| |
UKPN Feature: Derek Baxter
Published: 2005-12-30
 Tony Bromham
In a recent interview with Inside Edge magazine, David "Devilfish" Ulliott was asked to name some examples of non-USA poker players that he admired for their all-round game. He cited Marcel Luske, Ram Vaswani and Derek Baxter.
With so much television exposure of poker, some names appear frequently on our screens. Two of these are undoubtedly the singing Dutchman Luske and Crazy Horse Vaswani. However, not everyone who relies on TV coverage knows the name or the face of Derek Baxter. If one of the genuine great all-rounders like The Devilfish is impressed by Derek Baxter, we probably should be too.
Derek Baxter can comfortably be termed a poker veteran. Now in his 60's, he has played poker for many a long year and is clearly good at it having taken 4th prize of over $124,000 in the $10,000 buy-in Pot Limit Omaha event at the Rio, Las Vegas during the World Series of Poker 2005. At the final table, he finished above luminaries such as Erik Seidel, Todd Brunson and Simon Trumper before finally falling to eventual winner, Rafi Amit.
Amongst his other achievements in recent years on the tournament circuit are 7th in the $25,000 buy-in No Limit Texas Hold'em WPT Championship at the Bellagio, earning over $66.000, and 2nd place at the £1,000 buy-in No Limit Texas Hold'em British Open, earning £37,100 or nearly $60,000. Regular tournament cashes have come Baxter's way, both before and after these main achievements, most recently finishing 9th in the Main Event of The Christmas Cracker at the Rendezvous Casino, Brighton.
Of course, it is sometimes forgotten that tournament players are frequently active cash game players and there are those with the opinion that Derek Baxter is one of the best cash players in the UK. When the likes of The Devilfish are happy to promote Baxter's name in public, it is reasonable to believe that claim and fear him should you ever be sat at the same table playing for real stakes.
The Hendon Mob database makes the simple statement that Derek Baxter is a "top reader" of his opponents and "famous for making great laydowns" - attributes that have gone a long way to making him a successful cash player over several decades and which have enabled him to benefit from the increase in big-money tournaments.
After over 40 years pummelling the poker tables, it is a fair bet that 2006 will see more of the same.
| |
Stakes soar with guests on Flynt's jet
Published: 2005-12-30
 ON THE WAY HOME from Monte Carlo, I paid for a one-way seat on Larry Flynt's private jet. With one quick stop scheduled in Bangor, Maine, for fuel and pizza, it was to be pretty much a 12-hour straight shot to Las Vegas. Phil Ivey, Gus Hansen, Mike "The Mouth" Matusow and I were scheduled to play $400- to $800-limit poker all the way home. What's not to like? We were flying high, playing high-stakes poker (so the time would pass more quickly), and perhaps I could win $50,000 on the flight home.
Even before we were off the ground, the cards were in the air. Because Ivey had won two tournaments in Monte Carlo over the previous 2 nights (for $1.6 million) and wasn't used to playing poker at such modest stakes (he's used to limits of at least $2,000 to $4,000), I thought he might be off his game a bit. He wasn't. Hansen wasn't used to playing this limit either, so he figured to be playing way too loose, which he did, but he barbecued Matusow and me anyway.
In fact, Hansen made the game much bigger with his super-loose and super-aggressive style, and, after 7 hours, Matusow and I were losing more than $75,000 each. To have two players losing more than $75,000 apiece at any point during a $400 to $800 game would normally be unthinkable. But you have to factor in the "Gus effect." When I hit roughly $80,000 in losses, my original first-class ticket home, with a bed, looked pretty attractive.
Matusow played tough almost the whole way home. He had only a couple of 5-minute lapses. I thought I was playing well,
also, but you'll have to ask Ivey and Hansen. Matusow would tell you I played badly (he always says people played poorly in
retrospect). Nonetheless, he wound up losing $96,000, and I was lucky enough to cut my own losses to $18,000 or so.
We were playing a four-game "mixed-game" rotation, including Omaha Eight or Better, Hold 'Em, Deuce to Seven Triple Draw, and Chinese Poker. During the course of play, Ivey played one Hold 'Em hand particularly well. He raised it up with A-10, and I called in the big blind with K-10. The flop was 10-6-5, and I bet out for $400. Ivey raised to $800, I reraised to $1,200, and Ivey called. I then bet $800 "in the dark" - before seeing what the next card was. When a 7 hit on fourth street, Ivey called me. Now I waited to see the last card - I didn't want to bet out in the dark into a potential four-card straight board like 10-6-5-7-8. But it was a jack. I bet out $800, and Ivey raised it to $1,600. I called, and Ivey took down a nice pot.
The hand was played about the way it should have been. I was unlucky to have the K-10 side of the hand, of course, but Ivey's raise on the end was a
superstar raise, especially if he was willing to fold his hand for a reraise from me. In fact, the jack on the end froze me from reraising if I happened to have a different two pair, since it would have been easy for me to put him on J-10. So he cannot get reraised unless I was superpowerful, in which case he would presumably have folded his hand. And I can call him if I have a 10 with any kicker, which was likely in a
four-handed game, especially with me in the big blind.
Next time, I will ride the whole way in the jet, but I won't underestimate Mr. Ivey!
Betting "in the dark" means:
a) betting without seeing what the next card is;
b) betting when the lights are out;
c) betting while wearing all black (like me!);
d) all of the above.
Answer: a.
| | |
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska