There were two other players from Germany at the table and they immediately started chatting back and forth in German. Then one of them said something like, 'this is not right, you can't do that'. I told him it was just a joke but he kept on complaining about my 'cheating' and said he was going to report the incident. After that I just kept my mouth shut and eventually I eliminated Player A. I don't know if the complainer reported me to the site, but I never heard any more about it. After that, I never made a joke of this type again.
   The second incident happened just last year, on 888 Poker. I got involved in a big hand against 'Player 1', putting in big bets, which he kept calling. Then on the river I put in a small bet because I had a very good hand and was hoping for a call. Player 1 then folded. Player 2 then made a comment to Player 1, something like, 'doing a bit of chip dumping?'. At first I took no notice of this comment, but then I decided to go to Google to find out what 'chip dumping' was. That's when I discovered that it was a practice used by colluding players to pass chips to each other. I was somewhat surprised to discover that I'd just been accused of cheating. So that's what I said on returning to the table: '' did you just accuse me of cheating?'. He replied that it looked suspicious to him, Player 1 folding in the face of such a small bet, with so much in the pot. I didn't take this accusation well. I was absolutely seething and pretty much played the rest of the SitNGo on tilt. I spent the rest of the game trying to knock out my accuser and ended up playing heads-up with him, but in the end I didn't get my revenge, finishing in second place.
   The most serious case of collusion that I've ever come across happened a few years ago at a live tournament I used to play in every Friday night. A family group started turning up each week: mum, dad and a few of their kids. It became increasingly obvious that there was something odd going on during the game. The betting patterns seemed to change depending on who was involved in the pot. Often there would be big raises from one of the family until all the outsiders had dropped out, then things would quieten down and get much more friendly. There were dark mutterings from the locals about this situation, but as far as I know, no one ever confronted the family about their teamwork. It's a lot harder to accuse someone of cheating face to face than it is by typing something into a chat box. I don't know why, but the family eventually stopped coming to the game. Maybe they sensed the hostility of the locals, or maybe somebody did talk to them, or maybe they just moved on. In any case, we locals were all glad to see the back of this particular group.
   Although I haven't actually seen it myself, I've heard of a possible case of collusion at a local game. A player I know told me that he went to one of these games and gained the distinct impression that he was playing against a team. In fact, at one point one of the locals said something like, 'what makes you think you can come here and take our money?' Although this is the only time I've heard some doubts raised about this game, I have heard one player from this club make comments that suggest that she is not unfamiliar with signals that might be used by colluding players to communicate with each other. On the strength of this, I think I will avoid playing at this particular game. There are other similar games available which I haven't heard any bad reports about, so I think I'll err on the side of caution and stay away from a game where the odds may well be stacked against me.
   I play in a tournament every week on a Friday night and it's here that I sometimes encounter a milder version of collusion. A lot of the people who play in this tournament are regulars, and many are related to each other in one way or another. There are husbands and wives, sons, brothers, nieces, cousins and any number of relationships going on among these players. Although the organiser always tries to put spouses on different tables, he can only juggle the names to a certain extent, and there is nearly always a couple of people with some sort of connection on each table. It's not unusual to see a certain amount of soft playing going on between these people, especially if they're the only two in the hand. It's not unusual to see a hand get checked down in this situation. Although this kind of behaviour is at the mild end of the collusion spectrum, it still has the potential to affect the outcome of the game, and it really shouldn't be allowed. But in an amateur game, played among friends and club-mates, what can you do? I don't really want to be the one who starts complaining about people not playing hard enough against their girlfriends/sons/brothers or whatever.
   Sometimes I find myself in this kind of spot when I'm at the same table as my wife. We've had a number of discussions about the fact that I raise a lot, and she calls a lot. She is a pretty passive player and comes from a background of friendly games where players typically just bet the minimum or call and hands are often checked to the showdown. So she sometimes takes exception to me raising her, especially if we're the only two in the hand. But I've made it clear that I'm playing the same way against everyone, and if I bet or raise, it's because I have a good hand, so she should just fold. However, although I only bluff occasionally against other players, I never bluff against my wife, so I guess you could say that I'm guilty of collusion too.
   There seems to be a fairly relaxed attitude to partner-play at these local live games. This may be in part due to the Inter-Club tournament that many of us participate in. This is a teams competition that actually encourages collusion among team-mates, something that flies in the face of the basic principal of poker as an individual game. But I've also seen enough of these players' behaviour to realise it may actually be a more deep-seated attitude. I had a conversation with one player, S, a nice guy who I get on with well, who told me about a game he played in where his friend failed to carry out his plan to play as partners. He didn't seem to see anything wrong with this and treated the whole story as a bit of a joke. I've also been in a situation where I was in the final three with a father and son, both of whom I also get on with well, who were 'joking' about playing to knock me out and split the top two prizes between them.
   So in my regular live tournaments, I keep my eyes and ears open. There's not much I can do about the low-grade collusion, but I'm always aware of the possibility of serious cheating going on. It's funny how poker works. Deception is at the very heart of the game, at a number of different levels. It's perfectly acceptable for an individual to lie through their teeth in so many ways, as long as they don't do it in tandem. In short, poker is not a team game.
  


