Le Monde du Poker.

November 10 2011, Kristy Arnett

Randal Flowers, 23, has accumulated more than $2.7 million in tournament winnings, including two World Poker Tour titles.

For this edition of Strategy with Kristy, brought to you by South Point, Flowers sits down with Kristy Arnett to discuss bluffing preflop.

Here is a snippet from the interview:

How do you balance the need to steal with the fact that these days many players know that you're stealing?

If I have a very aggressive player or two to my left and I'm in late position, and there's an obvious weak [player in the] big blind, I don't know how often I'm going to open very light. I'm anticipating getting flatted, and people messing with me after the flop because they know I don't have that great of a range.

A lot of times, the general strategy should change to fold. Play tighter if there are good aggressive players behind you. But, if no one is really messing with you, you can sneak in a raise with a pretty weak hand.

With what kind of range are you willing to go for blind steals?

Well, live is way different than online, and I haven't played online in so long that I guess my strict math fundamentals aren't as good as they should be. When you play live, people look at their hands before they're supposed to, so I could be in the hijack and know the guy on the button is already holding his cards that he wants to fold. So then, I'm really in the cutoff. You should play way, way more hands in live poker, in my opinion.

What raise size do you prefer?

I vary my raise sizing more than most, but generally, I think 2.5 times the big blind is fine. What really matters is, if it's really early in the tournament, and you're very deep, I would recommend raising 3 times.

Maybe midway through the tournament, when there still aren't antes and the average stack is around 50 big blinds, I think under 2.5 times is probably better because you're risking 250 to win 150 if the blinds are 50/100. With no antes, if you get three-bet, it puts you in a tough spot. You're never really getting a good price so depending on stack sizes, I think you can risk less.

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy, brought to you by South Point. Feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember to follow PokerNews on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Kristy Arnett on Twitter — @KristyArnett

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

October 27 2011, Kristy Arnett

Andrew “Good2cu” Robl is known for both his cash game and tournament skill. He's played in a number of televised cash games, and the cameras have caught plenty of interesting hands for viewers to discuss.

For this edition of Strategy with Kristy, Robl sits down with Kristy Arnett to discuss a few of his most-talked-about televised cash-game hands. To view the hands as they played out on television, check Arnett's latest blog post.

Here is a snippet from the interview, in which Robl discusses a hand from High Stakes Poker [game details and action of the hand are written separately]:

Lex Veldhuis straddled to $1,600. Phil Ivey raised to $7,000 from the cutoff. Robl had on the button and called. Patrik Antonius looked down at in the small blind and reraised to $30,400. Ivey folded. Robl moved all-in for $113,900 and Antonius called, making the pot $299,600.

Why did you decide to flat Ivey’s raise?

I mean, I could have raised. I just didn’t want to reraise and have Ivey four-bet. I’d be in a tough spot and not really know what to do. It’s kind of a hand where I don’t really want to get it in if I three-bet, but I don’t want to fold either. It’s also very deceiving if I flat there. You wouldn’t normally put me on this type of hand when I flat.

You said that it’s kind of hard to put you on this type of hand since you flatted on the button so Antonius’ move kind of looks like a squeeze. Were you thinking that he might do this with a pretty wide range?

Yeah, I mean, Antonius is a good enough player that you’re never going to really know exactly what he has when he reraises one time. It’s not like he’s going to have a super-tight range of hands. He and Ivey were super deep. So, he’s not going to be reraising strong hands like ace-jack and ace-ten offsuit because it would get him in trouble playing deep with Ivey out of position. I do think he reraises with a lot of hands, though. Once he reraises, there’s already like $50,000 in the pot, and I only have another $100,000 left.

You continued playing in the game after losing this pot. How do you, personally, recover and continue playing well.

I don’t know. I’ve played a lot of poker. Sometimes you lose. Sometimes you win. I definitely wasn’t happy, but things like this have happened to me a lot in my poker career. There’s no reason not to play your A-game and give money away after that.

