Chiu the Grinder Comes Out on Top

I've talked before about the importance of playing your best rather than succumbing to the pressures of poker myths when you're near the end of a tournament.

There is no better example of that lesson than this weekend's terrific WPT Championship final table infrared ink.

So many times, I've heard players say things like, "I didn't come here to move up in the money - I was playing to win!"

That sounds great, but the best players understand that you can't win a tournament if you're out of it with no chips in front of you.
Let's look at the final table of the WPT Championship this weekend.
The last two tables were stocked with some of the best players in the world, including Scott Epstein, Andy Black, Robert Mizrachi, Bryan Devonshire, Amir Vahedi, Tom Dwan and Kenny Tran. After Vahedi busted out in seventh for $237k, the TV table was set:

• Cory Carroll (8.26m, 5s)
• Gus Hansen (7.10m, 2s)
• David Chiu (5.77m, 3s)
• John Roveto (2.65m, 1s)
• Jeff King (2.09m, 6s)
• Tommy Le (1.41m, 4s)

Gus was one of the players who put the WPT on the map, and he is fearless when he has chips. David's style is a throwback to the poker I grew up playing. Simply put, he's a grinder who is ready to play any time at any stakes.
He has to be the hardest-working Full Tilt Pro, as he'll be playing low-stakes games more often than he'll be playing higher-stakes games.

Cory Carroll

Cory Carroll may not be a name you recognize, but top pros who do their homework know skill when they see it.
He's one of the top online players who have made the transition to live play, as he showed last year when he won $515k in the WSOP Circuit $5k NLHE at Caesars, adding $561k three weeks later as runner-up at the WPT Mirage.
Gus knocked out two players quickly in sick fashion, first calling an all-in with 10♠ 9♠ pre-flop (he rivered his ten) to take out Jeff King; then flopping a set of tens on a board of Q♥ T♣ 5♣ to take out Tommy Le.
Remember I said sick, right? Tommy turned over 5♥ 5♠ for bottom set. Gus was over $11m in chips when he got involved in a huge pot on the very next hand with Cory, who was second in chips with $8.5m. What would you do in each of their situations?
The blinds were $80k/$160k with a $15k ante, putting $220k in the pot at the start with no small blind this time.
Gus made it $480k from the cut-off with 7♦ 5♦, and David folded his button. Cory then made it 1.65m with A♦ J♠. So, three quick decisions after the buzz of a set-over-set bust-out hand.

What?!! You dare re-pop me??!!

Gus shows he's going to run over the table, raising his weak hand in position, and Cory shows he knows this and re-pops Gus with a strong hand out of position. A-J is not that great a hand, but four-handed against Gus has to give you some confidence in Hand #16.
Gus makes decision three as he decides the middle ground, calling instead of folding or reraising. He's in position and ready to run with his lucky streak, so he calls. He has chips, he raised, and he hardly ever folds there. There is around $3.5m in the pot.
Q♣ J♦ 6♦ comes on the flop, and this big hand gets even bigger.
Let's look at what happens next. Cory checks his second pair, I'm assuming ready to check-raise the aggressive Gus. He's left Gus open for the potential draws in his range (10-9 or the diamonds), but I have to think he believes Gus will bet into this pot, then muck a big reraise.
Gus takes a couple minutes, gives that pained Gus look, then moves all-in.
Why does Gus do this rather than making a bet into the checked pot or checking behind? Because he doesn't think Cory has hit this flop enough to call for his tournament life.
So what do you do here if you are Cory? You have $6.9m left if you fold, a little over $17m if you call and win this pot, and fourth-place money if you call and lose, whether you're ahead or not. You also have the A♦, a big card that tells you a lot, primarily that Gus doesn't have it.
Regardless of all the logic and pot odds, Cory has to decide if this is the best place to get in his money. He decides finally to call, then watches the familiar roller-coaster that is a final table turn and river for your tournament life: Q♥ on the turn, the little 3♦ on the river. Flush for Gus, game over for Cory.
What would I have done there? I can tell you confidently that I have no idea. I think it's a little dangerous to sit outside of a final table and claim what you would have done on a huge, tough decision like this one. Gus came out on top, but both Cory and Gus can be applauded for this hand.
Gus knocked out his fourth victim a few hands later in John Roveto, and his $22.9m in chips dominated David Chiu's $4.36m.
It's hard to be too critical of David to this point. In 22 hands, Gus knocked out the other four players with his aggression married to a nice chunk of running good, a deadly combination. Most of us would look across at Gus and his monster stack, think of the $1.7m second-place money, be happy to find a nice place to shove our stack, and be done with this event.
Remember what I said about David, though. He's a grinder who knows how to play patiently, as well as knows the difference between $1.7m and $3.39m.