                                                                                                                       

Christmas Wrap-up

   I've spent the last three months writing about the five main poker games I've been playing in over the last year or more. Meanwhile, Christmas has nearly arrived and various other things have been going on in my poker world. Such as...

The World Series of Poker
   After much anticipation, the Main Event finally turned up on ESPN and I tuned in every week to see the thousands of players get whittled down to the November Nine. Actually, the coverage started when the money bubble had already burst and there were only a few hundred players left. It was still pretty entertaining to watch, although neither my wife nor I are quite as enthralled by it all as we were when we first started watching this event four or five years ago. The most interesting thing for me was to watch Daniel Negreanu go deep in this tournament again. He's the only one of the old guard of poker professionals to consistently do well in this massive tournament. In the end he just missed the final table, coming 11th for the second time in recent years.
   I saw the start of the final table and then, because it was being played every day, I missed an episode or two and caught up again when there were only three players left. It was pretty obvious that Joe McKeehen, with his massive chip advantage, was going to win. The fact that he kept hitting good hands didn't hurt either. I was rooting for Neil Blumenfield to win, partly because he's an amateur, partly because he's an old bugger like me, but mostly because I liked his hat. But in the end he had no chance and only collected about $3 million for third place. How sad.

PokerNZ
   For a while now I've been considering the possibility of starting up a poker website that would be a resource for Auckland and/or New Zealand poker players. I've been keeping an eye out for a site that provides information for local players for quite a while, but have seen nothing. I was even planning to check out web design courses in the new year. Then I discovered a new website: www.pokerNZ.co.nz . This site features a New Zealand map with flags pinpointing local tournaments and showing details of each game. I had a bit of trouble using this site at first, due to my habit of not allowing websites to know my location. It turns out that keeping your location private means that you don't get to see the location of games on the map. But having sorted this out, I had a look at the site and found it to be very interesting.
   There were quite a few games listed in places like Tauranga and Rotorua, but nothing in Auckland, other than the Sky City Casino. It turns out that the site organiser lives in Tauranga, so most of the listings come from that area. So I registered with the site and set about rectifying this state of affairs. I started by listing some of the club tournaments that I'm familiar with. Then I listed a few pub tournaments that I'd seen advertised. With Christmas coming up I've given it a rest for a few weeks, but will continue after the new year. There are still a few more club games to list and then I'll probably start with the National Pub Poker League games. The way I see it, the more games I list, the more likely it is that this site becomes a useful resource for poker players. And the more players that use the site, the more likely it is that some of them will also start listing games. This is my cunning plan for finding more live poker games.

The Verdict
   With December comes my annual summary of the year's results. To put it into a nutshell: it could have been worse. I ended the year with a slightly lower bankroll balance than I began with, showing a 2% loss for the year. Looking at the individual game types, I showed a 17% loss for both the online game types; the micro ring games and the single table Sit 'n' Gos. At least I'm consistent. Once again it was the live games that saved the day. In live tournaments I showed a 16% return on investment, not nearly as good as previous years, but a positive result nevertheless. Live ring games showed the best results of all, at 49% ROI, but unfortunately I haven't spent as much on these games during the year, simply because there haven't been that many available. As a result, it wasn't enough to bring me back into the black overall. These results only go to confirm a trend that has been obvious for a while: I do much better in live poker games than I do at online games. So I will continue to try and find live games to play in, especially cashies.

Interclub
   After building up the final Interclub Tournament as the big decider (see the previous post), it turned into a bit of a fizzer. Without going into too much detail, we ended up trialling a new format at the end-of-year game, which meant that there were no more points to be had at that session. The results remained the same as they stood at the end of the November round, which means that my team finished in second place, netting $720 between the 11 of us. Better than a slap in the face with a damp haddock I guess. One of our team-mates also came third in the individual points for the year and got some prize money. It turns out that I finished in fifth place overall, which I was pleased to hear. I also placed in the top ten last year so it's good to see I'm showing some consistency.
   As for the venue; it was the first time we'd been to the Tuakau Cossie Club. It turned out to be a pretty nice place and a good time was had by all. I even managed to get a ring game going, although I showed a small loss this time. Meanwhile there's a lot of talk about whether the competition will continue with 8-player teams or whether we're moving to 5-player teams. The decision is yet to be made but either way my wife and I will continue playing next year. It looks like we're hooked.