Want to know what else Robl told Arnett? You're going to have to listen to the podcast:

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember to follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Kristy Arnett on Twitter — @KristyArnett

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

October 28 2011, Brett Collson

Poker super agent Brian Balsbaugh is one of the most influential figures in the poker industry. His company, Poker Royalty, represents many of the biggest names in poker, including Phil Hellmuth, Erick Lindgren and Daniel Negreanu. Balsbaugh took a gamble by testing the industry waters in 2003 and used his marketing and networking skills to help pave the way for poker sponsorships and appearances that were unheard of before the "Chris Moneymaker" boom that saw poker explode worldwide.

"I was a lawyer and golf agent who saw a tremendous business opportunity in poker," says Balsbaugh, who quit his job in golf and signed Negreanu as his first client a short time later. "We’ve grown to service dozens of high profile clients and have offices in Las Vegas and London."

To put it bluntly, when Balsbaugh speaks about the business of poker, we drop what we're doing and listen. Last week, Donald Trump confirmed that he was teaming up with hedge-fund manager Marc Lasry to form an Internet gambling company should legislation pass in the U.S. Donald's daughter, Ivanka, declared that the Trump brand would be the "most powerful one in this [online poker] space."

Balsbaugh tweeted that he "respectfully" disagreed with Ivanka's comment. We desired more on that front, so we caught up with Balsbaugh to discuss his views on Trump's latest gaming venture, as well as several other topics in the world of poker.

Last week, Donald Trump announced plans to form an Internet gaming company if online gambling is legalized in the U.S. Ivanka Trump said the brand would be the "most powerful one in this space." You've stated that you "respectfully" disagreed with her comment. Can you expand on that?

I appreciate their confidence, but the Trumps will soon learn there is a lot more to running a successful online poker room than slapping your brand on some software. We’ve dealt with over one hundred online poker operators and can count the rooms on one hand that I would consider a success.

Any future operator, from the Trumps to other major brands currently jockeying for position in the space have countless considerations and strategic decisions to make: How are you differentiating yourself? What are your customer acquisition and retention strategies? What is your pro endorsement strategy? How will you leverage digital and social media to build your brand and customer base? You can have software and be well-financed, but without the right plan and management team in place you are drawing dead.

Who would be the major players if online poker legislation passed in the U.S. in the next one to two years?

I envision dozens of licenses and only four or five companies that actually make money. The company at this time that I see with a real plan is Caesar’s Interactive Entertainment. They will build around the World Series of Poker, they have a list of everyone who has participated in the WSOP and Circuit events, they have their casino loyalty programs, established WSOP marketing partners and an experienced team in place. Everyone else is still figuring it out, with some further along in their plans than others.

PartyPoker recently said it has been positioning itself for a return to the U.S. Jim Ryan seems to think his brand is now the largest in that market. What are your thoughts on that?

I’ve dealt with Jim on a number of projects over the years, and I’ve always found him to be one of the brightest people in our industry. I thought Party’s acquisition of the World Poker Tour a few years ago was really smart and it keeps getting better by the day. I heard recently that ClubWPT has nearly doubled its subscription base since Black Friday. If PartyPoker gets a license in the U.S., I believe it would be very successful.

What did you think of Tuesday's online gambling hearing held by the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade. What's the most important thing we can take from the hearing?

The hearing was certainly a positive step forward. With respect to legislation, my biggest beef is with the Senate Majority Leader, my senator from Nevada, the honorable Harry Reid. Everyone in Las Vegas knows that the only reason he won the election last fall was because he promised MGM and Harrah’s that he would make their number one legislative priority, online poker, his number one legislative priority.

Now, here we are one year later and he was quoted last week as saying, “Online poker, frankly, is way back in my head,” to the Las Vegas Sun. He’s not the first politician to turn his back on the electorate after getting elected, but Las Vegas is really struggling and online poker could bring so many jobs and revenue to our area. In my opinion, the burden is really on him to make this happen for his state and the gaming industry that got him re-elected.

Free-play sites seem to be appearing left-and-right in the U.S. How will these sites change the landscape of online poker in this country, if at all?

Zynga Poker is the godfather of all free play poker, with 8 million unique visitors every day. Almost everyone else is just trying to build a sustainable platform and database of users in hopes that they will someday get a license to operate real money poker. There are huge technology differences in operating an SMG (social media model) and an RMG (real-money business model).