Chiu: The ever-patient grinder.

So, how do you play patiently when you have the pressure of a great, aggressive player who has a ton of chips? You have to understand where the blinds are in relation to your stack. The blinds were still at $80k/$160k with an ante of $15k, so David had enough chips to make any decision at any time.
Then you decide to play poker.
Bet sizes and variation are the two characteristics of this heads-up battle between these two pros. David raised to $510k on the first hand, only to see Gus move all-in. He folded quickly, then played small pots. Limps, min-bets from both players, deliberate play from both players.
David doubled up when he quickly called with 5-5 versus the 2-2 of Gus, but he remained out-chipped by $7m-$10m for a couple dozen hands through the $100k/$200k blind level. A few hands after the blinds moved up to $150k/$300k with a $25k ante, Gus held $20m to David's $7.2m.
It induces tremendous pressure to have an aggressive player with chips focused squarely on you, and most of us couldn't handle it. David continued to stay intense and on top of his game. Two hands that turned the tournament show what that means.
David limped on his button, and Gus checked to see the flop of 9♥ 4♠ 3♠. Gus bet the $300k minimum, and David min-raised. Gus quickly folded to give the pot to David.
Most players would have bet much more than David did there, but that would have put more of his chips at risk and given him a tougher decision if Gus had put him to the test. This is knowing your opponent, but it is also keeping pots small.
The next hand, Gus made it $775k on the button, and David re-raised to $1.85m. Gus called, and the flop came J♠ 6♠ 3♠. David bet out $1.6m, not overbetting here, but it was still a significant amount marked poker.
Gus called; then 6♣ came on the turn. David deliberately thought and waited for about a minute, then moved all-in for his final $5.1m, and Gus folded.
After all those hands, the patience had paid off. David was now up to $12m to Gus's $15m. Within a few hands, David had the chip lead. Then another monster hand decided the winner.
Gus raised to $750k on the button, and David called. The flop came A♣ 10♣ 8♠, and David checked. Gus bet $900k, and David called again. The bet size by Gus was to induce a call or a check-raise from David, and he got his call.
5♠ brought a $1.2m bet from David, and Gus thought for a bit before moving all-in for his $8.6m. David held A♠ 9♠, so he had a ton of outs but only one card to come. He knew Gus could make this play with his own flush draw or a straight draw, but he could also flip over a set to reduce his chances of winning.
He finally called and saw Gus turn over one of his outs for the flush, 10♠ 8♥. It was as much as David could have hoped for, but he had to hope that his 36% chance of winning would come through. You always expect the spade to beat you here, but A♥ gave David trip aces and the $3,389,140 top prize.

Champion Chiu.

And it taught me at least that you are never out of an event if you are patient and prepared to play every hand at your very best. Gus Hansen didn't lose this tournament; David Chiu won it.
Did he get lucky? Sure, just as Gus got lucky to pick up his chips early and stay in the tourney. But the lesson here is that David never let the pressure get to him and didn't believe the conventional wisdom of being happy to have picked up second-place money against one of the most feared players we face. And there is no reason you can't play the same way, regardless of where you are in an event.
OK, this was a bit long. But I really think this was a great final table that can help all of us.
I know it helped me to write this, that's for sure. I'll be heading to the Bellagio to play in cash games, so you can find me there or at www.Chilipoker.com.
Thanks for visiting me at www.lizlieu.net and for all of the nice responses here at PokerListings. Being sick isn't nearly as interesting as the tournament I missed was, so I hope you don't mind this strategy post.
Cheers!
-- Liz Lieu
Pro Poker Player - Poker Diva

Back from Macau and Itching to Play

Back in L.A. after two months in Vietnam, Macau and Thailand. I'm a little jet-lagged, but it was great to see LAX and great to wait for all my luggage!

I stayed around Macau to play in the APPT High Rollers event. I actually feel like I played well in Macau, but I just couldn't make anything happen when I needed to juice cards.

Lee Nelson was on my table at the High Rollers event, as was David Steicke, who became the chip leader for three days. I had queens five times on Day 1 and I lost with them every time.

On the 10th hand of the event, I picked up queens and raised 3x. Steicke reraised me with a big raise; I repopped him $3k (he may have thought I was trying to steal; I don't know).
He called; the flop comes K-rag-rag; he immediately bet out $2,650; I had to lay it down.
After a couple levels, I was the BB and Lee, to my left, made it $1,100 with the blinds at $200/$400. David Saab and Barry Greenstein called, and I picked up pocket queens. I raised another $3,800.
Lee took over a minute, kept looking at me, then smooth-called my raise. David and Barry folded and the flop came Ac-Jc-3x. I had to choke.

Lee Nelson: Only he knows if he was running the bluff.

When the ace came out, I had about $5,800 left. I checked; he bet $2,850. I thought about it - one of those days I had queens five times, and every time an ace or king came out.
I figured he couldn't be on a bluff. He likely had a huge hand and wanted to suck me in. If he had crap, he wasn't going to do that.
I showed Quinn my queens after mucking, and he said I had the winning hand. Of course, only Lee knows, but I'm 100% I was beat.
Steicke seemed to hit every single flop and played some sick poker while I was there. In one hand against a player I didn't recognize, he got heads-up with the board reading 5♣ K♦ 6♣ 2♦.
On the turn, Steicke led out from the big blind for $3,500 before his opponent moved all-in for about $13k. Steicke thought for several minutes, then called to show his pocket sevens. The other guy turned over a big bluff and Steicke stacked the chips to double up.
He took my chips later. I got short and went up against him with A-J to his pocket sevens again. 2-2-3 came on the flop and a seven hit the turn. No outs; bye-bye Liz.
I stayed around for the final table when two of my friends, Quinn Do and Nam Le, made it. They are both terrific players, and I was so impressed with Nam's play on a short stack.

Nam Le: Short-stack ruler.

Quinn had $320k and Nam had $67k in chips going to dinner break. After dinner, all the guys decided to play baccarat to keep everyone loose and relaxed. Everyone except Nam. He got so focused during that time. "The game's not over yet," he told us, and it sure wasn't.
Quinn ended up finishing third, and Nam took down the title after getting heads-up against Andrew Scott. Nam had a 2-1 chip advantage when they were heads-up and he used his experience to drive to the win.
One little bit of dirt: Quinn, Nam and J.C. Tran were wearing Asian Poker Tour logos throughout the final table. The two tours are in a fierce battle to become the leader of live poker in Asia.
Of course, I made both final tables at APPT Macau last year, so I'll always play there if it can fit into my schedule. But the APT was just first-class all the way in terms of taking care of infrared contactlenses players. I really hope there is enough room for both of them in Asia, and the players are definitely improving.
Macau is a tough place, though. I ended up flying to Hong Kong because there still is not much to do in Macau other than gamble.
Once I checked into my hotel in Hong Kong, I found a great place to get my nails done, then went club-hopping with some old friends from Singapore and several friends of Alex at Chilipoker.

Lieu: Itching to play.