Woop woop woop, 'Pull up, pull up!'
   As detailed in previous posts, my summer poker season was disastrous in terms of results. I showed a loss in every single game type and lost a big chunk of my poker bankroll. Since then, I've been gradually crawling my way back up towards my previous bankroll level. It's been a long slow climb, but I've recovered nearly half of the money I lost. Looking back at these results, it's pretty clear that the reason I lost during this period is that I had a losing season for live games. And the reason that I've been able to claw back some of those losses is that my live poker games have got back on the winning track. So the way ahead is clear: play as often as possible in live poker games (especially ring games), and minimise the damage in online games. This may seem to be something of a defeatist attitude when it comes to online poker, but I consider it to be a case of facing reality. My online games have shown a negative ROI in three out of four seasons this year. So in future games I will be playing at the micro level to minimise my losses.

The Holiday Project
   Regardless of the pending decision over whether to play 5-player or 8-player teams in the Interclub Tournament my wife and I will continue to play for the Onehunga RSA. With this in mind, I volunteered to make some poker table-tops for the club. The hosting club needs at least 9 tables to accommodate the players in this tournament, and the RSA has only three (these table-tops were left over from a few years ago when the NPPL used to host games there). So we have to borrow tables from the club just up the street, which is less than ideal. Our team leader didn't seem too bothered about this embarrassing situation, so I put my hand up to sort the problem out.
   So I've bought some plywood, which I had delivered to my workplace, and I'm in the process of cutting it into six table-tops. I'm going to make four of them octagonal and two round tables. I figure that the round tables can seat nine people which could be useful for the tournament and also for use as a ring game table (I still haven't given up hope of getting a cashie started). Next I have to find some felt or card table cloth. There's a local supplier that has 'speed cloth' for sale but it's pretty expensive, working out at about $50 per table. So I'm checking out possible sources of supply next week, while I knock the table-tops into shape. I've got about three weeks holiday over Christmas so that will be my holiday project. My club is hosting the first tournament in mid-January, so there's no time for messing about.

Game Plan
   As usual at this time of year I've been thinking about what sort of poker game(s) I want to play in the coming year. I'm talking about online games here as I will continue playing in any available live games that are within my buy-in limits. Looking at my results for both online Sit 'n' Gos and online ring games, I can't really see myself continuing in these game types, at least not in the short term so, where to next? Well, I think it's time to return to playing tournaments online. I've played in these types of game in the past, with mixed results, but I figure that it's the game type that's most likely to have weak players, especially at the micro level. So for the next year at least I'll be playing in multi table no limit holdem tournaments on 888Poker. In particular, I want to play in games with no re-buys or add-ons. I've identified a couple of tournaments that are played mid-afternoon on weekends and I plan to make that my regular weekly online game. They are also quite cheap tournaments, well below my maximum buy-in level, which means I'm limiting the risk of losing a lot of cash on yet another online game shambles.

December
   I've had a couple of good wins in the last week. I came first in the Wednesday night tournament and then my wife and I finished in the top two on Friday night, splitting first and second prize between us. That's the first time we've ever been in the money together. So that's given my bankroll a nice boost. There's been a lot of friendly rivalry on Friday nights as players try to win the big yearly prize of $1000 for the best overall points-scorer of the year. I was sitting in third place but in the end the two front-runners were too far ahead for me to catch up. I believe that there's prize money for first and second so I just missed out on a Christmas bonus. Nevermind.
   My wife and I are off on holiday for a week over Christmas so I'll have to somehow survive a week without any poker games. Actually, it'll be nice to have a break from poker for a short time. We're planning to return to Auckland on New Year's Eve, and I'm hoping to find a live game to play that evening. What better way is there to see in the New Year?

  
  

