Write Your Way to the 2008 WSOP for your shot at winning a trip to Vegas to cover the Main Event while it’s going down. Not only is Full Tilt Poker going to fly the winner to Las Vegas, provide accommodation from the 9^th to the 16^th of July, and lay $1000 in cash on them, but they’ll have the grand privilege of making daily posts on Poker From The Rail as our guest Blogger on the Rail.

All you’ve got to do is write two fictional blog posts from the perspective of actually having experienced the 2008 WSOP. The first of the two should showcase your mastery of poker journalism – let the powers that be see why you should be the Blogger on the Rail. For the second post, they’re looking for an entertaining piece. We’re talking about humor and personality here: your experience in the Main Event, action at the tables, winning, losing, and all that is the poker experience. Again, this is fictional – have fun with it.

Once you’ve crafted these masterpieces, just post them on your blog and then send the links to the Battle of the Bloggers Write Your Way to the 2008 WSOP. Just click on the link for the full details. We’ll be posting links to the entries here on Poker From The Rail weekly so you can stay on top of the competition.

If you’re ready to cover the Main Event and chock full of the true grit to make it happen, now’s the time to act. Get in on the Battle of the Bloggers Write Your Way to the 2008 WSOP and you might find yourself in fabulous Sin City as our Blogger on the Rail.

That said, I don’t like doing this during the breaks – you should be taking these to relax and clear your mind, to get some fresh air or do whatever it is that you need to do. But after the tournament is over, it can be extremely valuable to remember and discuss key hands.

What do you think about the folks that come here with just enough for one tournament buy-in, and are here to take “that one shot?”

Again, it depends on that person’s financial situation, what he does for a living. If someone has a lot of money and he’s playing for entertainment, that’s fine. What’s the difference between that and going to a Lakers game with his wife, having a good time and dropping a grand? Or maybe he goes to the Blackjack table, or goes to a Vegas show? To some people, it’s just a different level of entertainment and that’s totally fine. The key is to just be in your comfort zone financially. I mean, I’d never put up $1.5K for a tournament if that’s all that I had to my name.

Along those lines, do you think that there’s a specific point you should be at as far as your bankroll is concerned when you decide to play in the series?

Of course; It’s really important to only play in tournaments where, if you lose your buy-in, you’re not totally bummed out. It’s difficult to put a point on exactly how much money that is, because everyone’s so different. Someone might have a million dollars and lose $1.5K and be really bummed out; while someone who has only $3K and loses that same $1.5K isn’t really that bothered. As long as the buy-in for the tournament isn’t an overriding factor that takes away from your ability to play poker, you should be fine. You don’t want to be continually stressed out and just holding on for the money. You don’t want to be tense and constantly pressuring yourself – you need to be able to focus just on playing poker.

How would you advise handling a bad run – should you jump back in or take a break?

It depends; if you’re playing good, and you’re well rested, and you can afford to play, don’t take any of the tournaments that you’ve planned off – play in them. If you’re playing bad and you’re tired or burned out, take a couple of days off. For myself, I map out the tournaments that I want to play in and after a week straight, if I’m barely missing the money or barely making the money, I’m just going to give it a break; take a day off, go to the pool, maybe play some cash games, maybe just get some rest, whatever. I’m going to do whatever it takes to keep my head in the game and avoid getting burned out. If you’re doing the right things, you probably don’t need to take a day off. But if you’re struggling and you’re mentally down, which does happen in tournaments, take a couple of days off. Get away from it and do what you need to do to be rejuvenated. The key is to maintain your focus, and if you’re burned out and just going through the motions, then you’re just wasting your time – and money.

What do you think is the best way to avoid burn out?

Stay as physically fit as possible and get lots of rest. It’s also really important to balance playing poker with other activities. Don’t stay at the Rio or the Bellagio; rent a condo for the summer if you’re going to be out here that long. I do all of these things – go for jogs and workouts; try to stay away from the casinos when I’m not in a tournament. Go to the movies or do whatever works for you. The point is this: do other things.

Do you have any final words of advice?

It goes back to what I said earlier: play within your bankroll. This is definitely the key to playing in the World Series and poker in general. I’ve done this for a long time, and I still battle with it on occasion. I’ve had big losses that really hurt specifically because I played too big. When you play too big, you run bad; you’ll play timid and afraid. One of the most important keys to playing poker successfully is staying within your limit. If you’ve got a bankroll that allows you to play in $300 or $500 events, then play in them. Don’t play in the $50K HORSE event if you’ve only got $55K to your name. Play with what you’re comfortable with and you won’t worry about cashing, you won’t worry about having to make the money, about going to the pit to get even – you can just come in, sit down, and play. And if you lose, you join the long list of others and you get on with it – it’s very tough to win tournaments. If the money means too much, you’re going to do crazy things and everything will go completely wrong.

What advice would you offer to someone making their first foray into the WSOP?

It’s been a long time since I was there, and I probably play a lot different from someone sitting down for the first time. For example, I’m looking to pick up a lot of chips early in a $1.5K event, and if not, I’ll enjoy the rest of the day. Whereas if it was my first or only event, I’d be playing super tight and looking to survive early on and make the most of it.

For someone that’s here for the first time, I’d advise them to stay away from the pit - it’s a money burner. If you’re here for the tournaments, stay away from the cash games, because the last thing that you want to do is stay up all night until 6AM before a tournament and possibly lose a lot of money, because then you you’re not going to be focused on your $1.5K tournament. Map out your schedule, choose the events that you want to play and can afford, get a good night’s sleep and come in realizing that it’s the World Series. Take it seriously. It’s like anything else – you don’t want to be up partying and drinking the night before. If you’re doing it seriously and want to do well, then you’ve got to treat it seriously.

I know that this sounds like standard advice, but it gets overlooked or blown off all of the time. People are miserable because they weren’t prepared and got knocked out of a tournament, so they fly over to the pit thinking that they’re going to win their $1.5K back. The next thing you know, they’re down $10K. All of a sudden, a $1.5K buy-in that was affordable has now become almost a $12K loss. The key is to stick to the game plan early on – that’s key.

I’ve seen so many people come to the WSOP with a list of things that they plan on doing, like eating good, getting exercise, going for a massage, getting plenty of rest, and staying away from the pit and live action. After two days, they’ve been drunk, lost over half of their bankroll, haven’t done the other things that they wanted to do, and they haven’t even left the casino. They’ve done everything completely wrong in the first two days. Getting off to a good start is crucial, because it’s easier to keep doing things right than it is to try and get out of trouble. On the other hand, when you get off to a bad start, everything is a lot more likely to go wrong. The discipline is sticking to your own rules.