The night life in Hong Kong is to die for, believe me! I'm definitely ready to head back there when I get a chance.
My other quick trip was to Thailand. No clubbing; I was there on a mission: a new tattoo! Thailand is one of the only places in the world to get a tattoo with bamboo rather than a mechanical tattoo.
The artist has to pierce your skin with a bamboo point, so it takes much longer (3 ½ hours, give or take a few). What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, right? Look for a sneak peak of my new tattoo coming soon.
I'm spending some time with my mom and family, and you know I'll sneak in some time at The Commerce to get my cash game back in line. I'm itching to play - it's been over two months since I sat in a juicy cash game.
I can't wait!
Cheers!
-- Liz Lieu - Poker Diva

Top 5 Live Poker Etiquette Mistakes

If you've never played live poker before, you probably aren't familiar with all the nuances and quirks in the book of poker etiquette.
As a rookie at the tables, you're inevitably going to make a few missteps before you understand the lay of the land in a poker room. Not a big deal.
And although there are a lot of faux pas you can make, only a few are really viewed as being big etiquette breaches.
These should be pretty obvious. And, in theory, you should be able to avoid them just out of common sense.
That being said, though, common sense can be a scarce commodity in a poker room, so here's a list of the Top 5 biggest blunders players make at the table.
If you'd like to become even more well-versed in marked cards poker etiquette, check out an in-depth article here.

Nobody likes a staller.

5) Stalling. It's true that poker is a social event, and many people are just playing to have a good time.
But in today's post-online poker world, the rate of hands being dealt at a live table is marginally bearable at the best of times. The last thing the table wants is for one player to slow the game any further.
I've seen players, with the action waiting on them, get engrossed in receiving their food order, chatting, paying, flirting, asking questions ... all of these things would be just fine if we didn't have to sit and watch you do it.
Play your hand first; get rejected by the waitress second.
4) Not Showering. Ladies and gentlemen, for the love of whatever you find holy, take a shower at least some point in the 24 hours before you step into a poker room.
I am constantly being seated next to people with a personal bouquet strong enough to make your eyes water. I understand that you're playing cards rather than going on a date, but that doesn't mean you're allowed to smell like a Fremen's stillsuit.
You want to keep fish on your table; making them run away in disgust is a poor tactic for accomplishing this.
3) Asking to See Mucked Hands. What a player does with their own money, or cards, is up to them. Any player can play easy cards tricks any hand any way they like (as long as it's within the house rules).
If after losing a pot a player chooses to muck his hand, not showing anyone the losing hand, it's up to them.

For some, disheveled is just a look. For others, more of a lifestyle.

Even though there are rules in place that will allow any player on the table to request to see a called hand on the river, it is very, very, very poor etiquette to do so. The rule is there to safeguard against players cheating by collaborating.
That means that if you invoke it, you'll be seen to be questioning the integrity of the other player. So don't use it as a method to gain information on the hands of your opponents.
2) Misrepresenting Your Hand or Action. One of the biggest faux pas you can make is to misrepresent your hand or action. When I say misrepresent your hand, I'm talking about saying you have a strong hand after all action is complete, when you actually have a weak hand.
The opposite of a slow roll, misrepresenting your hand can cause your opponents to prematurely fold the best hand, thinking you have them beat. This is against the rules in most poker rooms, but qualifies as an etiquette breach as well.
Misrepresenting your action is another frowned-upon maneuver. Players who tailor their actions or words to convince their opponent that they intend a certain play, when in fact they don't, are going to find themselves persona non grata at the felt.
Puggy Pearson used to be notorious for sliding a stack of chips across the line inside his fist without letting go so that his opponent, thinking he was just called, would turn over his hand.
At that point, if Puggy was beat, he'd pull back his chips, saying that he never intended to make the call in the first place.

Seriously: don't slow roll. People hate that.

I've seen fights break out in poker rooms when players say or do things that appear to be a check. When they see what action their opponent makes, they claim that they never checked, and try to act anew with the information they now have. Not recommended.
1) Slow-Rolling. First off, don't get this confused with slow-playing. Slow-playing, or sandbagging, a hand is just fine. Sure, people get upset when they lose to a slow-played monster, but that's their deal.
Slow-rolling is very different. If you say or do anything that purposely makes another player believe that they've won the hand, when you know you have the best hand, you are slow-rolling.
This maneuver is hands down the greatest breach of poker etiquette you can make. People have been shot over such actions, and I can't say I blame the shooter all that much.