Interclub

   Apart from the weekly 'Friday Nighter' and the regular Wednesday night tournament, I play in one other live poker tourney on a regular basis. This is the monthly Interclub tournament. But this game is
significantly different from the others. Here's how it works. There are seven clubs involved, and each one fields a team of eight players. In addition, any club can enter additional players who play as individuals rather than as team members. It's a twenty \dollar buy-in tournament with cash prizes and the team players also earn points based on their finishing positions. I think the extra points start with the player who finishes in 50th position; they get 2 points. The 49th finisher gets 3 points, 48th place gets 4 points, and so on. These points accumulate over the course of the year. The teams with the highest total scores at the end of the year get cash prizes (1st, 2nd and 3rd, I think). There are also prizes for the highest individual points-scorers. This end-of-year prize money comes out of the prize-pools of each of the monthly tournaments. I don't know the exact details but something like 25% comes out of the prize-pool each month.
   It is primarily because of the amount that comes out of the prize-pool that I don't use my poker bankroll to play in this tournament. I treat it as a fun day out and just play using my regular spending money. Another good reason for not treating this as a 'bankroll game' is the team factor. The expectation is that team-mates help each other out in this tourney. Although you usually start out on a table full of players from other clubs, as the day progresses and tables get broken down, you are likely to end up with one or more of your fellow team members on
your table. This is where it starts to get tricky. The general idea seems to be that you soft-play when in a hand with your team-mates. So if your opponent has a good hand and raises, you can call but not re-raise, and then the two of you just check it down. That's the theory anyway. But if a player from another team is also involved in the hand it starts getting more complicated. I don't know about other teams but our team has never got together and discussed strategy. This becomes particularly hard to work out when you start getting short-stacked. When a team-mate pushes all-in and you are sitting there with 10 big blinds left and pocket nines, what do you do? The answer? When I was in this position I called and eliminated my team-mate, who had AJ. He didn't seem to mind in this instance, but I wouldn't be surprised if some of my other team-mates objected to this type of play .There are lots of difficult decisions of this type in the later stages of the tournament.
   If you are playing as part of a team and also as an individual there is always going to be conflict between actions that are likely to get you closer to the money, and actions that might benefit the team. As a rule I tend to come down on the side of increasing my chance of cashing. After all, I pay my entry fee, not the team, so I figure I should be trying to get some return on my investment. But in recent months my team has actually been doing quite well and it has become increasingly important for our players to all go deep in the tournament and rack up the team points. So the conflict between individual and team progress has become even more pronounced. We've got one more of these events coming up before the end of the year and our team is currently in second place overall. So I guess the pressure is on.

  I was reluctant to get involved in this tourney, mainly because of the diminished prize-pool. But my wife was keen to play and eventually I got my arm twisted enough to join in. So I joined the team and started turning up on a regular basis. The tourney is hosted by each of the seven clubs in turn, so you get to go to a different venue each month. There are usually 60 or more players involved and it goes on from 11 am through to about 6 pm (with a lunch break included). The starting stack is 20,000, and it's usually after the second break, when the big blind jumps from 2,000 to 4,000 that a lot of players start dropping out. I usually go reasonably deep in these tournaments, having finished in the top three a couple of times and cashed on one other occasion, although I've never been able to take out first place. But even if I get knocked out early there's usually a cash game going among the other eliminated players. Although I don't play the tourney with my bankroll cash, I always take some along for the cashie, as this is a straight-up un-raked game. In fact, truth be told, I look forward to playing in the cashie more than I do playing in the tournament.
   That's not to say that I don't give it my best when I'm playing the tourney. Although I'm more inclined to drink during this game than I am during other sessions, I still take it seriously, and I follow pretty much the same tourney strategy that I would elsewhere. As a rule, the standard of play in this tourney is better than in the other games I play. This is not surprising, as I assume it's the keenest poker players that turn up to these events, rather than just casual 'walk-ins'. There are still quite a few loose-passive 'fish' about but there are also plenty of good solid players. It's just a matter of differentiating one from the other and playing accordingly. And of course, remembering not to bet into your team-mates.
   The next interclub tournament is to be held this coming weekend at the venue of the club that just joined the competition this year. So this will be the first time any of us have been to the Tuakau club. This is the prize-giving event, when the points are finally tallied up and and the prizes awarded. The hosting club is situated in Tuakau, a town about 50 km south of Auckland. It should be a fun end-of-year trip, as long as we don't get lost.

The Friday Nighter

   I've been playing in a live poker tournament nearly every Friday night since June of 2013. The only times I've missed this weekly event has been on the couple of Fridays over the Christmas period when it's not actually played, and a few days this year when missing the game was unavoidable (a wedding, a funeral, a holiday trip). Otherwise, my wife and I have a regular routine of playing in the Friday night poker tournament at the Onehunga Workingmen's Club.
   This is a $20 Texas Holdem tournament, with no re-buys or add-ons, that starts at 7 pm. The usual starting stack is 20,000, with the first blind level being 100/200. Although the organiser does change these around from week to week, the starting stack is usually in the range of 80 to 150 big blinds. The blind levels are usually 15 minutes long with a 10 minute break every hour. The organiser takes 10% out of the prizepool, and this money goes towards the OWMC I think, although this has never been made entirely clear to me. But 10% is a perfectly reasonable tournament fee, so I'm not particularly worried about where this money goes. There are usually between 18 and 40 players involved and between 5 and 7 players get paid. Last year player numbers were reaching the high thirties, but this year another club started their own Friday night tournament, and the numbers at the OWMC tourney dropped down into the twenties and that's pretty much where it's stayed in recent months.
   This tournament is very well run. 'B' and his partner, 'R' have been running it for years and have got it down to a fine art now. The club has a number of round poker table tops made of plywood covered in green felt and these are already set up by the time my wife and I arrive around 6.30 pm. Registration is open until 6.50 pm, and this is strictly enforced, giving B time to enter everyone's names into the tournament software before 7.00. They use 'Tournament Manager' with the display on a big TV screen in the corner. Players are assigned to tables, but not to particular seats, so I always try to get into a seat where I'm facing the screen. This gives me the chance to keep updated on important information like the blind levels, the number of players remaining, the time to the next level, the average stack etc. The organisers also play in the tourney and B always sits in the same seat, next to the computer, so he can keep updating player numbers.