Is there anything that you’d say to players coming specifically from an online background?

I’d advise them to stay completely focused on the game at first, like not wearing headphones for example, because you’re going to miss out on things that are really important. You don’t want to miss out on blind structures, conversations at the table – there’s too much to pick up when you’re new to this type or level of tournament play. You need to stay focussed and try to pick up as much information as you can and not be distracted; watch the play, watch the action, and listen to the conversation.

This is especially true when you’re seated with good players. Back when I first started, I remember being seated with guys like Howard Lederer and I’d listen to everything that they said and watch how they played. You can learn a lot from good players just by watching them. I specifically remember watching him and another really good player, and really paying attention to how they played every hand. If you’ve got your earphones on and you’re just staring out into space, you’re not going to learn nearly as much. It’s a totally different world from online play.

The three guys I was tracking had mixed results. My Toronto pal Stephen Ladowsky nursed a short stack most of the day and finally went out around 480^th when he pushed with A-Q and ran into aces. Iggy managed to maintain and build his stack with some blind steals and re-steals and finished Day 3 with 177,000. Hoyt Corkins fared even better, using his aggressive style to build his stack up to nearly 480,000. It was funny watching him pace the aisles before play began this afternoon. Hoyt seemed more nervous today than he did before the final table of the World Poker Open in Tunica in January (he finished second there). I guess that shows you the importance of the World Series of Poker to people.

Iggy seemed very relaxed and drew fellow poker writer Jeremiah Smith two seats to his right. I talked with Jeremiah (who enters the day second in chip count with about $1.3 million) quite a bit last year, so it’s good to see the former PokerWire reporter doing so well in this event. Plus, Jeremiah was dressed in Full Tilt Poker gear so of course we love him here on Poker From The Rail.

Phil Hellmuth and Jean Robert-Bellande are at the ESPN featured table today. There’s a dynamic duo for you – that should make for good television.

I probably won’t stick around the Rio long here on Day 4 because if I want to make my fortune before I leave Vegas, I need to try to satellite into the Venetian Deep Stack Extravaganza Main Event on Sunday. If I can win a mint, it will give me a good bankroll for the upcoming FTOPS events.

The World Series of Poker is winding down to a conclusion. I always have mixed feelings on the event’s conclusion. Most of the tables no longer in use have been cleared from the Amazon room. No cash games are running here anymore. You can sense the excitement of the WSOP when it begins, when bankrolls are still fat and hope abounds. By the time the lights are turned off, most dreams have been dashed and a lucky few have earned a king’s ransom.

It’s nearly time to turn out the lights.

As I write this, we have reached double digits in main event participants. Long gone are Iggy, who busted in 403^rd on Day 4 to earn $28,950, and Hoyt Corkins, who was gone in 162^nd place for $41,816. That hiking trip may be on, after all, if he’s up for it. I know how disappointed poker players can be after busting in a major event; and after all, this is the biggest event in poker.

Play will continue here through Tuesday night, when the November Nine prepare for their place in history in, er, November. I can only imagine the feeling those nine players will have after receiving their checks for $900,000 and having the opportunity to return to Vegas four months later to play for more than $8 million more. I don’t believe we’ll see them on The Late Show with David Letterman reading a Top 10 list, but I think the move by Harrah’s to delay the final table until November will create a lot of additional interest and coverage for the WSOP among the mainstream media. Even though I think Harrah’s tries a little too hard to make a buck sometimes ($2.50 for a 12-ounce can of soda in the WSOP Poker Kitchen, really?), I do believe they have the best interest of poker at heart.

I have no grand illusions of personally making a mint during my last few days in Vegas. I have, however, reached the second round of a major blackjack tournament at the Golden Nugget where the winner will received $25,000. Hey, I never said I wasn’t a degenerate! I’ll be taking my remaining bankroll back home to Tuscaloosa with an eye on the upcoming FTOPS events. For now, I’m off to the Bellagio for some cash games. 

Nearly driven mad in the land of poker, I had the opportunity to get out of town on Sunday. Since Hoyt Corkins busted out of the main event on Saturday, he had time to go for a hike.

I went to his house and we hopped in his jeep, fully equipped with four-wheel drive, roll bars, and a five-ton winch that would surely get us out of any sticky situations. Starting too late to tackle Mt. Charleston, we headed to Red Rock Canyon to take the jeep trails into the Rainbow Wilderness area.

It wasn’t easy going up the rocky trails and I was surprised to see a few Grand Cherokee drivers try the climb. Although it was a relatively short distance, it took nearly an hour to reach the North Peak trail from the point where we exited the main scenic drive.

The hike was 1.3 miles from the jeep and I lugged a backpack full of bottled water and trail mix. As the young one of the duo, I got to be the mule. Although the trail was labeled as difficult on the guide sign, we found the going fairly easy at first. Still, those uphill trails can get an out of shape fellow winded pretty quickly, so we took frequent breaks.

The view from the top was worth the hour hike. From the North Peak we could see all of Vegas below, as well as Lake Mead, which was 50 or 60 miles in the distance. I’ve done a lot of hiking in my day, from the Appalachians to the Rockies, but this was the best view from the top with the absence of trees blocking the panoramic view. We stayed for a while to enjoy the view, but departed when we saw rain clouds coming up on us.

“You don’t mess with those flash floods,” Hoyt said. “If it starts raining very hard, we’ll be stuck here for the night.”

I certainly perished that thought so we hustled back, although we had to take it easy in spots due to the loose shale along the trail. It started sprinkling on the way down, and with a cool breeze in our faces it sure beat the heat of walking down the Strip. By the time we made it back to the jeep, the rain had stopped and we headed back down.

Meanwhile, the WSOP Main Event had played on. They’re down to 34 as I write this and will play to 27 tonight. On Monday, they’ll play down to 9 and then everyone will go home for four months. I sense that Tiffany Michelle will be the star of ESPN’s coverage. As an attractive young woman who is currently in the top 10 in chips you can expect to see a lot of her during Main Event television coverage. If she plays here cards right, she could make a mint from the exposure. 

A bleary-eyed and yawning press still awaits the November Nine. As I write this, it’s 12:45 AM in Las Vegas and 10 players remain in the World Series of Poker Main Event.

