A High Roller in the Family

Had a couple of people draw my attention to an article in The New York Times Magazine from over the weekend written by PokerStars’ Team Online member Isaac Haxton’s father, Brooks Haxton, titled “Playing the Cards.” It’s an interesting article, kind of pointing out a familiar lesson regarding poker in a different way.

The piece begins with Haxton telling the story of he and his wife discovering just a year ago that Isaac was playing for hundreds of thousands of dollars online. We don’t get the full context and I think can probably assume the parents knew all about Isaac’s profession and that he played for significant sums, but it sounds like they hadn’t known before that point that he was playing for quite so much.

In any case, Haxton immediately relates the circumstance of his son’s tolerance for mega-swings and high-stakes risk and reward to a very difficult decision he and his wife had to make regarding Isaac’s health shortly after his birth. I won’t rehearse all of the details, but it was literally a life-or-death situation, and while Isaac survived in good health, the parents came away having learned something important about risk-taking, “play[ing] the cards as they were dealt,” and also getting lucky.

This experience in turn appears to help Haxton understand both his son’s special skill set and what it means to face risk and make decisions logically and under pressure. It’s an interesting twist on a somewhat familiar idea that poker can teach us about decision-making away from the tables -- in this case, it was a non-poker experience that appears to help the elder Haxton understand poker (and poker players).

I’d seen the piece even before people drew my attention to it in part because Isaac had tweeted about it while also letting his followers know that his dad has written a memoir that appears as though it is concentrated largely on his son’s poker playing. The book is called Fading Hearts on the River: A Life in High-Stakes Poker and is due out next month.

Isaac is a thoughtful guy -- and great, of course, in the commentary booth, as we heard him today on the EPTLive stream from the Grand Final. The profile done by Ryan Firpo and the 918 Films crew is a good one (that is a still from it up top), and adds further to our understanding of why he such a talent at the tables. (It also includes that awesome reraise-shove on the river with 3-high from the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure from way back in 2007 when we were all first introduced to Haxton, then looking like Joey Ramone.)

His dad seems pretty thoughtful, too, making me look forward to reading his book once it hits the shelves. And perhaps by doing so learning still more about poker and poker players.

By the way, that photo at the bottom (click to enlarge), is of Haxton checking the payouts at the final table of Event No. 2 of the 2009 World Series of Poker, the $40,000 “40th Annual” No-Limit Hold’em event in which he’d eventually finish runner-up to Vitaly Lunkin. I believe B.J. Nemeth was the one who snapped it (perhaps he remembers).

Travel Report: WPT Alpha8 Florida, Day 2 -- Florida Finale

The second and last day of the $100,000 buy-in World Poker Tour Alpha8 Florida event played out in relatively rapid fashion, with play starting a little after noon yesterday and wrapping up around 11 p.m. or thereabouts. Steven Silverman ended up winning the sucker, outlasting current WSOP Main Event chip leader J.C. Tran to take the title after a brief heads-up battle.

That up above is a shot Joe Giron took yesterday for the WPT from up in the bleachers looking down on the playing area I was describing before. Kind of an uncanny-looking scene from that vantage point.

Josh and I arrived and set up late morning, then mostly were behind the laptops entering hands, our day broken up a couple of times by breaks. One came early on after Bill Perkins busted in ninth, at which point the crew took some time setting up to shoot the official eight-handed final table. Then another short dinner break came later after start-of-day leader Matt Glantz busted in fourth for a “min-cash” of $243,180.

During that first break Josh and I took a walk around the Seminole Hard Rock property, taking a look at the modest water fountain show play out (kind of a mini-version of the Bellagio’s) while noting the small lizards positioned in the greenery around the water’s perimeter. With temps in the 80s it’s definitely a pleasant time to be in south Florida, and I can imagine a trip to the Seminole might offer a lot to entertain visitors with its sights, shopping, shows, and of course, the casino.