   The Onehunga Workingmen's Club is a pretty good venue. It's basically one long room, with the dining area and the TAB/bar area at one end and the pool and snooker area at the other, with the dart boards beyond that, on the end wall. The poker is played in the darts area, with enough room available for about six tables if required (maybe seven at a squeeze). There's always a band playing on Friday night and quite a few people come up for that, or for the membership draw. There's also sports on the TV screens, the TAB (for betting on races), raffles, and of course, the pokies (slots). So if I get knocked out of the tournament, there's always something to do, whether it's playing a game of pool or just sitting back and watching the rugby on the big screen. Of course if my wife gets knocked out she heads straight to the pokies room, but that's not really my scene.
   I've discussed the style of play that's typical of this tourney in previous posts but to summarise; most of the participants are playing 'no-foldem'. In other words, there's an awful lot of 'limping in' with very little raising and a ridiculous amount of calling. It's not unusual to see the entire table (except me) just call the big blind pre-flop. What's more, many players will just limp in with hands like QQ, AQ, AK, sometimes even KK. There is one player in particular who is notorious for never raising, but even she will raise if she has AA. Post-flop, there is still an absurd amount of calling, even of big bets. Many players will call with nothing but an inside straight draw, a couple of overcards, or some kind of crazy back-door draw. This style of play is typical in the early stages, although it tends to get a bit tighter and more active in the later stages, when the stacks get shorter and the players with the stickiest fingers have been eliminated.
   Probably 75% of the field play this way, with the remainder being the ones to worry about. Some of these more active players are solid players who play tight and aggressive, but a few could better be categorised as 'maniacs'. These are the ones who raise a lot, both pre and post-flop, sometimes with a good hand, sometimes with nothing. There are maybe three or four of these sort of players and as a general rule, I try to stay out of their way. So the basic rule is: if a solid player raises, they have a good hand; if a 'calling station' raises, they have a MONSTER; if a maniac raises, they could have anything. And of course if a passive player calls, they could have anything. So, as a rule, I prefer to be up against one of the solid players; at least I'll have some sort of idea of where I'm at in the hand, and there's a decent possibility of pulling off a bluff.
   About ten of these players could be described as 'regulars'; people I've been playing with for the past 2 1/2 years. After all that time, you start to pick up a few clues on the way particular people play. I've already mentioned the player who'll only ever raise pre-flop with AA. Then there's the player who plays any two cards if they're suited, and always plays the very first hand. One player is famous for preferring to play small cards rather than big ones.  Another will call almost any pre-flop bet because he just has to see the flop. Another player also calls an awful lot, trying to hit something, then if he hits a big hand, he pushes all-in. Of course, not everyone is so obvious, but I've managed to categorise the playing style of quite a few of the regulars. However, there is a fairly constant turn-over among the occasional players and most nights there are one or two new faces added to the mix, just to keep me guessing.
   As far as my playing strategy goes, I've settled into a fairly straightforward pattern. Early on I'm playing Mr Foldalot while the other players chuck their chips about. Then I get more active as my stack gets shorter. Unlike the other players, I'm not happy to let my chip stack diminish down to nothing. I figure it's better to go out with a bang than a whimper, either doubling up and going deep, or having an early rest. This basic plan has served me quite well over the last few years. Looking at my results, I showed a 61% return on investment over my first 6 months of play in 2013. The next year was even better; I showed a whopping 89% ROI over 2014, coming close to doubling my money. This year, however, has not been so good. In the Summer season I actually showed a loss for the first time, in Autumn I came up with a very small win, and then in Winter I was back up again (41% ROI). Overall, I'm maybe $50 in the black for 2015 so far. Not a great result compared to previous years, but at least it's a profit. So it's a game that is both fun to play in, and also profitable.
   My aim at this tournament is to make the final table, which is the top ten. This is a good place to be for a number of reasons: it's close to the money (usually 6th place gets paid); there are points on offer; you get to play ten-handed instead of five-handed; and you get to play on what is probably the best poker table in New Zealand, maybe even the best table in Australasia. This table was built by the organiser and it's a thing of beauty. It's a ten-sided table top with a blue cloth surface, with polished wood margins and a polished wood rail. It takes two people to lift it onto its base but it is truly a joy to play on.
   The other incentive for making the final 10 is the points system. The organisers run four 'ten week challenges' each year. Players get points for each of these games. We get 1 point for playing, then the final table players get extra points. Tenth place gets 2 points, ninth gets 3 points and so on to the winner, who gets 11 points. After ten weeks the three players with the highest cumulative scores get cash prizes. I've won the top prize once, and come third a couple of times, so that's a nice little bonus. However, unlike some players, I don't get fixated on the points: I'm interested in winning first prize money in the game-at-hand, and if that means taking a risk and getting knocked out early- and missing out on some points- then so be it.
   The Friday nighter has now become a regular fixture for me and my wife and it really is something I look forward to all week. It's strange that I was playing pool for several years in the club down the road and never even knew that this tournament existed. I guess it must have been Onehunga's best kept secret.
  