I think building an SMG site now in hopes of later converting it to an RMG is a very difficult path in the current environment. It's not impossible — and we've spent countless hours doing research and planning to determine how SMG’s could successfully make that transition — but it won't be easy.

The WSOP had a different look and feel this year because players weren't patched up by the major online poker rooms at TV tables. As someone with a finger on the pulse of the business side of this industry, tell us how Black Friday has affected sponsorship opportunities.

This was really a horrible year for sponsorship at the WSOP, with overall player sponsorship dollars dropping about 90 percent. The international players at the November Nine have some opportunities, but even those deals are a fraction of the guarantees and bonuses that PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker have historically paid. I’m hopeful a regulated U.S. market brings back the demand for brand exposure that drove player deals for so long.

What has business been like at Poker Royalty since Black Friday?

Since Black Friday we have doubled our efforts at obtaining income producing opportunities for our clients away from the poker tables. While logo deals have decreased, personal appearances have picked up. In addition, we have invested heavily in corporate consulting to help companies navigate their way through the soon to be regulated U.S. opportunities. We have some of the brightest minds in the industry developing those plans and strategies.

Now I see our industry taking one step back in order to take two steps forward. It’s an exciting time to be in the business and I’m looking forward to the amazing amount of new opportunities in a regulated U.S. market. It’s an opportunity for us to start over, knowing then what we know now.

Follow PokerNews on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Brett Collson on Twitter — @brettcollson

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

October 27 2011, Kristy Arnett

Andrew “Good2cu” Robl is known for both his cash game and tournament skill. He's played in a number of televised cash games, and the cameras have caught plenty of interesting hands for viewers to discuss.

For this edition of Strategy with Kristy, Robl sits down with Kristy Arnett to discuss a few of his most-talked-about televised cash-game hands. To view the hands as they played out on television, check Arnett's latest blog post.

Here is a snippet from the interview, in which Robl discusses a hand from High Stakes Poker [game details and action of the hand are written separately]:

Lex Veldhuis straddled to $1,600. Phil Ivey raised to $7,000 from the cutoff. Robl had on the button and called. Patrik Antonius looked down at in the small blind and reraised to $30,400. Ivey folded. Robl moved all-in for $113,900 and Antonius called, making the pot $299,600.

Why did you decide to flat Ivey’s raise?

I mean, I could have raised. I just didn’t want to reraise and have Ivey four-bet. I’d be in a tough spot and not really know what to do. It’s kind of a hand where I don’t really want to get it in if I three-bet, but I don’t want to fold either. It’s also very deceiving if I flat there. You wouldn’t normally put me on this type of hand when I flat.

You said that it’s kind of hard to put you on this type of hand since you flatted on the button so Antonius’ move kind of looks like a squeeze. Were you thinking that he might do this with a pretty wide range?

Yeah, I mean, Antonius is a good enough player that you’re never going to really know exactly what he has when he reraises one time. It’s not like he’s going to have a super-tight range of hands. He and Ivey were super deep. So, he’s not going to be reraising strong hands like ace-jack and ace-ten offsuit because it would get him in trouble playing deep with Ivey out of position. I do think he reraises with a lot of hands, though. Once he reraises, there’s already like $50,000 in the pot, and I only have another $100,000 left.

You continued playing in the game after losing this pot. How do you, personally, recover and continue playing well.

I don’t know. I’ve played a lot of poker. Sometimes you lose. Sometimes you win. I definitely wasn’t happy, but things like this have happened to me a lot in my poker career. There’s no reason not to play your A-game and give money away after that.

Want to know what else Robl told Arnett? You're going to have to listen to the podcast:

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember to follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Kristy Arnett on Twitter — @KristyArnett

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

AppId is over the quota
October 06 2011, Kristy Arnett

Amanda Musumeci, 27, has the poker world at her well-manicured fingertips. She gained most of her poker experience online but has had impressive live success, as well. Most notably, she finished 62nd this year in the World Series of Poker Main Event for $131,000, and fell just shy of claiming the “Last Woman Standing” title.