Following that second break for dinner Jeff Gross went out in third for a $364,770 cash. Silverman led Tran slightly to start heads-up play, and Tran even grabbed an early lead before Silverman earned a big double-up and then finished off Tran shortly thereafter. Tran took away $526,890 while “Zugwat” won $891,660. (Hell of a year playing out for Tran, eh?)

Silverman also won a huge trophy shaped as the number “8” -- not sure what it is made of, but it looks silver, man.

None of the four cashers had re-entered the event, and none of the three players who bought in twice cashed. Isaac Haxton was one of those who’d fired twice, and he unfortunately finished fifth after leading with five to go then experiencing some misfortune to fall on the bubble.

As I was saying earlier in the week, more Alpha8 events are certainly in the works, so it’ll be curious to see how this “super high roller” tour fares and whether it ultimately manages to attract the participation of those who regularly play the six-figure events elsewhere during the year.

After all was done and the final interviews were shot, the whole “WPT family” assembled around the table for a final group picture and before too long we were packing up and heading back to the hotel. Got a reasonable night’s sleep, then this morning was able to meet an old student of mine who lives in the area and had contacted me not long ago. Kind of a highlight of the trip to reunite and catch up with him.

Overall it was a fun few days and I got a kick out of getting to know some of the WPT folks and seeing how a yet another group -- an especially well-seasoned and talented one in this case -- puts on and covers a poker tourney.

Looking forward now to getting home and resting up today and tomorrow before flying to Spain on Friday where I’ll again see a lot of the players and other media folks who were here in Florida this week. I guess this was sort of an end-of-summer bash for a lot of folks, with “school” (or the regular curriculum) about to be back in session starting with the always popular EPT Barcelona stop.

Then again, to paraphrase that Emerson, Lake and Palmer quote on the wall at the Seminole Hard Rock, the traveling circus that is the professional poker tourney circuit is kind of the show that never ends.

Playing for Real Money: Haxton and Blom

Poker players talk a lot about finding the right stakes for one’s skill level. Usually the advice is to find limits where you can play comfortably, that is, where the amounts won’t influence you to the extent of negatively affecting your decision-making.

Meanwhile, there are certain types of gamblers who prefer playing limits where wins can produce tangible pleasure and losses genuine pain. You know, where what you are playing for is somehow most real, if that makes sense. I guess for a lot of players there’s a middle ground in there somewhere where the stakes are just right for them -- they can play without reservation, but winning or losing is gonna matter in the end.

Was thinking about all that a little this morning when reading about the heads-up match that took place between Viktor “Isildur1” Blom and Isaac “philivey2694” Haxton over the last three days on PokerStars. Wild stuff, that.

Recall how in early December 2010 Blom was signed as a Team PokerStars Pro, his identity still theoretically hidden although by then most everyone knew who the mysterious Swede was already. (Isildur1 would officially be revealed as Blom at the 2011 PCA a few weeks later.)

Soon after Isildur1 came on board at Stars, the “SuperStar Showdown” challenges involving Blom began, and Haxton was the first to take him on. Haxton would win that initial challenge by a relatively slim margin (not quite $42K).

Blom went on to play a dozen more SuperStar Showdowns over 2011 and early 2012, essentially winning them all save a rematch versus Haxton last month in which Ike beat him a second time by an even slimmer margin (just over $5K). Blom technically split two back-to-back matches versus Daniel Negreanu, although Blom was the overall winner, taking more than $123,000 off of Kid Poker during the almost 4,000 hands they played. (Here’s a page listing all of the Showdown results.)

Perhaps losing to Haxton twice inspired the ultra-competitive Blom to take him on again. Or maybe Haxton saw a chance to win more against an opponent against whom he’d built up some experience.

Whatever their motives, this time the two decided to raise the stakes considerably from the usual SuperStar Showdown format (2,500 hands, with $150K the most a player could lose). Here the pair would each sit down with $500K and play $200/$400 heads-up no-limit hold’em across four tables with no limit on the number of hands played. They’d play four hours a day, continuing until one had all the money.

Gotta think for these two upping the stakes made it all a little more “real.” If that makes sense.