The Micros

   The first time I played in an online no-limit ring game was back in February 2011. I'd just registered with Fulltilt Poker when I decided it would be a good idea to try the ring games. I played in the 10c/25c game, with a buy-in of US$25 on three separate occasions, and lost my entire buy-in on three separate occasions. The games were not what I expected. My poker reading had suggested that online tables were populated by vast schools of  fish (loose-passive players, also known as 'calling stations'). Far from it. The tables were in fact, pretty tight, and I guess the only fish was me.
   So I gave up on the online ring games for quite a while, finally returning to the no-limit version of the game in March of last year. As detailed previously, I tried out both 888 and Pokerstars and finally decided that the loosest games were to be found on 888 Poker. So I've been playing more or less one session per week on 888 ever since. I started out with a hiss and a roar, winning a significant amount in the Autumn season and showing a 61% profit. After that things went downhill a bit. I had a small win in the following Autumn and the rest of the seasons showed a negative net result. The upshot of it all is that I'm about US$40 in the red after playing in this game type for about a year and a half. A poor result but I guess it could have been worse.
   After that first winning season playing in the 10c/20c games (US$20 buy-in) I decided to start playing two tables at a time. But then, after a few months, as my results took a downturn, I figured I'd better go back to concentrating on a single table again. And then, as the decline continued, around March of this year  I dropped down to the next level, and I am still playing in these 5c/10c games. This is where I intend to stay at least until the end of the year. At that point it will be time to re-assess whether or not I want to continue playing in online cashies, given my less than inspiring results.
   When I first started playing online I'd been reading quite a few poker books, which led me to believe that there was an ocean full of poker fish out there, just waiting to donate their chips. But of course, most of these books were years out of date, and many of them were based on live poker games rather than online games. But after playing in the Fulltilt games and finding tables full of  TAG (tight and aggressive) players, I decided that it must have been because I started at too-high a level. Surely the micro-stakes games would be fish heaven? Reading up on poker strategy on various websites confirmed the generally-held belief that there were loose, fishy sites to be found, if you knew where to look. 888 poker was one of the sites that was frequently listed as being one of the loosest and 'juiciest'.

   Any poker book/site/expert will tell you that if you want to find the loosest tables, you need to pay attention to the table statistics that are listed in the site lobby. In particular, the vital stat is the 'percentage of players who see the flop', something that all poker sites list. The more players there are calling and seeing the flop, the looser (and by extension, the more profitable) the table is likely to be. So it makes sense to check out the game lobby and try and get into a game with a high 'players to the flop' figure. However, in the modern era, there is a catch. It seems that every semi-serious player in the world knows this vital fact, and they are all lining up to play in these potentially profitable games, even at the micro-stakes level. As a result, any cash game with a reasonably high PTF %age has a small line-up of players on the waiting list hoping to get in and feed on the fish.
   As mentioned previously ('Cashie', 6th March 2014), I tried both 888 and Pokerstars, and found that Stars was a much tougher (and tighter) site to play on. So I stuck with 888 in the end, trolling around, trying to find the loosest tables to play on. Even here, there were a lot of players putting themselves on the waiting lists for the loosest tables, but I could usually get into a reasonably loose game. But a 'loose game' these days is nothing like the sort of game they talk about in those old poker articles. Typically, there are 5 or 6 'sitters' who wait and wait and wait for some sort of hand to raise with pre-flop, and maybe a couple of loose players who do a lot of calling and/or raising. So I'd join the sitters and wait for a chance to get in on a decent hand with the loosies. But these opportunities were few and far between. Gone are the days of limping into an inflated pot from late position with a drawing hand. It's not very often that you have the odds for that sort of thing.
   A lot of the regular players in these games are multi-tabling. You only have to flip through the player lists for different tables to see the same names turning up time and again. At this level, I don't know how much profit a poker 'grinder' could possibly make, but there still seem to be plenty of them. The margins in these not-particularly-loose games can't be very good. I guess there are positives and negatives to this situation. On the minus side, these guys are not going to get involved in a pot unless they have a positive expectation. On the plus side, if they are multi-tabling, they can't be paying close attention to what's going on at every table, which presumably leaves some sort of opening available for those smart enough to exploit it.
   So far, I have not proved to be smart enough. In fact, in recent games I've played, there has been a disturbing pattern emerging. Often I will start out ok, but then get trapped in a situation where I have a very good hand and my opponent has a better one. This is a classic no-limit trapping scenario, except that my aim is to be the trapper, not the trappee. I usually end up losing most or all of my chips and then spend the next 3 or 4 hours crawling my way back up towards the break-even point. I think the main reason I get into these situations is this: after waiting a long time for what I consider to be a good playable hand I refuse to believe that someone else has started with a better hand, or worse still, out-flopped me. This is one disadvantage of playing tight on a single table. When you finally get a good hand you don't want to release it, even if you suspect that you are behind. It's the old I-can't-believe-he-flopped-two-pair-when-I-hit-top-pair-top-kicker syndrome.
   They say that your playing style should be the opposite of the table playing style. So at a loose table, play tight and at a tight table, play loose (or at least looser than the other players). I've been trying to follow this advice recently. I've taken to playing a much wider range of hands from late position and then, if I'm up against a TAG player, attempting to bluff him out of the pot. This strategy  works sometimes, but of course if your opponent hits, you can end up in a lot of trouble. So a certain amount of caution is required. Basically, I'm just looking for some kind of edge when I play against the 'tighties'.
   The more I look at it, the more I realise that I'm making a mistake in defining a particular table as 'tight' or 'loose' and then adjusting my playing style accordingly. What I should be doing is deciding what sort of player I'm up against and adjusting my playing style to that player. This became obvious to me a few weeks ago when I was in a game that contained one chronic calling station. This player was in nearly every hand and liked nothing more than to limp in to the pot from early position, get raised, and call with virtually any two cards. His play was so obvious that I was able to exploit his weak play and I ended up with most of his chips. Then a few days after that I read an article about the importance of finding the fishy individuals and playing against them as much as possible, preferably in position. So table selection is the first step, and the next step is player selection. This is where taking notes on players becomes so important.
   So now I am working on focusing on individual players and their tendencies. First I need to look for the loosest table available. Then I need to identify who the fish are AND who the tight players are. I figure that loosening up my starting hand range is actually the right thing to do against both of these player types. After all, a looser starting range is still going to be better than the loosies' range most of the time, and it's likely to give me opportunity to play back at the tighties when they miss their high cards. Then it's a matter of adjusting my play to suit the type of player that I'm up against.
   Meanwhile, I keep working on getting my live cashie up and running again. I've played in enough online ring games to know that there is a huge difference between them and live games. Even at the micro level online there are lot more players who know at least the basics of correct play than you will ever find at a live table (at least not at the live games I play in). So it's a matter of looking for that small edge in the online games.
   I fully intend to keep on playing in online ring games on a regular basis. I'm playing at a low enough level that a continued losing streak is not going to hurt my bankroll that much. And in the meantime, I'll keep trying different strategies to get ahead. I'll play in these games at least till the end of the year and then I'll reconsider what type of game I want to play online. The chances are, I'll be looking to play in a different game type, but you never know. Maybe my new plan will turn out to be the answer to cracking the micros.




  
  
  
  
  

The Rebuy Tournament

   Unlike some people I know, I have nothing against rebuy tournaments. Up until recently I've played very few rebuys, but this has nothing to do with the format of this tourney type. In fact, my first couple of years playing in live Texas Holdem tournaments was almost exclusively in rebuys. I used to play most Friday nights at a local pub that held a $10 rebuy poker game; that is, $10 entry, $10 rebuy. After playing in this for the better part of a year I actually started winning a few games and by the time that this event closed down I'd even managed to make a bit of a profit. By this stage I was pretty comfortable with the rebuy format.
   Since then, I've been playing in a different Friday night Texas Holdem tournament but this is usually a standard tourney with no rebuys. There are a couple of other live rebuy tourneys around at the moment but I don't play in them for one very simple reason: they are too expensive. Although these games feature a $20 buy-in, just like my current regular Friday-nighter, they also have a $20 rebuy and a $20 add-on. In other words, they could cost up to $60 to play in; a little too steep for me. However there is a $20 buy-in/$20 rebuy (no add-on) tournament played on a Wednesday night at a local pub, and I've been going to that for the past few months. I actually checked this game out last year ('Winter Bulletin', Tues 02/09/14) but wasn't impressed. The tournament organisation at the time was shambolic and it had a rather odd structure, but things have improved markedly since then.