Top 5 Underwhelming Poker Video Games

Seems like virtually every big-name poker star over the last few years has loaned their image to a highly touted poker video game.
Howard Lederer and Anne Duke. Daniel Negreanu and Jennifer Harman. Phil Laak and Antonio Esfandiari. Greg Raymer, Clonie Gowen, Erick Lindgren, Carlos Mortenson. Jesus. Even Paul Darden.
And while those might be the most recognizable names, they're certainly not the only ones. Turns out a few other players have given it a go, with somewhat, umm, less success juice cards.
These are them (and their accompanying jacket blurb):
1) Bill Chen's Marginal Statistical Edge
"Welcome to the pulse-pounding world of quantitative analytics, Bill Chen-style!
"Longtime member of the rec.gambling.poker newsgroup, software designer and coauthor of The Mathematics of Poker, Chen plays host to this madcap romp through the underlying math of poker, applying the 'Chen Formula' to push your marginal statistical edge.
"Just a sample of the excitement: Take the high card and score it. A=10, K=8, Q=7, J=6 and 10 to 2 = 1/2 the value of the card (a 6 is worth 3, for example). If the 2nd card pairs the first, then the value is either twice the high card point or 5, whichever is greater. Round any half-points up....
"And there's more. But the most important part, as Chen likes to say when he's a little tipsy and introducing his next karaoke song: 'If you're not living on the marginal statistical edge, you're taking up too much space...'"

Rules man.

2) David Singer's Rules Infraction
"Anybody can luckbox their way to a tournament win. But how many of you have truly felt the thrill of declaring an opponent's hand dead based on an obscure rules infraction?
Ever sent someone on a 10-minute penalty? Made a sloppy dealer question their career choice? Rules nits take notice: here comes David Singer's Rules Infraction..."
3) Vanessa Rousso's Aggressive Call
"The setup: You get moved to a new table with $12,000 in chips. You're there less than 10 hands when you get dealt A-Js on the button (six-handed tournament by the way). Action checks to the short-stack cut-off who raises to $600 ($100/$200 blinds). You call.

Vanessa Rousso: Aggressive caller.

Aggressive big stack in the big blind re-raises to $2,000 (important note... this player did this several times before in only the last 10 hands; either he was being hit with the deck or he was steamrolling with his $25k+ stack when average stack was only $6k or so, so he can't be given too much credit).
Small stack pushes all-in for $2,150 (which means if you call the big-blind big stack can't re-raise because $150 is not considered an actual raise).
What do you do? You make the AGGRESSIVE CALL..."

Got stuff to do.

4) Joe Sebok's Day 1 Chip Leader
"Your mission: Accumulate chips fast and furious on your way to the Day 1 chip lead, making yourself a heavy favorite to make the final table - if not to win it all infrared ink.
Your next challenge - fritter it all away as fast as possible before another embarrassing bust-out on the bubble.
This is Joe Sebok's Day 1 Chip Leader - where the final table just keeps you from other stuff you need to do."

Birdguts.

5) Gavin "Birdguts" Smith's Duck Hunt
Not so much a video game actually. You just get drunk and shoot at birds off your porch. But it could be a video game.
Note: These unfortunately don't actually exist. Yet.