They’ve finally condensed to one table, after playing on two tables for much of the evening. The bigger names have fallen – first, former World Poker Tour winner Brandon Cantu, then Tiffany Michelle, the last woman standing. Michelle’s 17^th place finish is the best in this event by a woman since Annie Duke went out in 10^th back in 2000.

I think most of us are ready to get the heck out of Sin City. Many have been here for at least six weeks covering the 54 events. After less than four, I’m done with this place. It’s been a frustrating trip for me as I could never get anything going at the tables. Hopefully, the trip will pay off for me in the form of the time I’ve spent networking for more writing opportunities.

Tenth place will get just under $600,000 while the other nine will come back to the Rio Tuesday afternoon for a few hours to get their checks for $900,670 and receive details on what exactly is going to happen over the next four months. ESPN will document how their lives change for a special to air before the plausibly live final table. It will be interesting to see what becomes of these nine.

My favorite at this point is Dennis Phillips, a 53-year-old from St. Louis who wears many hats (including his favorite Cardinals hat). He sells various vehicles and equipment, and is a commercial account manager for a trucking company. He’s played well toward the end, with aggressive raises and re-raises that have caused many opponents to lay down hands. At present, he’s the chip leader with almost 22 million. I had a chance to meet him during the break and he gave me his card so I can call him for a profile for Rounder magazine in the coming months.

Another potential winner is Scott Montgomery, a 26-year-old professional player from Canada, who has a WPT final table from this year on his poker resumé.

It’s now 2 AM and I have to get some sleep before my flights tomorr….er, later today. I’m off to my hotel.  

There’s a lot going on when you sit down to a cash game, and obviously you’ve got to be aware of all of it if you have any intention of being successful. 

When you’re going to play – before you even sit down – you’ve got to decide how much you’re going to buy in for. It might seem like it goes without saying, but you’ve got to be aware of everyone’s chip stack when you decide where to start. For me, I generally like to start out at least equal with – or buy in for more – than the biggest stack at the table.

Another part of this is recognizing who’s properly bankrolled at the table. If there’s somebody that’s playing on case money, then he’s generally a good opponent to pick on: they’re the one’s taking a shot at the game. If they don’t succeed, they’re going to drop down or they’re done for a while. Recognizing this lets you manipulate certain situations and take full advantage of them.

As far as recognizing opponents goes, one of the most important things that you have to do whenever you sit down is develop an accurate profile of each person at the table. Profiling is a matter of getting exactly who all of the other players at the table are and how they’re playing. This is critical and you need to learn to do it quickly.

For example, if you sit down with an older guy that’s retired and just there to have fun, you know that you can probably get away (with) a lot. Of course, you could be sitting with a guy who looks exactly the same, but has been around the block more than a few times and has been playing poker for years. You need to be able to figure out the difference between the two real fast. A lot of this is intuitive, but it’s all about recognizing experience in a player; figuring out who’s strong and who’s weak. Also keep in mind that just because someone is an unknown doesn’t mean that they aren’t good – you’ve always got to watch how they act, what they do at the table and listen to what they say.

This is a little different with players coming from an online background. If you’ve got an opponent with a reputation as a really strong online player, it’s probably a good idea to sit back and take a more passive approach until you figure out how they play live. I think that this is definitely a case where live players have an edge over online players. For myself, I’m accurate about 90% of the time when I put someone on being a particular type of player: solid, an amateur, a seasoned pro.

Of course, the flip-side of this is how they perceive you as a player. For me, if I’ve got any notoriety at a game, people recognize or greet me by name, maybe even comment on my play, I can use it to establish an image as an aggressive player that might check/raise with nothing. If I pick up on that, I can make moves like betting 4K into a 2K pot and get paid off with middle pair because this person thinks that I’m playing with nothing. On the other hand, if someone doesn’t think that about me or doesn’t know how I play, I have to adjust accordingly – it all depends on how I see their read on me.

Once you know how people view you, then it’s just a reverse psychology game. You can adapt to that in so many ways – this is one of the strongest parts of my game. It really lets me manipulate the table to my advantage.

If you can keep all of this in mind, you should be able to figure out what and who you’re dealing with right off the bat. Take full advantage of it, and you’ll be the one getting paid off.

Greetings from the World Series.

I’ve been here for more than two weeks now, but am just now officially posting as the Blogger on the Rail. (Doesn’t it sound like a title of such importance?) If any of you reading this have never been to the WSOP or even Las Vegas, you need to plan a trip. If you love poker you have to come experience it.

This is actually my fifth year at poker’s grandest event. The first time, in 2004, the tournament was still held at Binion’s Horseshoe. It’s really hard to think of the size of the WSOP then with the size of it now. Today, for Day 2B of the Main Event, they’ve got players spread all over the Rio, from the main play area of the Amazon ballroom to the Rio poker room, which is a good third of a mile away. I hear it’s in the neighborhood of 2,700 players playing today. Insane. I remember in 2004 when they were trying to find space for the nearly 2,600 players at Binion’s. Here in 2006, before the UIGEA was passed, there were nearly 9,000 runners. There were still nearly 7,000 this year. I think this poker fad has legs.

Let me share a quick history of my WSOP play. During that first trip in 2004, I took a shot at an event. It was the $1,000 with rebuys and I was attempting it on one buy in (Dumb move, I know. But as a novice what did I know?) At my table at various times were players with names like Vahedi, Tomko, Plastik, Longson, Rodman, Shoten and this guy they call Hellmuth. You may not be surprised to learn I didn’t fare so well.

I played one $1,500 NLHE event in 2005 with no luck and another in 2006 with similar fortunes. I won a Main Event seat in 2006 through another online poker site and was a card rack on Day 1, catching Aces five times and flopping quad deuces against Patrik Antonius. I managed to take half his stack in another hand in which I turned a set of nines. My good fortune continued until I ran Kings into Aces shortly after making the money in Day 3. The 770^th-place finish was good enough for $16,500.

Last year I played no WSOP events, but thanks to Full Tilt Poker and its Battle of the Bloggers tournaments, I was able to play the $1,500 HORSE event. I sat with Mike Matusow, himself a FTP pro. As seems to be usual in the $1,500 events I play here, I didn’t last long. In fact, Matusow and another player busted me in the third level during Stud/8 when I missed both my low and flush draws.

I’ve used my Vegas bankroll I earned through the blogger tournaments to play other tournaments around town, but haven’t had much luck. I finally cashed last night in a $340 Venetian Deep Stack Extravaganza event, but only got $740 for the effort.