In this week’s edition of Strategy with Kristy, Musumeci talks about her deep run and her most interesting tournament decisions.

Here is a snippet from the interview:

I got moved to Donnie Mizrachi’s table, and he was sitting in seat one. I was in seat nine. [Action] folded around to me in the small blind and I had him covered. I think he had 15 big blinds and was short-stacking for an hour or two. I just shoved king-jack into him when we were blind versus blind. He ended up waking up with pocket queens and held up there. That kind of chipped me down.

When you’re playing a tournament and you’ve got a short stack in the big blind, how wide is your shipping range if he’s folding so often? In that spot, I don’t think he’ll be calling off too lightly since he still has fold equity after going through the blinds.

Well another thing to take into consideration to add to that is that I’m a female. To him, I’m unknown. I think at that point, I was relatively new to the table. Even after being at the table for an hour-and-a-half, in live poker, you just don’t see that many hands. He didn’t get to see much of my play. So, I think that his calling range may actually be a bit tighter than against some other opponents where he might call off a bit lighter knowing it’s correct.

PokerStove is a really a great tool even with the age of online poker halted right now. It was a tool we used for online, but even when I go out and play live, I’ll come home at the end of the day and use the PokerStove to see equity-versus-implied calling ranges. So in that spot, given all that, when has 15 big blinds, I have him covered, and it won’t cripple my stack at all, I’d shove four-five suited, nine-ten offsuit plus, any pair. So yeah, [I’d shove] pretty wide. Because even when you’re called which is like 10 to 15 percent of the time, you’ll still win like a third of the time, so you have to shove a ton no matter what.

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember, follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Kristy Arnett on Twitter — @KristyArnett

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
October 01 2011, Chad Holloway

Do you remember the first time you ever stepped into a poker room? I remember mine. Nearly ten years ago, I made a four-hour trip across the state line to the Twin Cities in Minnesota, home of Canterbury Park and its 34-table poker room. The trip proved to be both an educational and expensive. After a five-year hiatus, I’ll be returning to the place where it all began for Canterbury Park’s Fall Poker Classic (FPC).

This year, the Fall Poker Classic features 32 events spread across 16 days, culminating in a $1,000 Main Event. In addition to the normal no-limit hold’em tournaments, the FCP features 7-card stud, Omaha, ladies NLHE, seniors NLHE, six-max, and an “All-In-or-Fold” tournament, where the only choice players can make each hand is to go all-in or fold. I’ll be playing quite a few events, but I must admit, the last one has the potential to be the most enjoyable.

For a look at the entire Fall Poker Classic Schedule, visit Canterbury Park.

Recently, Canterbury, which is regulated by the Minnesota Racing Commission, was closed during the 20-day Minnesota government shutdown. Needless to say, that hurt business, and I’m curious to see how it's recovered.

Another thing I’m eager to check out is their “Survival Tournaments," Canterbury’s solution to not being able to play no-limit/pot-limit poker. State statues prohibit such games, leaving just limit poker as an option. Considering that no-limit is the game of choice, Canterbury has been missing out on an entire demographic of poker player. Now, Canterbury has figured out a way to combine its relaxed tournament regulations (they can host no-limit/pot-limit tournaments) with the thrill of a cash game.

We spoke with Michael Hochman, Senior Director of Card Casino Operations at Canterbury, about the upcoming FPC, what to expect, and clarification on how poker works in Minnesota.

Canterbury Park was closed during the Minnesota government shutdown. How come?

In the most strict interpretation of the law, and although it is fully funded by Canterbury Park and Running Aces, the Minnesota Racing Commission (our regulatory body) has some reimbursements out of the general fund. Even though what the general fund pays out we pay in, the judge interpreted the MRC as a government agency that had to be closed during the shutdown. Without our regulators, we could not operate and had to close our doors and temporarily lay off all of our employees for 20 days.

Did it hurt business? If so, in what ways? How did players and staff respond?