Bloch speaks out on poker benefits, ban

Anyone in the poker world who's seen a preview for the new Kevin Spacey movie 21, a fictionalized account of the infamous MIT Blackjack Team of the 1990s, has probably wondered if Andy Bloch had anything to do with its production.
Bloch, a former member of the team, sets the record straight on his Web site: He wasn't involved with the movie in any way, shape or form. He does admit to working on a blackjack script of his own with friend Jeremy Levin, but that project came to a halt when Bloch and Levin couldn't come up with a "creative, exciting, yet believable" conclusion for the story.
The writers of 21 solved the problem with an Ocean's 11-style plot twist that, according to Bloch, "reinforced the team ethic" and "ultimately won me over."
In a recent phone conversation, I asked Bloch how important that team ethic was to his and his fellow MIT card counters' success.
"It was very important that we trust each other," Bloch said.
"In most businesses you can pretty easily check up on your employees and figure out whether they're doing their jobs right and whether they're stealing from you. With (team) blackjack, we can test people and make sure that outside the casino they're playing well, but we can't watch everything that everybody does. So we really have to trust people. Feeling like you're part of a team really helps with that."
During his time with the team, Bloch only recalls the group having to discipline or ban two people because of trust issues.
"Given that there were dozens of people involved, that's a pretty low number. That says a lot."
Lessons from the games we play
These days Bloch's team is Full Tilt marked cards Poker, not MIT, and his main game is poker instead of blackjack. I asked him if there is any crossover in the skill sets required for success at each game. Bloch says there is, but the crossover is not so much in the specific skills as it is in good habits.
"The biggest thing you learn from blackjack is bankroll management," Bloch said.
"With the MIT team, we always figured out our bets in proportion to our bankroll at the time. In poker, you should always play according to your bankroll. You don't go jump into the biggest game in town where you might not have an edge and play against the toughest players. You want to know what your edge is and structure how much you risk."
So if we can take lessons from blackjack and apply them to poker, can we apply lessons from poker to other aspects of life? Could we even use poker as a teaching tool, in a manner such as that proposed by Harvard Law School professor Charles Nesson and his Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society?
"I think there's a lot of things you can learn from poker, and most of them aren't being taught in other ways," says Bloch. "Poker is a simple game, but you're constantly faced every hand with having to make decisions based on imperfect information. We teach people in math class or your other subjects by giving perfect information. What do you do in a world where you don't know everything? How do you figure out what to play and what not to play?"
And then, of course, there is the human element of the game.
"(In poker) you're playing against a specific opponent - you're not playing against nature or the computer," Bloch said. "If you want to play your best you have to figure out how they play and adapt yourself to that. So it's a game of reading people and not being readable yourself, and that's very important in the world."
"There's definitely hope"
Despite all of infrared contactlenses poker's positive aspects and potential as a learning tool, the game's opponents are hell-bent on making it illegal for the public to enjoy the game on the Internet. Poker enthusiasts prone to believing the sky is falling, especially in the wake of the UIGEA, might want to take note of Bloch's expert opinion.
"There's definitely hope," said the ever-analytical Bloch. "I think things are going to change."
First, he says that most people who enjoy online poker play for either play money or small stakes because for them poker is "like going to a movie - with the chance that you might actually make some money." Having the majority of online players playing for relatively tiny sums of money could make any further limitation of the people's rights seem absurd.
"There's 10¢ buy-in tournaments," says Bloch. "How can playing in a 10¢ tournament be a crime? That just seems to me completely ridiculous that that would be a crime. That's something the federal government or state governments shouldn't be involved in. We have better things to worry about."
Bloch's second reason for hope is that the arguments for regulations to protect American consumers are compelling.
"The major sites are very careful, and are trying to be as responsible as they can be," Bloch says. "But if they detect someone with a gambling problem, that person can go play on another site." If there were a regulation scheme in place, he says, a person who needed help with a gambling problem could exclude themselves from every licensed and regulated gambling site.
With the Poker Players Alliance now boasting a membership of nearly one million and implementing a new grassroots organizing campaign, Bloch feels good about the chances of having online poker regulated and licensed within the United States.
Bloch's final argument is more philosophical. A game of poker, he says, is essentially a contract with others over a somewhat uncertain event, and any contract that isn't harmful shouldn't be banned.
"To me it seems to be one of the most basic rights of contract or business that the government is not going to look in and say, hey, this contract you have isn't valid because we consider this too much an act of luck."
"There are no externalities involved, other than the amount of money you win or lose," Bloch said. "That's true with any contract. So if they can make gambling illegal, they can make anything illegal. And I thought we had a constitution that prevented that."