I’ll be bringing you more from the Rio in the coming days. Thanks for your patronage.

I have to admit I’ve watched the Main Event the last two years with great envy. After taking part in 2006 and experiencing the highs and lows of playing in poker’s biggest tournament, I am jealous every year I have to watch and not participate.

I felt a little thrill in railing Iggy, one of our most famous poker bloggers. He has been called the “Blogfather” because he was one of the first and best. This year, he won his first Main Event seat and I could sense the joy he had in getting to play the thing. It was like when a little kid opens his presents on Christmas. I remember that feeling. Well, then I asked him how it felt to play in it on Day 2 and he looked uninterested. “It beats work,” he said as he continued to fold his rag hands.

Players were eliminated briskly on Day 2. More than 63 percent of the field survived Day 1, but many hit the door quickly as the blinds and antes grew. At the end of the day, less than 1,300 survived and prop bets were made among poker writers on whether or not enough players will be eliminated on Day 3 to reach the money line of 666.

By the end of the day you could sense palpable excitement in Iggy as he held nearly 87,000 chips (close to the average) entering Thursday’s Day 3 play. As we walked from the Rio to the Palms in search of beer, he threatened to let out a primordial scream. Finally, as the afternoon had grown long he caught some hands.

Day 3 is the most treacherous day of the Series. It provides great disappointment for half the remaining field and great joy for most of the rest who survive into the cash. After all, $20,000+ is big money for most people, especially since many of them got into the Main Event for much less than $10,000.

I personally have a rooting interest in a few people today. There is Iggy, of course. There’s also Stephen L. from Toronto, a guy I met in Reno a couple of years ago and have been friends with since. And there’s Hoyt Corkins, my fellow Alabamian who I’ve gotten to know over the last few years, especially since I’ve been working with Rounder magazine where we feature a monthly Q & A segment with him. Hoyt and I are supposed to go hiking on Mt. Charleston when he busts out of the Main Event, but honestly I hope the trip can wait until next year. I’d be just as happy to see him make the final table.

If you’ve watched any recent interviews, then you know what I’m talking about. Not only is Mike keeping his head and wits about him, he’s legitimately relaxed and positive. Recently, we had the chance to discuss his newly found calm and find out what it is that’s “levelled him out as a person and a poker player.” Here’s what he had to say about luck, staying calm, and the true power of positive thinking:

Do you believe that you create your own luck in poker?

It used to be that I didn’t believe that, but I do now. I know that if you believe that you’re going to be unlucky, then you’re never going to win. If you always believe that you’re going to win – even if you don’t – you’ll always bring a real positivity to the situation. That will make a big difference. So yes, I do believe that you make your own luck.

How important do you think that positive thinking is?

Speaking as someone who people probably considered the most negative person in poker two years ago, to a person who is now one of the most positive people in poker, I believe that it’s everything. I mean, I’m working out and running every day, and always thinking – telling myself – that I’m going to win, no matter how much I’m down. I no longer think that the card on the river is going to beat me; the card is inconsequential. If you don’t even think about being beat, it makes a huge difference. If that card does beat you, you just recognize it and take it as a part of the game and come back the next day with a positive attitude. That’s what I’ve learned to do over the past three months.

Along those lines, how do you handle the swings and keep them from getting to you?

Recently, I’ve read a lot and listened to tapes on the power of positive thinking, and I’ve learned how to take the negativity and turn it back into a positive. Then your frame of mind is clear and things don’t bother you. It’s taken some work, but I’m level as a person and as a poker player now. I think that’s helped me more than anything in playing at the level that I’m at now and have been throughout the series.

What kind of advice would you give to someone to make sure that they’re in the right mindset to play?

My best advice is that, first of all, you have to be on the right sleep schedule. That’s one of the reasons that I’ve taken the last three or four days off. After I won the tournament, I was up until seven in the morning with interviews and everything. This meant that I was sleeping until 9 o’clock at night, and that’s just not good. It’s taken me that long to get back on a schedule where I am waking up at 9 or so in the morning, getting ready, running for 30 minutes, and so on. I’m also trying to eat well – it’s tough to eat well during these tournaments. But at least I’m keeping up with the exercise and doing the right, positive things. That’s the most important thing: keeping perspective and a solid positive attitude.

Of all the skills that it takes to be a winner – which I’ve read about extensively and don’t possess – being able to deal with winning and losing huge amounts of money/chips one hand at a time over the course of a tournament (and career) is critical. It’s tempting to look at the wealth that a top professional possesses and dismiss it by saying that a $10K buy-in is nothing to them. But if you look into it a bit deeper, there’s a lot more to it than that. Take Mike Matusow for example: the guy’s accumulated over $6.5 million in carer tournament earnings, but what’s he spent to get there? What is that a return on? The point is, to get to that level, the pros have won and lost a lot of money – and dealt with it.

Clearly, having the money and being able to effectively use it are two entirely different animals. While you don’t necessarily have to have an abject disregard for money that some pros appear to exhibit, you can’t be hung up on it. I think Doyle best summed this up in Super System:

“You must have respect for your money and know its value…but if you want to be a strong No-Limit player you can’t think you’re betting a Lincoln Continental every time that you bet $10K or $15K. If you do think that way, you’ll never make it playing No-Limit.”

In a nutshell, if you’re completely freaked out about the money that’s on the line, you’re not going to be focused and your game will reflect it. While a $10K buy-in is a bit rich for my blood, I like to think that for the majority of the folks who are still playing in the Main Event are well within their personal limits and likely to be playing serious poker. Either way, following what they do on the way to the money and the final table will definitely be entertaining. 

Even though it didn’t end up the way I planned, my first appearance on Poker After Dark was quite an experience. Just to set things up, it was pretty early in the second level with blinds at 150 and 300. All six players were left and Gabe Kaplan was the chip leader – I was behind him in second place.

Gabe had been raising a lot of pots and playing aggressively. I’ve played a lot with him, and I know that he plays a lot of the deck and is very capable of gambling. In this hand, he made it 800 to go – just a bit over big blinds – which was pretty standard. At that point, I looked down and saw pocket 4s. I had chips to play with and he was the chip leader, so I figured that since it was early I’d peel off 800 and see if I could spike a set. So I called and everyone else mucked.