We were completely shuttered for 20 days — it obliterated business! Canterbury Park, and CEO Randy Sampson, did everything possible to petition the courts and offered up many solutions to try and get us opened again, and did an amazing job of keeping great communication with all the staff. We're like family. When the 20 days were over and we were allowed to open again it was like a reunion — hugs from fellow staff and the players. Naturally the staff and players were disappointed, if not outraged, at having to close.

Minnesota does not allow for no-limit/pot-limit games. How does Canterbury Park deal with this law? Are there options for NLHE/PLO players? If so, could you describe them for us?

Annie Adlin, our resident genius in the poker department, came up with a way to play timed no-limit games under our existing tournament rules. Player's buy in for $200, $300, up to $2,500 and are issued the same amount in tournament chips. We play a tournament for two or three hours (predetermined) and at the end of the tournament we pay off chip-for-chip. Basically it's a timed no-limit game where the blinds move up once during the tournament. We call those our Survival tournaments and they've become quite popular!

The FPC is one of the biggest tournament series in the Midwest. What sort of things do you do to prepare, and what can participants look forward to?

This is the first year I've had the privilege of setting up the FPC — and it's an undertaking! We hire about 23 dealers from all over the USA specifically to take care of our tournament. We do a complete transformation of our track-level area and turn it into a nice comfortable 33-table tournament area. This year we've added a few new events: more mix-game tournaments, an All-In or Fold tournament, and we've added smaller events every evening at the $100 level. We've also added some local restaurateurs to show off their talents. We're doing a different buffet every night of the tournament and about six of those nights will be prepared and served by local restaurants!

Can we expect any pros in attendance?

One can never tell! We've had Phil Hellmuth, Men Nguyen, Susie Isaacs, Jason Senti, Mike Sexton, Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher, Marcel Luske play in our events in the past. All the local talent will be out, that's for sure!

Can you give us a brief history of the Fall Poker Classic? When did it start, what was the biggest event, and have there been any notable winners?

We did our first Fall Poker Classic in 2001 and had a total prize pool of just under $200,000. It has gained in popularity every year since, and last year our total prize pool was almost $1,000,000! We have actually had one player win the main event twice. Notable winners? They're all notable! But Brad Berman took down the main event in 2006 and again in 2009!

In addition to poker, what other sort of things are there to do at Canterbury Park?

What would you want to do other than play poker during the Fall Poker Classic? We do have year-round simulcasting if you like betting on horses, from all over the world, we have a 27-table pit with baccarat, blackjack, pai gow poker, Ultimate Texas Hold 'em, Three Card Poker, Four Card Poker, Blackjack Switch, and Let It Ride, and food service 24/7. The live-action in the poker room has limits from $2/$4 up to $30/$60 and the Survival tournaments spread around the clock.

For news, updates, and more follow PokerNews on Twitter and like us on Facebook.

*Picture courtesy of Minnesota Poker Magazine.

Follow Chad Holloway on Twitter — @ChadAHolloway

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
September 29 2011, Kristy Arnett

Olivier Busquet, also known as "livb" online, honed his poker skills by crushing online sit-n-gos. He's also had impressive live tournament poker results, including a win in the 2009 World Poker Tour Borgata Poker Open. His live winnings exceed $2.4 million.

For this edition of Strategy with Kristy, Busquet answers questions sent in by listeners, and also discusses his thought process in a few tough spots against good, loose-aggressive players.

Here is a snippet from the interview:

Let's say you have queens and you raise in middle position. A loose-aggressive type of player flats you in position, and you're 200 big blinds deep. The flop comes nine-eight-seven with a flush draw. You continuation bet [c-bet], and your opponent raises. In this spot, you're out of position against a good player. It feels like you're getting run over if you bet-fold an overpair. At the same time, he's going to make the rest of the hand super difficult for you to play if you call. He will be able to play perfectly against you with hands that either have a lot of equity or a hand that has you beat. What's your thought process here?

What a lot of people have to understand is that the definition of tough spots is that there aren't clear cut answers. So, you're in a tough spot, and you're not sure what to do, that's good. That's the right response to have. It shouldn't be an easy answer where you just say, "Oh I have to call, I have queens." Well, no you don't. Folding isn't the worst play in the world.

What do you do if you have top set? Or when you flop a straight? Or when you have queen-ten with the flush draw in that spot? If he's raising so much on that board, then when you do have big hands, you're going to end up being able to make a lot of money. It's fine, from a range point-of-view, to fold your marginal hands. To be honest, even though it's an overpair, queens in that spot, on that board, is a marginal hand.

It's the type of board, depending on your opponent, that you should probably be catering your c-betting range to your opponent's aggressiveness. You don't want to be c-betting your entire range on that board if you think your opponent is going to raise light there.

Now there are some good aggressive players who interpret that board as really scary, so they're actually not raising your c-bet without hands that are either very strong or have a lot of equity. From that point of view, you might want to c-bet a lot on that flop. So again, it just depends on how your opponents play.

If your opponent is trying to represent a number of hands because he knows he can represent tons of hands and he knows you can't continue without a strong hand, then you might want to tighten up your c-betting range. But, I think folding in that spot is perfectly reasonable and probably the best play.

If I had jacks, I'd be much more likely to call than if I had two queens. And that may be obvious, but just to be clear, you would have a gutter to a ten that would give you a straight that would beat other straights. Your opponent could have a six, so it's not like he couldn't have anything. It also makes it less likely that your opponent could have jack-ten. It's just a much better hand in that spot because you can improve your hand and it takes away some of the cards from your opponent. Two queens on that board, is just not that strong. Folding is probably the best play.

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember, follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

Follow Kristy Arnett on Twitter — @KristyArnett

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
September 21 2011, Chad Holloway

On Tuesday, PokerNews interviewed Tom “durrrr” Dwan in regards to the latest developments regarding Full Tilt Poker, most notably that the company has been likened to a "Ponzi Scheme" by the U.S. Attorney's Office.

According to your TwoPlusTwo post, your silence over the past few months was due to a non-disclosure agreement. Can you talk about your trip to Ireland at the end of April, why you were there, and how the NDA came about?

I was there because some friends were looking at investing in Full Tilt, and that later changed to buying, once they realized the situation. I would have liked to have been more involved than I was. Unfortunately, one of the things that was important to me was that I get to be in a room with the management of Full Tilt, because I had a bunch of bracelet bets against a bunch of the owners of Tilt, and got second in a spot that would have like more than doubled my net worth if you include the equity of the two and three-year bets. That’s pretty convincing evidence that I’m not gonna be a scumbag. If I was gonna be a scumbag, I would try to be one then.

Because you could have tried to buy a bracelet, is what you’re saying?

Right, yeah, I mean like that kind of stuff does happen. I’m not saying anything about the morals of the guy who won, maybe he would say no if I had offered twice first-place money, I don’t know. But the point is just that these guys have known me long enough, and I was trying to help, and it’s not common that you have a business that you’re trying to sell and the people that you’re trying to sell it to happen to know someone who, you know, knows a lot of the owners and knows the business well.

But anyway, long story short, I wasn’t involved in the discussion, I was just brought in under NDA (non-disclosure agreement), and so I never personally signed anything, so I have nothing at risk, but my friends do. So that’s why I really wasn’t able to say stuff.

After your trip there, why were you so adamant that players would get their money back? Were you told information that ultimately became false?

No, no, I mean, no. It’s just ridiculous that it wasn’t sold. I don’t know. After I’d been there and, you know, found out additional information and stuff, it seemed like a very viable business. It still seems like a much more viable business than a lot of the people that I’ve talk to seem to believe, a lot of people not affiliated with Tilt, who don’t know the numbers and things. But if you go back to May or June, I think it was very viable. I definitely thought the chances of it being sold were way over 80 percent.

The public is looking for the right people to blame. Obviously, we have four people listed now, but people want to know if any members of Team Full Tilt were aware of wrongdoings and/or participated in behind-the-scenes business actions?

The reason I’m happy the Justice Department did that is because it cleared me of the only stuff I wouldn’t be able to say [under the NDA] was the stuff that they just said. There was a lot of side things such as my take on who knew things, or my take on when people found out about the situation that I would have been able to say, and could have been for the last few months, but I would have been ignoring the elephant in the room.