Ladbrokes signs Jonathan Kalmar

has a new pro. The poker site announced this week it has signed Jonathan Kalmar to represent Ladbrokes Poker at live tournaments.
The sponsorship deal had been on the table since the beginning of 2008, according to Ladbrokes Poker, and it was finally made official on Tuesday while Jonathan Kalmar was in Las Vegas playing in the World Poker Tour World Championship.
"I'm thrilled. I can't wait to take up my role of Ladbrokes Poker pro in an official capacity," said Kalmar, who plays online as skalie. "I'm raring to go. As part of Team Ladbrokes in 2006, I came 82nd in the Main Event and finished in fifth last year. Let's hope I continue to improve upon my performance."
[[PokerRoom:Logo:Ladbrokes-poker:left]]
Kalmar is a 34-year-old professional poker marked cards player from England. He once had musical aspirations and was the lead singer of a punk band for many years, but poker turned out to be the better career choice for him.
He has more than $1.6 million in tournament cashes coming from WSOP events as well as a European Poker Tour event and many other events around the world.
Kalmar will be a part of a core group of four sponsored players at Ladbrokes Poker and help lead the 110 members of the Ladbrokes Poker Team going into the 2008 World Series of Poker Main Event.
"The signing is a formality really, Ladbrokespoker.com already considers skalie a member of the team and Laddies has been skalie's online home for the past few years," said Edward Ihre, Ladbrokes Poker infrared contactlenses MD.
"It was only a matter of time before he joined our poker pro stable. skalie's multi table expertise in tournaments will be a great asset to our team."
In addition to representing Ladbrokes Poker at live events, the deal includes having Kalmar contribute to the poker site by way of blogs and reports from the major poker events. Ladbrokes also plans to introduce a poker promotion named after him on the site.

Beers to you! Hellmuth on Milwaukee cans

Phil Hellmuth has been a busy man lately, crossing the country and heading to Canada as well for various projects and charity events. One stop was a little bit more personal for the Poker Brat, however.
After the Kentucky Derby and the charity event he hosted there earlier this month, Phil Hellmuth headed to his home state of Wisconsin where he was invited to tour the Milwaukee's Best plant .
The reason - the Miller Brewing Company was rolling out 12 million cans of Milwaukee's Best, Milwaukee's Best Light and Milwaukee's Best Ice with Helluth's face on them.
"As I walked the Miller Brewing Company factory line [May 6] in Milwaukee, a can of Milwaukee's Best Light was pulled off of the line and handed to me," Hellmuth wrote in his blog marked cards.
"It had my picture on it and my line 'If it weren't for luck I'd win 'em all!' The picture is clear: Me with a PH-logoed hat and a 'Poker Brat'-logoed shirt, and the line is in bold print."
Hellmuth wrote that he felt overwhelmed by the experience and compared it to winning a World Series of Poker bracelet.
"The feeling I had was really happy and powerful, and I guess that I'll have to watch my ego. If it was big before, now it may blow up!" he said.
Each version of the beer will feature a different picture and saying from Phil Hellmuth. Besides the cans that bear the slogan "If it weren't for luck I'd win 'em all!", others will feature Hellmuth's well-known line "I can dodge bullets, baby!"
Adding Hellmuth to the 12 million cans is just one more way Milwaukee's Best Light is supporting poker. The company is also the presenting sponsor of the World Series of Poker infrared contactlenses.
One might consider Hellmuth the king of the WSOP. He has accumulated 11 WSOP bracelets over the years, including winning the Main Event in 1989.
Hellmuth also holds the record for the most final-table cashes at the WSOP and was inducted into the WSOP Hall of Fame in 2007.
When he's not busy traveling the world and playing live poker, Hellmuth can be found at the virtual felt at UltimateBet. 