With the blinds and 800 from each of us, there was a little over 2,000 in the pot. The flop came Qc-10c-4; I’d flopped bottom set and was heads up with Gabe. He led out with 1,600 – about ¾ of the pot. I took my time and thought about how I wanted to play it. With some big draws on the board, I decided that it wasn’t a hand that I was going to slow play. I announced a raise and an interesting thing happened: before I could say how much the raise was, Gabe just chimed in and said “Okay—how much, how much, how much?” in a really nonchalant fashion.

In hindsight, especially the more that I think back, it was a pretty good indication that he had a big hand. I really didn’t think that was the kind of thing that would come out of his mouth if he was weak because it was too relaxed and – apparently – intended to get me to put money into the pot. And that’s exactly what I ended up doing.

After he’d just bet 1,600 – that made 3,650 in the pot – I raised it 4,500 more. This was well over the size of the pot and I figured it was enough to push him off of a naked club draw and gave him less than 2:1 to call. After I made the raise, the pot was almost 10K, and I had about 15K or 16K in front of me. Really calmly, he asked me if I had a Queen. Again, in hindsight, that was another indicator that his hand was pretty strong. After asking that, he took a few minutes and asked me how much I had in front of me – and moved all-in.

I was really shocked to see this, especially this early in the tournament. Of course there were a handful of hands I started to think about him having – Ac-Kc, Ac-Jc, Q-10, Q-Q, pocket 10s, etc. The more I started thinking back about how he’d played in the past, the more I thought that this wasn’t the type of play that he’d make at this juncture. At the same time, Poker After Dark is unique in that it’s a winner-take-all format and you’ve got to take chances.

So I was sitting there staring at a set of 4s for at least four or five minutes (even though they edited it to look like only a minute or so), for what seemed like a lifetime, thinking to myself “I am so beat here.” I can’t explain specifically why it was that I decided that my pocket 4s were no good. I knew that set over set was unlikely and I also knew that if I laid down a set here that it was going to be a question of “what am I going to wait for to get my money in?”

I also thought that in a winner-take-all format, this was a way to double up through the chip leader, send him into sixth place, and put pressure on the blinds for the next four or five rounds. In the end I didn’t love it, but I called. He rolled over 10s and I showed my under-set.

Every player at the table was shocked. They all know me as an announcer and they didn’t think that I was capable of not snap-calling with a set. Of course the only reason that I didn’t was because I started thinking that my set was no good. At the same time, I was compelled to call in that spot. Even though I was sick to my stomach about it, I knew that in that format I couldn’t wait on a hand much better than that. In any case, that sent me to the rail in a most humbling fashion and ended my first Poker After Dark appearance.

How important do you think it is to have an established table image?

I don’t necessarily think that it’s the most important thing to have going for you, but it’s certainly very helpful. When you have a certain image going into tournament, you can exploit it. Switching things up a bit throws your opponents off guard – that’s pretty important.

In general, do you think that one particular image works more effectively than another?

As far as things go, I definitely think that playing looser will help you win more often. A loose image doesn’t have as much to do with your game as it does with what you’re trying to get people to perceive. So even though I’ve got a very, very loose image, I’m really not as loose as people think. I’m very loose pre-flop, but after the flop I’m quite a bit better than they think. That’s where the concept of your image comes into it. You don’t want your image to directly reflect exactly what your game is like.

I guess it also depends on how you play. Regardless of this, it’s important that you’re always aware of how people perceive you. You’re better off going with an image that suits your personality rather than trying to act like something you’re not.

People have seen you play on TV, and a lot of them probably think that they know how you play – how do you deal with that?

It actually works out pretty well because I’m generally aware of what people think of me, so I bluff a lot less than people think I do – and I get paid off for it. I also get people trying to throw crazy bluffs at me when it’s not going to be very effective for them. I definitely think that the image I’ve portrayed on television has helped me in poker.

How could someone best play against an opponent with your table image?

The best way to play against someone like me is to call frequently from position. That’s where I’m going to have the most trouble – it’s going to force me to tighten up pre-flop.

As far as all of this goes, you can’t easily change your image, but you can change the way you play – that’s an important distinction. People are going to believe what they’ve seen or think about my game for years. I can’t change that very quickly, but I can definitely change the way I play and throw people for a little bit of a loop when I want to.

I remember one particular hand that I got into with Gus Hansen at last year’s Aussie Millions. There were 18 people left, so we were pretty deep in the money and playing short-handed. In fact, there were only four people at our table. I started the hand with about 380K and Gus had about 600k, which represented the chip lead at our table. The blinds were 5K/10K with a 5K ante and Gus – being Gus – was raising about 80% of the hands. At this point it was tough, because I wasn’t picking up many cards, so I really had to pick my hands.

In this particular hand, Gus was under the gun and raised to about 27K. I was in the big blind with A-J suited. Looking back, it’s hard to say what I should have done with that kind of stack. I made the decision to call because I was pretty sure that he would make a continuation bet on the flop – represent with a pretty big bet – and then I could check-raise him all in and force him to fold. The only problem here is that Gus doesn’t like to fold if he even thinks that he has anyouts at all, which gives him a chance to hit a worse hand. Anyway, that’s what I decided to do – just flat call.

As I expected, he made a continuation bet of 50K on an 8-7-5 rainbow flop. I thought about it for a while and, like I said, he doesn’t like to bluff and these cards were definitely in his range. Ultimately, I had to go with a physical read. I didn’t think that he looked very strong, so I made the decision to move all-in for about 300K more.

My thought was that he might fold a middle pair with an Ace or something like that; something that did have me beat, but that wasn’t that strong. He sat there and thought forever, and the more he thought, the more nervous I got. After about five or six minutes, he decided to call.

Immediately, he looked at me and said “I have nothing.” I thought “oh my God – did I just get called with A-K?!” I told him that I didn’t have anything either, and we turned them over. He had A-6, giving him an open-ender.

Honestly, I was happy to see that. If he was going to call, that’s about the best hand that I could hope for, because it was almost a coin-flip at that point – I was just a little bit ahead. The turn brought a 6 and gave him a pair, but before I could really think about it the river was a 4 and we chopped the pot.

It was a nerve-wracking hand. When he said “I call,” I thought that I was dead. When I pushed on the flop, I really thought that I had enough to get him to fold because 300K represented a good portion of his stack. And up until then, he was doing just fine running over the table. I don’t know if I would’ve done anything different looking back at it, but it was very, very nerve-wracking hand. I guess that if there is a moral to this story, it’s “don’t bluff Gus.”