You’ve probably heard already how it all went down. If not, check out the PokerStars blog where Change100 and Otis recapped all of the action from each of the three days the duel lasted.

On Saturday, they played just over 1,900 hands with Blom leaving nearly $200K up (Day 1 recap here). On Sunday, Haxton closed the gap for a while before Blom pushed out ahead again, ending the day over $285K ahead overall (Day 2 recap here). Then yesterday they played almost four more hours, with Blom finally taking the last of Haxton’s money, having won $500K total over 5,030 hands (Day 3 recap here).

I can’t help but think back to when we first heard about Isildur in late 2009, back when we really didn’t know who he was and he was multi-tabling against all of the Full Tilt Pros, winning millions off some and losing back millions to others.

Remember the $1,356,946.50 pot Isildur1 lost to Patrik Antonius? Remember the subsequent data-mining controversy and Isildur1 indicating an intention to file a “formal complaint” to FTP presumably in an effort to recover millions won from him? (He never did.) Remember others marveling at the multi-million dollar swings, with some -- including Team Full Tilter Mike Matusow -- describing the games as “not real poker”?

Matusow’s comments came in an interview on the Two Plus Two Pokercast back in March 2010. His point was a little complicated and not entirely clear, although it seemed to boil down to the idea that since a lot of those involved in the biggest games were FTP pros using money they’d gotten as part of their endorsement deals, the money was therefore not “real” to them.

“They’re just numbers,” said Matusow, referring to the mind-boggling amounts of the pots being shipped back and forth. “And it’s not real money. If them guys had to use their real money -- like if they were playing in a live game with those kind of moneys -- you think they’d be throwing it in like that?”

Of course, today we look back on all of that talk a lot differently, knowing, in fact, that a lot of the money being shipped back and forth on FTP really would turn out to be just numbers, and not “real” -- if not then (late 2009-early 2010), then later on, for sure.

Anyhow, it seems much more likely the half million clams Blom managed to take off of Haxton over the last three days was real enough. To them, anyway.

To the rest of us, though, it still seems pretty unreal.

Isildur1 Intrigues

Last Sunday I found my attention once more divided between college basketball and happenings on PokerStars.

As far as the b-ball went, my UNC Tarheels came back valiantly versus Kentucky only to lose in the end, their season ending one step shy of the Final Four. Kind of how the day went for me in that massive Sunday Storm tournament, actually, the one in which a whopping 113,770 players entered the $10+$1 event, thus creating a $1.13-plus million prize pool.

Got off to a good start, then stumbled a little after a couple of short stacks doubled through me after winning flips. Then a late setback saw me suddenly cut down to just a couple of big blinds as the cash bubble approached. Like the Heels I came up short, hitting the rail in 15,000th or so to finish a couple of hundred spots outside the money.

The ball game and my tourney run both ended, I turned my attention to the latest installment of the SuperStar Showdown, a “March Madness”-style buzzer-beater of a match between Viktor “Isildur1” Blom and Daniel Negreanu. After getting wiped out by Blom last week, Negreanu eeked out a win this time, having to make a huge comeback himself in order to do so.

These SuperStar Showdowns have been running for three months now, and I have to say a couple of things about them have surprised me somewhat.

One is the way the matches have remained interesting, something I can’t say I thought would be the case early on, especially after all the drama of the farce-slash-tragedy that was the Tony G match (the second one). After all, how could the sucker possibly remain intriguing after that?

But then came the wild one-blind win over the qualifier Attila “DodgyFish72” Gulcsik. And the two matches with Negreanu were both quite riveting, too.

Here are the results, by the way, of all seven SuperStar Showdown matches thus far (with links to Change100’s recaps):

1. Lost to Isaac Haxton, -$41,701, all NLHE (12/19/10)
2. Beat Tony G, +$44,820, half NLHE/half PLO (1/2/11)
3. Beat Daniel Cates, +$51,196, all NLHE (1/30/11)
4. Beat Eugene Katchalov, +$111,750, all NLHE (2/13/11)
5. Beat Attila “DodgyFish72” Gulcsik, +$10, all NLHE (2/27/11)
6. Beat Daniel Negreanu, +$150,000 (1,439 hands), all NLHE (3/20/11)
7. Lost to Daniel Negreanu, -$26,500, all NLHE (3/27/11)

One other aspect of the Showdowns that has surprised me a little is the way they appear to have affected Blom’s reputation and/or image, both among his opponents and (by extension) among those of us watching from the rail. At least it seems as though something along those lines is occurring as a result of these matches.

Players who have participated in these SuperStar Showdowns have consistently praised Blom as a crafty, difficult opponent. However, more often than not the respect they convey is delivered in terms that make the so-called “King of Swing” seem a lot more “human” (for want of a better word) than he perhaps appeared even just a few months before.

Prior to the first Showdown -- and especially back when the mysterious Swede first arrived on the scene in late 2009 -- Isildur1 existed as kind of a prototypical ramblin’ gamblin’ force of nature, reckless with his bankroll, willing to take on all comers, anytime, anywhere. And his anonymity only added further to his mythical-like stature.

I remember hearing Patrik Antonius talk about Isildur1 to Phil Gordon in a video from December 2009. “He’s a very interesting opponent,” Antonius said, noting how he considered Isildur1 “very dangerous” because of his unrelenting aggression and willingness to gamble. He “wants to make big decisions all the time,” added Antonius, a penchant that necessarily meant his opponents frequently were being forced to do the same, like it or not.

While somewhat specific in his analysis of Isildur1's play, the unknown opponent who “came out of nowhere” (as Gordon noted) still seemed hard to picture as a living, breathing member of the species to which you and I belong. Now, more than a year later, everything is different with regard to Isildur1/Blom, with these SuperStar Showdowns having a lot to do with the change.

Isaac Haxton set the tone for this different way of talking about Blom in his comments following that first match. Haxton, a highly-experienced, no-limit hold’em heads-up specialist, admitted that while Blom wasn’t necessarily the best opponent he’d ever faced, “no one has ever more consistently made me miserable when playing against them.”

“Isildur’s brand of over the top -- but carefully balanced -- aggression is unlike anything I’ve played against,” added Haxton, saying that Blom’s game successfully took him out of his “comfort zone in a lot of situations.”

Other of Blom’s opponents -- with the exception of the ever-hyperbolic Tony G who ended his match proclaiming “isildur1 is hte legend” (sic) -- have spoken of him in similar fashion, right up to Negreanu who following their second match similarly said of Isildur1 that he wasn’t nearly as “wild” or “crazy” a player as his reputation perhaps might lead one to believe -- in no-limit hold’em, anyway (not PLO), where Negreanu’s estimation was that his game was anything but reckless, and in fact “solid.”

When a hand reaches showdown, that’s when players’ cards are finally exposed. I guess that’s kind of what is happening in these SuperStar Showdowns, too, with the gradual exposure of Isildur1/Blom, one match at a time.

But even the more “human”-seeming version of the young Swede continues to fascinates many, which is why I think the SuperStar Showdown will keep capturing interest going forward. As will Blom, especially once he finally turns 21 (which doesn’t happen until August or September, I believe).

Ambiguous Images

Been vaguely following some of this poker-related, Twitter-y back-and-forthing over the last few days, instigated by frequent-center-of-attention Prahlad Friedman.

Friedman suddenly hopped on Twitter Saturday night to report “Isaac Haxton and Justin Bonomo share and switch accounts often. Was playing random guy and looked up his stats. Identical to Hax.” From there ensued several hours’ worth of claims and counterclaims, among them numerous instances of folks noting the obvious irony of a UB-sponsored player complaining about being cheated.

A sequel to that brouhaha then erupted yesterday, thanks to a thread-starting post by Jon “FatalError” Aguiar over on Two Plus Two. Aguiar had participated some in Saturday’s scuffles, defending Haxton and Bonomo against Friedman’s accusation. Sometime after, Joe Sebok apparently sent Aguiar a message asking him “to chill on the UB hate,” a note that also included reference to Aguiar and his girlfriend having “a skeleton or two that you wouldn’t want public.”