 So after vowing never to go back to the Landmark Bar tournament, why did I change my mind? Well, I came to an important realisation a while ago; that I'd been neglecting the absolutely vital matter of game selection. After looking back at my poker history I realised that I needed to concentrate more on playing live games, because that's where my best results lie. Add to that the fact that Wednesday is my most convenient night for playing poker and that the venue is a five minute bus ride (or a 45 minute walk) down the road and I had to bite the bullet and give the game another shot. As it turns out, this tournament is now being run in a much more professional way and I've realised that some of the peculiarities of the tourney structure may actually be to my advantage. So I'm down there on most Wednesday evenings.
   The Panmure Hotel has been through a few changes over the years, and a few years back was divided into a 'sports bar' and a 'bistro bar' called the Landmark. Then the Panmure RSA (Returned Servicemen's Association) moved out of their old clubrooms and into the Landmark. I'm not sure exactly how this arrangement works, but Wednesday night appears to be RSA club night. This is the night when all the RSA members turn up, and there is karaoke, raffle draws, occasional pool or darts competitions and, of course, poker. The game is usually played at a couple of tables involving 13 to 16 players, and goes on until quite late, if you make it through to the end.
   The game itself is essentially a turbo. For $20 you get 4000 in chips, with the blinds starting at 25/50 (you start with 80 big blinds). After half an hour the blinds increase to 50/100 and this level is followed by a break. After the break the blind period drops down to 15 minutes and the blinds go 100/200, 200/400, 300/600, 400/800. So after the second break the blinds have hit the 500/1000 level, the equivalent of 1/4 of the original starting stack. Clearly, with a relatively short starting stack and the big blind doubling three times in a row this is a structure that promotes action and encourages players to rebuy.
   As for the rebuy, it costs another $20 for a stack of 2,500 chips. I've never seen a rebuy tourney before where the rebuy stack is smaller than the starting stack and this makes for an interesting dynamic. A lot of players like to rebuy but they come back into the game with a significantly short stack. Anyone rebuying at the start of the second period comes back into the game with only 12 1/2 big blinds. And if you come back in at the start of the third period, you have just 2 1/2 BBs ! Amazingly, some players actually do this. The organiser allows multiple rebuys until the prize pool reaches $500. This is the upper limit that is legally allowed for a game of this type and the prize pool usually reaches this level. So the combination of the turbo structure and the short-stack rebuy combines to push up the value of the prize pool.
   It was always my intention when I started playing in this tourney that I wouldn't rebuy. Paying $40 or more is a little over my buy-in limit so I figured that I'd just play with my starting stack and take my chances. As it turns out, I think the unusual structure of this game plays to my advantage. It means that the players who are rebuying are bloating the size of the prize pool and coming back into the game at a distinct disadvantage because of the short rebuy stack. In the long run I think that this is the best possible tournament structure for someone like myself who doesn't want to rebuy.
   The players in this tournament are fairly typical of the pub/club poker tournaments that I've been involved with over the years. There are probably five or six regulars, most of whom have a reasonable idea of basic poker play. The remainder are casual players with little or no idea of how to play well. There are often one or two absolute beginners involved as well. The game usually involves lots of calling, especially pre-flop, and very little raising. If the pot does get raised, many of these loose-passive players will then call any size bet, just to see a flop. The result is lots of very big pots and numerous rapidly diminishing stacks. In other words, a typical 'no-foldem' game (see 'The OMG Hand', 21/09/13).
   The way that this rebuy game plays out is not that much different from any other tournament. After all, the rebuy is simply adding more players to the game, and of course, more chips to the tables. And because I'm not rebuying anyway, I just play it the way I would a 'straight-up' tournament. But on the odd occasion when I do play in a rebuy, the only difference in strategy comes as the end of the rebuy period approaches. That's when I have to decide whether it would be better to push all-in in an attempt double up or whether it would be better to hold on to my current stack. This is something that I generally have worked out before I start, so it's not that much different from a regular game. But as I don't rebuy in this tourney, it's academic anyway.
   The real adjustment that I need to make when I play in this game is to the turbo-style blind structure. With the 80 big blind starting stack and the three level double-up (not to mention the shortening up of the blind period) things move pretty quickly. This means it quickly becomes an action game where you are forced into the position of making a move. But it doesn't mean I'm changing my basic strategy. I still play tight early on and then get looser as my stack/blind ratio increases. The difference with this tournament is that I reach the 'action zone' earlier than I would in a slower-paced game. So typically I'm folding a lot in the earlier stages; mostly just sitting pretty and watching the action. Generally I reach the 'push-or-fold' zone some time after the first break. And then I'm either doubling my stack, giving me a bit more room to manoeuvre, or I'm knocked out, giving me 7 days to figure out where I went wrong.
   My recent results in this game have not been great, but it's way too early to panic. It's in the nature of turbo-type games that luck plays a big part, and all you can do is keep playing the best game that you can. I had a couple of cashes earlier in the year, but the money has dried up since, and I just recently dropped below the break-even point. Nevertheless, I'm reasonably confidant that the results will come in the long run if I keep working at it. I certainly intend to keep playing at least until the end of the year and probably well past that, regardless of the results. Even if I don't get the good results, there's always the karaoke.
  Yeah right.