This is easy to understand when you take into account images – sometimes literally – of an unnamed professional allegedly trying to “cop a feel” or meandering off to the VooDoo Lounge for drinks with their respective bloggers. From a more grainy, visceral perspective, a tranq dart hitting the jugular as a card hit on the river and a poor, broke, Indiana boy hitting the bar after being busted from the table definitely got more than a few grins…and grimaces.                                 

In any case, choosing the winning entry wasn’t easy. But after group deliberation and a bit of swearing, it has been decided that TuscaloosaJohn will be our Blogger on the Rail for the 2008 WSOP Main Event. He’ll be receiving roundtrip airfare to Las Vegas, accommodation for July 9^th to the 16^th, $1000 in spending money, and have his exploits chronicled and immortalized* on Poker From The Rail. Well done and congratulations.

Make sure to check back and keep up with his exploits when he hits Sin City this July – the beast of a man with silver hair and glasses might or might not have his back this time around.  

There’s always good side-action running during the WSOP, and there’s one hand that I remember in particular. Before the 2005 Main Event, I was playing in a really juicy 50/100 No-Limit Hold ‘em game. The table was pretty deep and, if I recall, I was sitting there with somewhere between 50 and 60K.

I’m a pretty aggressive player, and the guy that I ended up against in this particular hand was extremely aggressive. I was on the button, and when the cards came I caught K-Q. Somebody else had called, so I just went ahead and smooth-called. The guy in the big blind – the opponent who I got into action with – just checked.

The flop showed K-Q-4, two of them hearts; my King and Queen were black. When it got checked around to me, I bet about 1K. Like I said, my opponent was very aggressive, and he immediately raised it to 5K and the other guy folded. Obviously, I put him on a big hand. The read that I had on him pretty much told me that if I raised, he was going all the way with his hand and would make a big shove. I figured that if he did that, I’d be in a tough spot. He had me covered, and I didn’t want to get into a position where I had my whole stack called off. Holding the top two pair, I made the decision to play a smaller pot, so I just called and waited to see what would happen.

The turn was the Qh. Of course, this was the perfect card for me since it gave me a house and also put the flush out there in case he was on a flush draw.

He led out with about 8K. The way he and I had been playing, I put in a raise knowing that he would go after it if he had the nut-flush or some other strong hand. With that in mind, I made it about 24K to go. He thought about it for a while before pushing and putting me all in. When we flipped them over, it turned out that he was holding pocket fours for a set – obviously a very hard hand for him to get away from. As it turned out, the river didn’t matter.

So it all worked out very well for me. At the time it was the biggest pot that I had played – somewhere around 110-115K. For me, that was a really memorable hand.

Even if you are not a professional poker player, the game can take up a lot of your time. Poker players need to be able to balance their poker time with their home life.

A lot of people ask me about balancing time with family and playing poker when their spouse doesn’t have any interest in the game. People have to understand their spouse’s interests and hobbies and should try to be supportive, even if that is a matter of simply trying to understand the concept of the game. In some cases, because they don’t know the strategies involved in playing poker, they are worried that their spouse is “just gambling.” When they take time to learn the game, there is a better understanding of the skill involved in playing poker. It comes down to being supportive of whatever your spouse’s interests are.

There is a time commitment involved in playing poker and reconciling that time with family needs comes down to balance. You need to learn to spread your time equitably, leaving time for friends, family and other hobbies. 

For me, the priority is my kids. They’re the first thing on my mind when I schedule anything. My husband and I try to put them first and our careers second. We balance family and career as well as we can. If a scheduling conflict arises, Chip will get priority over me. I will step back and take care of the kids. I don’t have a problem with that because, since I’ve had children, they have been the priority and my career has come second.

It wasn’t a difficult change at all. If I’ve had a bad session playing poker and I go home and see my kids, it puts things in perspective on how I see life and what’s most important. If you have a bad day at work and come home to smiling kids who are happy to see you, it’s the most rewarding experience. The bad beats don’t matter any more.

You want to be able to enjoy your time at the poker tables. You can only really do that when you know you are maintaining a good balance between playing time and family time.

The crux issue of the folks engaged in this type of debate was a fear that one entity ultimately had the power to take action of any nature against a player who acted out of accordance with Tournament Rules. They can dictate what can and can’t be done?! That’s ridiculous – it will ruin everything.

First of all, settle down, junior. Specific actions that I’ll loosely define as uncool have been identified as not acceptable at the table: not going ballistic at your competitors or dealer, cheating, breaking any laws, or behaving like a jackass. Of course that’s just my paraphrase, but it seems simple enough to me and I think that you get the point.

When you look at it purely from a media coverage standpoint, it’s not a wonder that the powers that be have clearly stated that all calls regarding player conduct – specifically abusive language or behavior – have been addressed as “at their discretion.” Coverage of someone acting way out of line is only going to generate debate about the legitimacy and professional efficacy of poker in general.

Looking further into it, there are a couple of lines that cover situations that might arise outside of the realm of expected chicanery:

“Where a situation arises that is not covered by these rules,” the folks in charge “shall have the sole authority to render a judgment, including the imposition of a penalty, in accordance with the best interests of the Tournament and the maintenance of its integrity and public confidence.”

As sure as there are thousands of players involved in the various events, there is an exponential number of “unique” situations that might arise and require some form of ruling. There’s no way to predict what someone might do – who would have thought that Mr. Peanut would get taken out by The Mouth?! All joking aside, if there isn’t language like this in place, it leaves the door open for all manner of controversy. While I’m no fan of most vestiges of authority, you can’t have total madness at the WSOP and expect it to maintain professional credibility.

At the end of the day, when someone agrees to pony up and play in an event, they explicitly agree to abide by the set rules – there’s not a lot of room for debate. For those of us keeping watch from the rail, keep in mind the repetition of the phrase “best interest of the game” as well as the words “fairness” and “integrity.” With all of the media coverage that the WSOP will receive – from our mighty blog to ESPN – the WSOP and poker in general need to be portrayed as a professional endeavor. The last thing that anyone needs is for the masses to be presented with a scene fit for coverage by Jerry Springer or Geraldo. 

Nothing is going to be taken away or lost as a result of the regulations regarding player conduct. We’re still going to have a field of players ranging from the greatest professionals to the most grabasstic amateurs. There will still be table talk, heated battles, mad prop bets, and everything else that makes the WSOP what it is. Whether entrants are of the chip and a chair or chip and a prayer variety, we will see and read about some good poker.