Aguiar took the message as indicating some sort of blackmail-like threat, and from there came lots more posts, more private messages made public, and tweets from Aguiar, Sebok, and others.

Like I say, I’ve followed some of the chatter, though not that actively. Kind of like overhearing a lurid cell phone conversation while stuck in public transit or something. Can’t quite shut it out, but can’t ignore it entirely either.

The latest machinations involving Sebok -- put together with some of his recent podcast appearances -- put me in mind of his initial decision back in September 2009 to sign with UltimateBet as a sponsored pro and “media and operations consultant.” I wrote a post here then titled “Sebok Surprise” in which I expressed some trepidation over the move, comparing it to sweating a friend who appeared to be playing a hand badly -- hoping it might work out, but not feeling optimistic that it would.

It also got me thinking about the significance of image in poker, and how things like Twitter, the forums, and other varieties of communication mediated by technology -- including the kind that happens in online poker -- can serve to complicate one’s image in so many ways. And I guess I’m talking both about one’s image at the table (of use to one’s play) and one’s image away from the table, too (perhaps better referred to as one’s “character” as understood by others).

Can be hard to build and maintain a successful image at the table. Can be difficult to do so away from the table as well, especially when we complicate the process with extra layers of ambiguity introduced by the way we sometimes choose to communicate. (Or miscommunicate.)

Haxton Takes First SuperStar Showdown

Ended up following that “SuperStar Showdown” match between Isildur1 and Isaac “philivey2694” Haxton over on PokerStars fairly closely last night. Wasn’t sure it would keep my attention beyond the start, but I found myself checking in throughout the four-and-a-half hours or so it took to complete.

It was a fairly close match, with both players leading for stretches during the 2,500 hands of heads-up no-limit hold’em ($50/$100 blinds). About two-thirds of the way through it appeared the mysterious Swede was going to win as he held nearly a $30K advantage. But Haxton snatched the lead away, hitting a few hands while also making some big calls versus Isildur1’s bluffs.

They were still close to even with just 300 hands to go, then came the biggest pot of the night -- over $44,000. On that key hand, both players flopped top pair of nines on a 9-5-3 board, but Haxton had a king kicker while Isildur1’s other card was a jack. Isildur1 led the betting on all three streets after the flop, jamming all in on fifth street after the turn and river brought a couple of deuces. Haxton called the big river shove (a pot-sized bet of $15,000-plus) with the better hand, and was on his way to victory.

In the end, Haxton finished exactly $41,701 ahead -- a figure that represents his total winnings for the match, by the way. That is to say, there was no additional reward to the victor (as in the “Durrrr challenge”). Not officially, anyway. For an overview of the entire match, including details of all the key hands, check out Change100’s recap over on the PokerStars blog.

Like I say, I didn’t necessarily expect to keep following the sucker to its conclusion, but it successfully held my interest. Then again, I might have a slightly higher tolerance for watching people play online poker, given that I do it so much.

As I was saying yesterday, I think it’s likely we’ll be seeing a lot more of these Showdowns, perhaps involving other PokerStars pros. Wouldn’t be that surprised, actually, to see the stakes go up a bit as well in some cases, should the participants desire such. Kind of funny to consider how Haxton’s overall win compares to some of the pots that were being played by Isildur1 on Full Tilt Poker around this time last year. Or the stakes of the “Durrrr challenge,” in which Dwan wins an additional $500,000 if he comes out ahead, while his opponents could earn $1.5 million for doing so.

Something cool, though, about getting to see such a match play all of the way to its conclusion like this. I imagine Stars might come up with on-screen “scoreboard” or the like to keep a running tally for the railbirds, too, so as to make it easier to jump in and out and know instantly where things stand. Heck, they could even turn this into some sort of ongoing “season” or tourney or something, with cumulative standings and so forth.

