| |
2006 WPT World Championship: Final Table
Published: 2006-04-25
 by Paul McGuire
The Tower Room at the Bellagio was the locale for the final table of the WPT World Championship where dozens of media reps and hundreds of die hard poker fans showed up to soak in the largest event in the history of the World Poker Tour. Six players survived a field of 606 who all bought in for $25,000. After six days of intense poker, they were ready to play for the record $3.7 million first place prize.
The seven day event started last Tuesday as some of the top pros in poker showed up to the Fontana Room overlooking the Bellagio fountains, hoping to cash record prize pool worth over $14 million. James Van Alstyne ended Day 5 and Day 6 as the chipleader. He gave it up a few times on both days, but managed to survive the day at the top in chips. Men the Master started Day 6 as one of the short stacks and hung on to make it to the final table. England's Roland de Wolfe won the WPT Paris event at the Aviation Club in July. He's seeking his second victory on the WPT this year.
Here's the final table seat assignments with chipcounts:
Seat 1: Joe Bartholdi (Dan Diego, CA) $7.135M
Seat 2: Roland de Wolfe (London, England) $1.86M
Seat 3: Men "The Master" Nguyen (Bell Gardens, CA) $1.490M
Seat 4: Claus Nielsen (Aarhaus, Denmark) $5.875M
Seat 5: James Van Alstyne (Las Vegas, NV) $8.07M
Seat 6: Davidson Matthew (Toronto, Canada) $5.765M
James Van Alstyne won the first pot, but lost the first monster pot of the day to Joe Bartholdi. It was worth over $7.2 million. On a board of 4-4-3-A-6, Van Alstyne mucked after Bartholdi showed 8-8. After he won that pot Bartholdi took over the chipleader with over $9M in chips, while Van Alstyne slipped to $5M.
Men the Master moved all in and uttered his trade mark phrase, "All you can eat, Baby!" He didn't get any action and only picked up the blinds and antes. Roland de Wolf's tight image hurt him early. He did not get any action with his pocket Kings.
On the 15th hand of the final table, Men the Master and Claus Nielsen were both all in preflop. Claus had Q-Q and Men's pocket tens were dominated. Men's hand did not improve and he finished in 6th place winning $292,915.
Play slowed down after Men the Master busted, but at the first break Joe Bartholdi built his stack to over $10M. Roland de Wolfe was the shortstack with $1.845M. James Van Alstyne slipped to 4th in chips. He came over to talk and said, "I'm playing the worst poker of my life."
James Van Alstyne would lose the majority of his stack when he made a move with K-6 and pushed all in. He was called by Roland de Wolf's K-K, which held up. Van Alstyne would be eliminated when he moved all in with A-K a few hands later. Joe Bartholdi called and flopped a 10 with J-10. Van Alstyne busted out in 5th place and picked up $439,375. Joe Bartholdi increased his stack to $11.3M.
Roland de Wolfe went on a rush and built up his stack until he tangled with Claus Nielsen. Roland de Wolf had A-10 and doubled up Nielsen's 9-9. Claus Nielsen jumped to $6M in chips but he wouldn't last too much longer. Joe Bartholdi rivered a flush with Kd-9d against Nielsen who caught a Queen on the river with A-Q. He finished in 4th place and won $659,120.
With three players remaining, Joe Bartholdi held a 3 to 1 chip lead over both players. He had $18M to their $6M each.
Roland de Wolfe had moved all in with 6-6 and was called by Joe Bartholdi who held Q-Q Bartholdi flopped a set but de Wolf picked up a gutshot on the turn. The river didn't help de Wolfe and he was eliminated in 3rd place. He won $1,025,205, which is not bad for third place. Joe Bartholdi increased his stack to over $21 million. Davidson Matthew had about $8 million in chips.
Matthew picked up his aggression. He reraised all in twice against Bartholdi who folded on both instances. At one point after he won an $8 million pot, Matthew took over the chiplead. He would not have it for too long.
On the 42nd hand of heads-up play, a winner was decided. Joe Bartholdi made a tremendous call against Davidson Matthew. On a board with of Ah-9c-8h, Davidson Matthew re-raised all in with 10h-4h and a flush draw. Joe Bartholdi thought about calling for a few minutes and even stood up to think. He decided to call with 9-5o. Bartholdi had middle pair and his read was right. Matthew was just on a flush draw. The turn and river did not improve Matthew's hand and he ended up finishing in second place.