So, to go to your question, I really believe that a lot of the owners, possibly all, possibly some, didn’t know as of late April. I’d rather not go into complete specifics for the reasoning behind this, but from the way it came up when talking to some of the owners, I really believe that they didn’t know. Plus there’s just the logical side that like any logical human being that owned a piece of Full Tilt, if they found out there was a shortfall on players’ funds, would have said, ‘What the hell are you doing? Stop processing U.S. deposits and probably stop allowing them to play on the site.”

Are you one of the approximately 23 individuals who own shares in FTP?

No. If I owned a piece of Full Tilt, I would not be doing these podcasts. I’d be sitting somewhere in, I don’t know, where’s a place that doesn’t have extradition?

Do you find it suspicious in any way that Phil Ivey was not named in this?

The four people that were named were the board members. I really don’t think, I really think I found out before Phil Ivey did, that there was a hole in the company. I really think that I found out before most of the owners did, and that’s because I had friends who were looking at buying it.

Obviously I could be wrong, there’s a chance that they’re all just, you know, bluffing me, but I’ve played poker with a lot of those guys, have pretty good reads on a lot of them. I could be wrong, I’m not sure, I mean obviously I was wrong in the past — but I really don’t think they knew.

When was the last time you spoke to either Howard Lederer, Ray Bitar, or Chris Ferguson? What was said during that conversation?

I don’t think I’ve talked to Chris since Black Friday, I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure I haven’t. Ray, I sent a few texts to a few days after Black Friday cause I asked him if I could guarantee a million dollars and he said no. Then I did it anyway. I don’t know, maybe I shouldn’t have said that, I feel kind of bad. Howard, to his credit, has been very open and picked up the phone and answered questions.

I haven’t caught him in a lie yet, and just like anyone who’s in a position that he’s in, I’ve obviously tried because it’s hard to trust someone in his position. There’s been times that he’s avoided a question or two, or maybe told a half truth, but it’s still pretty strong for him not to have lied yet. Now who knows, maybe he’s out there lying to everyone else and not me.

Do you worry about your own personal safety around disgruntled poker players? If not yours, do you think others including board members should fear for their safety?

I don’t think that they should need to, but sure, maybe there’s a chance that someone gets crazy or whatever, but even for the people on the board, they weren’t intending to be criminals, definitely [there are] people who are up to worse all the time. That’s not to sanction what they did, I think it’s very ridiculous what they did, and I do think that they should at least have civil actions taken against them, which clearly are going to happen. Obviously I’m not condoning anyone committing violence against any of those people.

What is your plan for the future as far as playing online?

[Jokingly] I think I’m just gonna get a proxy and play from the U.S., they sanctioned that, right? I don’t know, I guess I’m going to need to move. I don’t know. It just makes me angry.

Is there anything else you’d like to add?

I don’t know, I’m sure there would have been had you asked me at the start, but now I’m all tilted because I’ve been thinking about Full Tilt for the last 25 minutes. So I just want to go bang my head against the wall.

To hear even more, including Dwan's thoughts on how former Red Pros should proceed, the DOJ actions and accountability, players' funds, and how his recent USO tour influenced his take on things, be sure to listen to the entire podcast.

Don't forget to follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook.

Follow Chad Holloway on Twitter — @ChadAHolloway

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
September 22 2011, Kristy Arnett

Ben Wilinofsky is a seasoned pro in his early twenties. At 22, he won the 2011 PokerStars.net EPT Berlin event for €825,000. He continues traveling the international tournament circuit when he's not competing in online poker's most lucrative events under the screen name "NeverScaredB." For this edition of the Strategy with Kristy podcast, Wilinofsky discusses proper short-stack strategy in tournaments.

Here is a snippet from the interview:

Let’s say that early in a tournament you get down to 25 big blinds. If you are still pre-ante, what kinds of things do you have to keep in mind with this sized stack?

Usually if you are playing a 25 big-blind stack pre-ante, especially in a tournament that is full ring, your opening standards are going to be pretty tight. One of the reasons for that is that a lot of the other people around you are going to have deeper stacks and they will be putting in chips more loosely. You’re often going to be facing multi-way pots.