It ain’t Johnny Moss versus Nick “the Greek,” of course. Or the “Corporation” versus Andy Beal. Still, fun stuff.

PokerStars’ SuperStar Showdown Debuts Tonight

It was not quite two weeks ago that PokerStars announced they had signed the mysterious “Isildur1” as a Team Pro.

Won’t be long, of course, before we will all start omitting that “mysterious” adjective when referring to young Swede. Word is he’ll be playing in the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure, scheduled for January 6-16, 2011, where he’ll be taking a seat in the $10,000+$300 main event. Who knows... perhaps he’s going to be one of the few to play in that $100,000 buy-in “Super High Roller” event as well. In any case, he’ll be there at the Atlantis Resort and Casino, all patched up, confirming his real identity once and for all.

When PokerStars first announced the signing, a new “SuperStar Showdown” series involving Isildur1 was announced as well. The series will consist of heads-up matches in which Isildur1 will be taking on challengers in 2,500-hand sessions. The combatants will play four tables at once, with the game being either no-limit hold’em, pot-limit Omaha, or some combination of the two, and blinds will be $50/$100 at minimum.

Read the full “SuperStar Showdown” rules here. Additionally, there is a chance for players to qualify to participate in a lower-stakes “Showdown” versus Isildur1 as well (see here).

Although the stakes probably won’t be rivaling those we saw Isildur1 playing on Full Tilt Poker around this time last year -- when he was regularly engaging in $500/$1,000 PLO matches versus Phil Ivey, Patrik Antonius, and others -- I have to say I’m still intrigued to see what will happen in these “Showdowns.” Four-tabling 2,500 hands should only take a few hours, as well, so unlike what has happened in those long, drawn-out “Durrrr challenges,” a “winner” and “loser” should be determined in relatively short order.

I put those words in scare quotes -- “winner” and “loser” -- because 2,500 hands is obviously much too small of a sample size to determine definitively who is the better player. Still, I think the format is set up in such a way that the matches will surely create a lot of buzz, with players perhaps coming back for rematches down the road, depending on how these first few go.

The first “Superstar Showdown” takes place this evening over on PokerStars with Isaac “philivey2694” Haxton being the first to take on Isildur1. I believe the pair is going to be playing no-limit hold’em only tonight, which given both players’ reputations probably suggests Haxton has the edge. But obviously anything can happen.

Pretty savvy, I think, for PokerStars to line up these “Showdowns” -- sort of like little heavyweight poker fights. If these first few involving Isildur1 are at all successful, I wouldn’t be surprised to see other Team Pros perhaps getting involved in something similar, too, by hosting their own matches on the site.

The match gets underway at 6:00 p.m. Eastern time. Gonna have to take a peek later, I think, at least for the start of the sucker. I have a feeling there will be a number of others there on the virtual rail with me when it does.

2009 WSOP, Day 5: Taking Off

“It’s like we’re getting ready for takeoff.”

Said yr humble gumshoe to Change100 yesterday afternoon as we got ourselves situated on press row, readying for the final table of Event No. 2, the $40,000 buy-in “Special 40th Annual No-Limit Hold’em” event.

We were squeezing into our spots there at the left-most end of the row, having gotten our laptops fired up and online. Not a lot of room to maneuver, really, what with all the monitors and cords and other folks also trying to occupy the relatively scant space available to those us covering the sucker. Felt a little like we were on a plane, our items all safely stowed at our feet, our seat backs and tray tables in their upright and locked positions.

Experienced just a little bit of turbulence during the ascent when the site went down momentarily about 20 hands in. But for the most part the flight was smooth and without incident, and we landed safely sometime after 1 a.m., some 12 hours or so after departure. Change100 expertly handled the hand-for-hand reporting, while I did some color and kept the chip counts up to date. The latter task was made much easier by the presence of Mickey, our terrific field reporter, who was there entering hands into the hand simulator along the way. On his day off, too! (Mickey rocks.)