Have a fine weekend.

The Captain

To start with, I hope that I don’t pick up a hand right away when I sit down at a table – I like to watch my opponents before I play against them so I can make better decisions. Some things that I’m watching for are really easy, like the way they’re dressed and the way they’re sitting at the table. It says a lot about how they play. That’s basically the first thing that I do – look to see how my opponents are dressed, how they’re sitting at the table, and maybe how they stack their chips. They’re already giving me information on how they’re going to play.

Let me get into how an opponent’s dressed a little more: people tend to dress how they play. A lot of times, when they’re sloppily dressed, they play kind of sloppy, and when they’re conservatively dressed, they play more conservatively.

Let’s say a guy sits down in a suit and tie: I’m generally going to view him as being more conservative. While it’s likely that I’m going to be able to steal more pots from this guy, I’ll stay away from him when he’s raising in earlier positions because I feel that he’s most likely going to have a hand there. As a rule, they’re going to play tighter than the person who’s dressed pretty sloppy.

When I’m talking about sloppy, I’m talking about the player with a collared shirt that’s unbuttoned and one collar is up. They’re wearing a baseball cap, kind of unshaven, and maybe the baseball cap’s not on straight – maybe even a big belly. (Sorry – I hate to stereotype.) There’s always one button that’s not buttoned, things like that. They usually play sloppy and are into more pots. I find that they’re more recreational and there to have fun – not to try hard and win money. They’re not taking it as seriously as, let’s say, a guy in his jeans and t-shirt. I think the guy in his jeans and t-shirt takes it more seriously. I think that maybe the guy in his suit is there for entertainment too, but he doesn’t want to lose his money.

That’s another view that I have – a different take on dress – the player in a t-shirt and a pair of jeans: a pair of jeans and a t-shirt means a solid player. They’re usually kids that are coming from the Internet. When they’re playing in a tournament or a side game, they’re going to try. They tend to take things seriously.

Keeping all of this in mind, I try not to ever let myself fall into a trap. You always have to be objective about how somebody might play. A guy might look sloppy or like he’s completely ruffled – with his shirt hanging out of his pants or something – but he might actually play conservatively. You just can’t let yourself fall into that trap. Even though someone looks or dresses a certain way, you have to stay objective. Keeping this in mind and staying on guard, looking at how someone is dressed can give you valuable information about how they play.

I think that the game that is most translatable to poker is backgammon. It’s a great game of skill with a healthy dose of luck. It’s a complicated game because you’re dealing with a lot – you have to be thinking with every single move that you make. You’re constantly trying to minimize the effectiveness of the most likely rolls of your opponent and trying to maximize the number of possible good rolls for your next turn. You’re distributing your checkers in a way that makes them flow nicely over a wide range of numbers while trying to minimize the good numbers for your opponent.

In poker, you’re trying to do that all of the time. You’re tying to maximize the chances that the chips you put in the pot are going to come back to you with a nice, healthy return. You’re also thinking about a wide range of potential cards - tying to minimize losses when the cards go poorly for you and maximize your chance of winning when they’re in your favor.

Chess is also a great game – you develop discipline and good critical thinking skills, but there’s been a poor crossover to poker, particularly with players at the highest levels. Although chess requires a great deal of skill to master, it’s a game that rewards your skill too consistently – at least compared to poker. It’s one of the reasons people don’t really gamble at chess.

It’s certainly not a lesser game, but when you reach the level of grand master in chess, one of the skills that you really haven’t learned is how to deal with the luck. I think that someone who has reached that level has a hard time making the transition to a game where they might play great for an evening and then lose. It’s hard to deal with emotionally. On the other hand, backgammon players do this all of the time. And you see that a lot of the world’s best backgammon players have successfully made the crossover. Guys like Gus Hansen and Erik Seidel, amongst others. I can’t give you a list for chess.

Something else that’s developed with or through other games that’s relevant is competitiveness – the desire to beat your opponent. We’re hardwired to compete in this world. In the real world 10,000 years ago, this competition was for food or maybe a territorial skirmish where, in both cases, life was on the line. The beauty of games is that you get to satisfy these urges and no one dies at the end (usually). It’s the idea of engaging in competition, and the fact that there is honor in winning. 

I was a pretty good backgammon player, and I think that this competitive drive is what helped me. As my skill developed, I was able to be around world-class players. There was always a certain mentality, a certain approach that they took; it was an uncompromisingly self-critical ability that’s common amongst those who had become world-class. It was this mentality that I applied to poker. I really hadn’t been exposed to people like that before and, if I hadn’t, I don’t think I could have developed the critical ability necessary to become a great poker player. I believe that’s important for sure.

It might not be so much about the games themselves as much as being exposed to the players who have developed that ability. If you’re serious about poker, choose your friends wisely. Find accomplished people that are really excited about the game. That’s what will make you a better player.

What are your thoughts on physically getting in shape as related to making you a better poker player?

I read or hear about so many people working out so that they can play better poker. I think that’s a load of BS. Are they trying to brag about the fact that they work out? I don’t know – I really just don’t get it. I think that if I’m going to try to “train” myself to sit still at a poker table for eight straight hours, the last thing that I’m going to be doing is running around a track. I think that better training would be lying in bed and watching TV.

Speaking of TV, what’s your take on poker television as it relates to playing or improving your game?

You don’t learn how to play poker by watching poker shows. In fact, you probably learn how not to play poker by watching poker shows. It’s entertainment. The only way you learn to play poker is by actually sitting at the table. By watching these shows, you can develop some imagination and it might teach you a few things. But at best, it teaches you as many bad things as it does good. That’s primarily because you have to know the context for the moves that a given player is making in a given situation. TV just doesn’t do that. You only learn and improve by playing a lot of cards and a lot of hands.

Do you think that there is such a thing as a “poker personality” that might give someone an edge as a player?

(Laughing)There are a lot of poker personalities. Actually, I think that someone who has a “poker personality” is someone who can accept and deal with failure and rebound from it. No matter how good you are, you’re going to have times when you fail. How you deal with that is directly related to how well you will do in the future. You just have to be prepared to deal with it. Strangely enough, I see people out there who aren’t prepared to deal with failure. Some poker players who aren’t able to deal with it still do okay, but I think that it’s difficult for them. Those people are tortured and it’s horrible for them emotionally. They’re much more likely to go on tilt and much more likely to be unstable and play badly.

What do you do to avoid going on tilt?