When you open, especially in early position, you’re going to need a pretty strong hand to do that, because you’re going to be losing those pots fairly often. You’re also not going to be winning as much when you do win the pots because you will only have 23 big blinds behind, if you take out your preflop raise. I suggest playing very tight from early positions, and folding hands that look pretty strong in terms of average hands like pocket sevens and jack-ten suited.

I’d be generally looking for spots to squeeze with a stack like that because all of the other players are going to be playing their stacks optimally against the rest of the field which means they are going to be playing looser, more speculative hands because everyone else around them has a couple of hundred big blinds. So, when there are multiple callers in the pot, very often, they are not going to have a hand strong enough to call when you put in 25 big blinds. I’d look for spots in late position to squeeze over multiple callers rather than entering unopened pots lightly. Before the antes kick in, you can afford to be patient.

Want to hear the entire interview? You're going to have to listen to the podcast.

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember, follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
September 15 2011, Kristy Arnett

Lex Veldhuis has always been acclaimed for his no-limit hold'em cash-game skills, but he has recently transitioned to pot-limit Omaha. He's been putting in thousands upon thousands of hands in an attempt to become highly skilled in a game that is new to him.

For this edition of Strategy with Kristy, Veldhuis sits down with Donnie Peters and Kristy Arnett to discuss three cash-game pot-limit Omaha hands he played online. To view the hand history for these hands, check Arnett's latest PokerNews Blog post.

Here is a snippet from the interview in which Veldhuis shares a hand he feels he misplayed [game details and action of the hand is written separately]:

Game: $2/$4 pot-limit Omaha

Preflop Action: Veldhuis raised to $12 under-the-gun with . Next to act, Villain reraised to $42. Action folded around. Veldhuis four-bet to $132, and Villain called.

Before we talk about this hand, I've been noticing that I don't have a four-bet fold range. Anything I four-bet, I'm like, "OK let's go." For instance, I'll have good double-suited kings, aces, or an insane rundown against a guy who three-bets a lot and anytime I four-bet, I pretty much go for the hand. I've been trying to put more stuff in my range where I four-bet fold because I'm always really impressed when someone does that. I'm trying to incorporate that into my play, so I figured I'd choose hands with holes in them so that I wouldn't want to just run it out with them, but that can flop really well.

Flop Action: The flop came . Veldhuis bet $100, and Villain called.

The flop is pretty perfect for my four-betting range because I "never" four-bet bluff. So I don't have to bet big on this flop, and also by the way, I have two backdoor flush draws and running gutshots. The most important thing about this is the ace of course. I know that he doesn't have aces because he's going to pot preflop. People don't really three-bet all that much with queens, so I don't think he has a set. I can bet really small I think, to represent aces because I "want" action. I'm pretty much all-in anyway. I bet $100. I would have actually liked to bet a little smaller, but I think $100 is fine.

When he called the flop, I made the mistake of thinking that he'd do that with draws. I thought he might have some gunshot type of hand or something like queen-jack-ten but queen-jack-ten is like the only hand I could see him calling the flop and folding the turn. It's so wrong to put someone on one specific hand. I think most of the time, he's just going to have an ace, and on a good turn for him, he's just going to call. People just don't call this flop and fold. I went all-in on the turn, which is just horrible.

Turn Action: The turn was the . Veldhuis moved all-in for $254, and Villain called with .

He called with top two pair, but I don't think that he would have folded any ace to me in this case. I think the only chance I had was to get him to fold with a small bet on the flop since I was representing a strong range with my four-bet preflop. I should have stopped on the turn because if he did have king-jack-ten, he's not going to fold anyway. It's just one of those hands where I had to hope he had a low rundown hand that he'd fold on the flop. This is just one of those hands where I wasn't thinking about ranges well enough. This isn't a spot where people peel with like queen-ten-nine-seven to see the turn because they know I'm going to be firing.

Want to know what else Veldhuis told Arnett and Peters? You're going to have to listen to the podcast:

Tune in every Thursday for new episodes of Strategy with Kristy and feel free to send in questions, ideas or suggestions for the podcast to kristy@pokernews.com. Also remember, follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.

View the original article here