All in all, anyone following that final table on PokerNews should have gotten a fairly close idea what was going on, I’d think.

What was going on? A lot of solid play from Vitaly Lunkin (left), the Russian who ended up winning the thing after surviving three hours’ worth of heads up with Isaac Haxton. Haxton played well, too, although perhaps gambled a couple of times near the end when he didn’t need to. Greg Raymer also made what seemed like an unnecessarily risky play during three-handed that resulted in his getting ousted in third. Tell me what you think.

There was a moment there right after Dani “Ansky” Stern had busted in fourth when Raymer, Haxton, and Lunkin all had almost exactly 8,000,000 chips -- kind of amazing, really, how close they were (like within 40,000 of each other or something). With the blinds 80,000/160,000 (with 20,000 antes), that meant each player had almost exactly 50 big blinds when Raymer raised to 400,000 from the button. Lunkin folded from the small blind, then Haxton reraised to 1.25 million. I don’t recall exactly, but I don’t think Raymer took more than about 10 seconds to push all in over the top. Haxton took a little longer before deciding to make the call.

Haxton turned over pocket nines, and Raymer pocket fives. Haxton’s higher pair held, and since he had Raymer barely outchipped, the Fossilman was out. The flop on that one turned out to be , so you’d have to think had they seen the flop before getting it all in (say, if Raymer just called the Haxton reraise), it is doubtful the hand would have resulted in a 16 million-chip pot.

I’m thinking Raymer was looking to gamble, having decided Haxton and Lunkin were too tough to outplay. He’d even said something about how “it doesn’t get any easier” right after Stern’s bustout. Still, as one of several there pulling for Raymer to seal the deal, it looked at the time like he could’ve found a better spot.

Easy for me to say, of course. I’m not the one piloting the plane.

Didn’t pay too much attention to what was going on elsewhere in the Amazon yesterday. The second Day One of the “Stimulus Special” played out. They ended up with a whopping 6,012 players for that one (more than I’d expected). I’m hearing the numbers are up for the upcoming no-limit hold’em events as well, so the WSOP appears to be sufficiently stimulated at the moment.

I did wander over during the dinner break to sneak a peek at the WSOP Champions Invitational. Only 20 of the WSOP Main Event champs ended up coming out for that one. Some snickers were heard when it got around that the first three bustouts were Jamie Gold, Chris Moneymaker, and Jerry Yang. (Hey, at least Robert Varkonyi still has chips.) Haley is covering that one for PokerNews, so you can follow the updates on today’s final table here.

Two new events get going today, then two more new ones tomorrow. Finally, after starting just four events in five days, the WSOP really picks it up.

At noon today is the $1,500 Pot-Limit Omaha (Event No. 5), and at 5 p.m. is the $10,000 World Championship Seven-Card Stud (Event No. 6). Gonna have to get over on Full Tilt and make some more Fantasy Poker picks for those two this morning. Speaking of, three of my horses ended cashing for me in Event No. 2 (Justin Bonomo, Brian Townsend, and Sorel Mizzi). Only one of my 15 (Eli Elezra) cashed in Event No. 3, the $1,500 Omaha Hi-Low Split-8 or Better.

By the way, let me congratulate Julie Schneider, wife of 2007 WSOP Player of the Year Tom “DonkeyBomber” Schneider, who outlasted Tom (one of my picks in the Omaha/8 event, actually) and cashed in Event No. 3. Pic comes from B.J. Nemeth’s WSOP Photo Blog. Go over there and see his pics as they’re intended.

A quirk in the scheduling means I’m taking off both today and tomorrow. (Very doubtful I’ll be seeing back-to-back days off again for a long time, if at all.) I’ll come back on Wednesday to pick up Event No. 10, the $2,500 Pot Limit Hold’em/Omaha event, from which I’ll be reporting for all three days. Between now and then, I plan to relax some, do some reading and a little writing, and make a return trip to the grocery store. Might try to play some cards in here somewhere. Also, this evening I’m getting together with Tommy Angelo, author of Elements of Poker, which should be a lot of fun. Will likely report back here about that later.