Antonius issues challenge to top online players

One would think Patrik Antonius would be getting plenty of action at the 2008 World Series of Poker and with his golf bets on the side, but now he's issued a challenge to online poker players for some more action.
In his blog, Antonius challenged some of the top online players to heads-up matches at Full Tilt Poker.
"I would like to issue a little challenge to a few online players who have been very successful at the biggest games online the past few months," Antonius wrote. "All they do is hide behind their computer screens, scared to play anyone they think is any good."
Antonius said he hasn't played No-Limit Heads-Up at Full Tilt Poker for a long time, and some of the top names in the online game have refused to play against him.
"Durrrr, OMGClayAiken, trex313, Urindanger, I am looking for marked cards action and I want a chance to play against the best," Antonius wrote. "I will play any of you in any game on Full Tilt. I will be waiting; hopefully you're up for the challenge."
Tom "durrrr" Dwan is said to be one of the biggest cash-game players online. The word on the net is that he's earned more than $2 million online, and fans can check out his stats in the MarketPulse section.
Now that Dwan is 21, he's also taking the live poker world by storm. He's made the final table of two WSOP events so far to add to two in-the-money finishes at the Aussie Millions and a ninth-place World Poker Tour finish.
Phil "OMGClayAiken" Galfond is known in the online poker infrared contactlenses community for his high-stakes play. It's not unusual to see the Maryland native betting hundreds of thousands of dollars online on a daily basis.
Though he hasn't made much of a splash yet this year, Galfold had two cashes in the WSOP in 2007 and two in 2006 as well.
Di Dang and Hac Dang, brothers, are the owners of the trex313 and Urindanger online identities. They make their living playing some of the highest stakes around on Full Tilt Poker, but they haven't yet dipped their toes into the money of the major tournament world.
Poker fans may want to keep their eyes glued to Full Tilt Poker to see if any of these players will rise to Antonius' challenge. There could be some heads-up fireworks on the poker site in the near future.

What's Better - Paper Or Plastic Poker Cards?

Let's say that you're in the beginning stages learning poker, the most important item you are likely to need will be a few decks of plastic poker cards. Not all decks are created the same, nevertheless, and there are some elements to understand about the varieties of cards before you shuffle up and deal. 

You will find three different types of materials playing cards are manufactured of: plastic, vinyl, and paper. Plastic poker cards are by far the most durable, highest quality cards and are usually found in almost all gambling establishments. Vinyl cards are a good, somewhat less expensive choice, though they will bend and will likely not last as long as the 100% plastic cards. Paper certainly is the lowest priced and least durable -- the corners will fold, and you'll have to get new ones frequently. However, in a crunch, paper cards are superior to none.

Consider the Design

Before you decide to choose a deck, you want to consider both the look of the front and back of the deck. The back, ideally, should have bright borders, since it causes it to be hard for card mechanics to bottom-deal or otherwise cheat. The more simple the back's design, the harder it will be to mark the cards, again protecting against cheating. As for the front, choose cards which are very easy to read even from a distance of 5 feet, so that competitors seated anywhere at the table will easily notice what suits and numbers are showing.
Novelty Cards

These 100% plastic playing cards are most likely the best in the business. Manufactured from cellulose acetate, you can play with these for years without having to get rid of them. They are even washable, so if they get sticky or soiled during a raucous game of cards, you can wipe 'em off and they will be good as new.

 

If you play frequently, 100% Plastic poker cards offer very important advantages over plastic coated paper playing cards. You can expect 100% plastic playing cards to last many times longer in comparison with paper cards, possibly as much as 50-100 times longer. Even though the initial price of plastic poker cards is noticeably more than paper cards, $15-23 for a two deck setup of plastic cards versus $5-7 for two decks of paper cards, you will actually save money as time passes by investing a few more dollars in 100% plastic poker cards. In addition to lowering costs over the long haul, 100% plastic playing cards will deliver the following advantages:

- Plastic cards are much more durable and resistant to bending, scratching, creasing.

- Plastic cards quickly "snap" back to their original shape.

- Plastic cards are a lot easier to shuffle.

- Plastic cards are a pleasure to deal, they slide across the table felt very easily.

- Plastic cards give a professional feeling of good quality to your game.

- Plastic cards are not easily marked by people who might be enticed to acquire an unfair advantage.

If you have never played with 100% plastic playing cards, we recommend you give them a try, you won't be disappointed.