I don’t have to avoid it. Let me put it this way: I have no advantage going on tilt, so why would I do it? That’s my approach. I don’t see what advantage it gives me so I just don’t do it. Honestly, I really don’t understand why people do. Maybe, once in a blue moon, I might think “wow, that’s really horrible – I feel terrible about that.” But it doesn’t mean that I’m going to play the next hand badly. When that next hand comes along, I’m going to play it the best that I possibly can. I guess that I’m the wrong guy to ask – you’d have to ask someone who does go on tilt to get a better picture of it. It’s just something I don’t understand. Taking a beat without tilting is simple: you just don’t do it.

What do you think about playing against, or more to the point, taking money from people on tilt?

I really don’t like taking money from people on tilt. I like taking money from the best players in the world. First of all, there’s a different mindset for some players: they like taking money from anyone. I think that when you’re playing live action it’s kind of distasteful to figure out how to beat a guy and then sit there taking money from him hour after hour. I just don’t enjoy that. On the other hand, if they enter a tournament, then they’ve put their money in and it’s no longer theirs. In that case, I’m playing to win.

I think that it (the delay) will be very cool. It will vastly increase interest across all media for the final event. Because we’ll have these nine players that people know are going to be playing for millions of dollars in a few months, it’s not over. It’ll be shown on ESPN as a news event, not something that happened three months ago. Think about the buzz that the mainstream media will generate: now all of a sudden you’ve got these nine people thinking about and dealing with the pressure of what’s coming up. We’re a reality culture – we want to get to know interesting people. Nine people who might win however many millions of dollars it turns out to be for first place are a lot more interesting to talk to than one person who won three months ago.

As far as taking an extended break goes, it is what it is. If those are the rules, everyone’s going to agree to them before they sit down to play. Everyone will know that if they are good enough or lucky enough to make it to the final table that they’re going to take a three-month break. Maybe they can work on their game, maybe they can get some coaching, or maybe they can even get some mainstream coverage or even professional sponsorship. Certainly, I think that the player that finishes fifth after this three-month delay will be much better known than the player who finished in fifth place last year. I’m not saying that it’s important to every player to become famous, but I think that creating famous poker players is good for the game.

Again, it’s a good thing overall. And there’s precedent for it. I played in the Ladbrokes Poker Million VI tournament where we played our heats early for taped TV in August of last summer. This built up to up to the Championship Grand Final that we didn’t play until December.

Of course things will turn out differently, but that’s how it goes in all of life. Your drive home might turn out differently if you leave an hour later. It just is what it is. It’s a three-month delay that’s going to create a lot of buzz and positive exposure for the game of poker – which is good for the game – and it will change the final table. How it will change it, we have no idea. But it’s all completely fair and I think it will be good.

Instead I found an entertaining narrative of Gus’ experience from start to victory at the 2007 Aussie Millions. Taken directly from recordings that he consistently made throughout the tournament, Gus methodically walks through what was happening at the table and in his head every step of the way. Rather than the diary of a madman at the table, Revealed gives the reader clear and direct insight to Gus’ critical thought process from start to finish.

Gus explains his decisions employing the type and depth of theory that you’d expect from a player of his caliber, but his delivery is more practical application than treatise on game theory. More to the point, its how it was – in fact is – for one player rather than a “how to play” instructional. Supported by liberal commentary and subtle humor, it’s a good read if you’ve ever wondered how Gus makes some of the plays that he does.

Examples of this abound, but his philosophy on avoiding certain “ugly scenarios” illustrates the tone of his book. As Gus details the hand where he busted Patrick Antonius, his “toughest opponent” who “easily made his top-ten list of pretty, Finnish poker-players,” he methodically examines his options following the turn:

“…and No. 3: The all-in bet: 1.7 million! Pulling the trigger is often my favorite play. No more nonsense, no more worrying about disgusting river bets, just the plain and simple ‘Do you wanna dance?’ puts on the ultimate pressure.”

Reckless out of context, his discussion identifies exactly how he arrived at this decision and how it played out – and sent Patrick to the rail. Later, Gus offers a final opinion on “the all-in play,” stating that even if it’s a mistake, “at least it’s gonna be the last one you make.”

As books go, Every Hand Revealed is a poker book written by a professional poker player specifically for poker players. Gus gives us his experience Down Under one hand at a time to illustrate exactly how he operates. In his own words, it’s a visit to his world.

Things happen at a very rapid pace as a result of technology. This is true with life in general, and in poker. Exposure and experience can be gained very quickly more so now than ever. As a result, it’s easy to lose perspective – lose touch with what’s important. Arguably, anytime something happens very quickly, there’s danger of something being lost even though some things can be gained.

Especially with the rise of the Internet, there’s so much out there that people don’t feel the need to discriminate between what matters and what doesn’t. With this, there are a lot of people that are missing out on the details or finer points in life. They become focused on one thing – not necessarily just poker – and then miss out on everything else going on around them. They develop tunnel vision and miss out on other things that are equally valuable.

Of course there are some people who are able to be balanced and integrated, and still totally focused on one particular thing. But for most people - the majority - and I count myself among those, we need a range of activities or at least a range of ways of doing things to remain reasonably sane. In any case, as an individual, you’ve got to step back and figure this out.

One problem is trying to work out what’s missing in life – and in poker as well – is the fact that it’s not there to begin with. It’s a real paradox trying to work this out. But when something is missing, it creates a couple of problems. With so much choice, it becomes overwhelming – there is so much input that it becomes very difficult to stay focused on what is there, let alone what’s missing.

The thing to do is to work out what you need to make yourself sound – whole and sane – and to move forward. I attempt to apply this to poker – and I do say attempt. With poker, the biggest obstacle to overcome in this context is losing your “beginner’s mind” after you’ve been playing for awhile.

Think about when you started playing how incredibly exciting it was: you had these cards, these chips, these other people at the table – and you wanted to get their chips. Think about how amazing it was when you were making these decisions for the first time: if I bet this or if I check here… Again, it’s all incredibly exciting. This is why most of us continue playing cards – it’s a riveting experience.

But after time goes by, you tend to forget that. And if you get unlucky, it’s very difficult to look at it and realize that maybe you didn’t do anything wrong. Instead, you end up adjusting your game and becoming less imaginative/less creative. It’s like getting beat holding a pair of Kings - that’s happened to me. Five major tournaments in a row, I got done with Kings. It’s easy to lose perspective when these things happen and not look at what you need to do to get on with it.