Meanwhile, let’s all get some rest. Need a blanket? A pillow? Just let the flight attendant know and we’ll get you taken care of. And thanks once again for flying HBP.

The Name Game

Last week, Gary Wise posted a two-part article about online poker “tells” over on the ESPN Poker Club. In the first part, Wise talks to Justin “ZeeJustin” Bonomo, Isaac “philivey2694” Haxton, and Todd “DanDruff” Witteles about bet-sizing, timing tells (or “click tells”), and screen names. In the second part, Matt “DaProfessor” Hawrilenko and Mike “Schneids” Schneider also join in to say a bit more about bet-sizing and timing, and even speculate about the significance of a player’s city.

The issue of screen names and their significance is one that’s been discussed before. John Vorhaus wrote about screen names in his Killer Poker Online: Crushing the Internet Game (2003). There Vorhaus encouraged readers to choose neutral monickers that “give no hint as to your age, gender, geographical location, level of expertise, or philosophy of play.” As it happens, I think I have done just that with all of my screen names, although as an experiment I did specifically choose a female username for one site. “Over time your choice of screen name probably won’t make a huge money difference,” writes Vorhaus, “but why give anything away?” Others have written on the subject as well, including Dr. Pauly whose “Guide to Online Poker Screen Names” appeared in Poker Player last summer (although I think he wrote about it some time before that).

Anyhow, Haxton says he varies his play “radically” against an unknown based on a player’s screen name. He then lists a number of assumptions he tends to make about names. Says Haxton, someone with a name like “shipmonieslol” or the like “is probably under 30 and probably reads poker forums” and is thus to be regarded as at least a “winning amateur.” Players who choose names of cars, cigars, or drinks (like “laphroaig,” a kind of scotch) are probably over 30. Of such a player, says Haxton (betraying a bit of age-based prejudice, perhaps), “there is a higher than normal chance that he is a fish.”

Certain off-color handles (e.g., those that include crotch jokes) and/or names featuring wacky capitalization (e.g., “AcEsFuLL4346385”) connote aggression for Haxton. He says names including words like “gamble” or “fish” or “rock” are more often than not accurately self-descriptive.

Finally, while not exactly referring to screen names, Haxton believes “anyone who has a picture of their baby as their avatar is terrible at poker.” I suppose Haxton must play a lot on PokerStars, then, the site Wicked Chops dubbed “Best Online Poker Site if You Like Pictures of Children and Dogs” earlier this month.

Following Haxton’s catalogue, Bonomo chimes in to disagree. “A screen name is not a tell,” Bonomo insists, but rather just an occasional encouragement to “stereotype” players (rightly or wrongly). Says Bonomo, screen names are better described as “personality/play style indicators” than as tells.

If I had to choose, I’d lean toward Bonomo’s line here, although frankly I would say most screen names aren’t “indicators” of much at all, with a few exceptions, perhaps. I suppose names containing “1989” or “pimp” or “420” may well tell us something about the player which may or may not relate to how he or she plays poker. But generally I’m not going to fashion a strategy -- or vary my play “radically” -- based solely on the nick.

I will admit, however, that certain names do occasionally suggest something to me about the player’s level of education and/or intelligence. Have played several sessions of H.O.R.S.E. over the last few weeks with a guy named after a Dostoevsky character. A decent player, as far as I can tell, although I’d already been inclined to think he had something going on upstairs just from his name.

A couple of months ago I played with someone named “rhizome.” If I remember correctly, he asked me something about my avatar, and after a bit he and I ended up in a brief chat about the late Gilles Deleuze. Again, even before our chat I’d already suspected the guy might’ve picked up a book once in a while.

Not saying, of course, that if someone’s screen name happens to be a character from a Russian novel or a term used by a French philosopher that automatically means that person knows how to play poker. But I tend to assume these folks are thinkers, at least. And thinkers usually have a better chance at figuring out how to play poker than most.

Then again, there are certain things about which one can probably think too much.