Davidson Matthew is a small business owner from Toronto, Canada won his seat in the WPT World Championship after he won a $25 online satellite. He turned $25 into $1,903,950. For first place, Joe Bartholdi picked up $3,760,165 and he was awarded a free seat in the 2007 WPT Championship. Congrats to Joe for an amazing victory. He left the Bellagio $3.7 million richer. History was made at the Bellagio once again as the fourth season of the WPT concluded.
Here's the payouts for the final table:
1 $3,760,165
2 $1,903,950
3 $1,025,205
4 $659,120
5 $439,375
6 $292,915
Also, Congrats to Gavin Smith for winning the WPT Player of the Year. Well deserved!
| |
Bluffing and Statistics
Published: 2006-04-28
 by George Epstein
Remember that there are two ways to win a pot: Either (1) you have the best hand at the showdown; or (2) your opponents think you have the best hand and fold before the showdown. In the September 19, 2005 issue of Poker Player, I described the "Esther Bluff."; I have been keeping statistics to evaluate its effectiveness. Here are my findings. . .
What about bluffing?: Bluffing is a poker strategy often used to force out an opponent who may actually hold a better hand than you. Most often we do it on the river; sometimes on the turn and then carry it through to the river. (When I bluff on the turn, it's usually a semi-bluff: I have lots of outs that could lead to the best hand. Then, on the river, I may pull the Esther Bluff if I didn't connect and the situation seems right to continue the bluff.)
Basically, you bet or raise - or even reraise - to induce your opponents to toss their hands into the muck. A good time to pull the Esther Bluff is when you have been drawing for a straight or flush, made the bet because the poker odds were favorable, but did not connect. You are up against one, perhaps two opponents, and they show weakness; the situation lends itself to attempt the Esther Bluff. Bet out if you are first to declare; and, by all means, bet if they all check to you. It's even more effective if you have been winning; now your opponents respect and fear you. . .
There are poker experts who will tell you that you can't bluff in lower limit games. I believe that is true for stakes of $2-$4 and lower; on the opposite extreme, we all know that bluffing is a key strategy in no-limit games. (Have you watched the action on the TV poker tournaments?) The higher the stakes, the more likely a good bluff is effective. But, if you do it well and against the "right"; opponents in the "right"; situations, it can work for you even in low-stake games.
The Esther Bluff is really a way to bluff: Bet with confidence; you "know"; you have the best hand! A key factor to its success is the kind of opponent you want to bluff out. Timid and tight players are your best targets. It's less likely to work against aggressive and deceptive opponents. You can never be sure against loose players. Generally, you can't bluff out a player who is almost all-in; for a few more chips, he is bound to call - just in case. . . Nor should you bluff too often; then your opponents will be suspicious and more likely challenge you when you try. What is too often?
That depends on the game, the situation, the players. . . On the average, I believe no more than one bluff an hour seems about right. (What do you think?) Certainly, the situation and your betting position should be considered.
If you have been betting or raising all along, then your opponents are more likely to fold when you pull the Esther Bluff on the river. It's foolhardy to try it against an opponent who has been betting consistently or raising; he must have a hand of some value and is not likely to give it up without a fight. It's easier to bluff an opponent out of a small pot; but the Esther Bluff has worked for me in large pots too. It's best to pull the bluff if you sense weakness in your opponents; that's easier to do when you are in a late position. My statistics on using the "Esther Bluff";: Admittedly, mine is a limited sampling; but the general observations are worth noting.
In 15 sessions of $4-$8, my Esther Bluff was effective in 33 out of 55 attempts. That's a 60 percent success rate. It succeeded 50 percent more often than it failed. Fantastic! As a rule, you will break even if your bluffs succeed one out of five or six times. That's because you win the whole pot -- containing lots of bets -- for the price of one or two big bets. That's a great investment! (Note: In 11 sessions of $3-$6, my Esther Bluffs worked for me in almost 58 percent of the attempts.)
Sure, in some of these hands I may, in fact, have held a better hand than my opponents; I'll never know. Even if we assume that was the case in half of these "successful"; bluffs (that's reasonable), I am still way ahead with about 43 percent of my "Esther Bluffs"; being effective. Usually, the bluffs that didn't "work"; were when the opponent actually had a hand worth calling with. On a few rare occasions, he raised me with a strong hand; I should have been more cautious in those cases.
So, all in all, the Esther Bluff is a great strategy even in games with limits as low as $3-$6, albeit higher limits certainly would be preferable. . . . So readers, what's YOUR opinion?
| | |
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska