The Mid-Atlantic Poker Championship in Wilmington, Delaware at Delaware Park gives you every opportunity to take home the money, offering an expanded variety of events in a jam-packed schedule running from Oct. 14-26. The three championship titles, trophies and of course the money will be awarded in the $1,500 pot-limit Omaha event, the $550 heads-up event and the $1,090 no-limit hold’em main event.
images (54)
If you pre-register for event no. 4, the $550 no-limit hold’em $60,000 guarantee offered on Saturday, Oct. 17, 24 hours prior you will have the additional benefit of receiving $100 slot dollars. The same applies to event no. 13 on Friday, Oct. 23, the main event with a $1,090 buy-in. The slot dollar vouchers will be distributed on the day of the event.

The series is offering some very serious money, including 18 tournaments with guarantees ranging from $2,500 all the way up to $150,000.

For more information on the Casino at Delaware Park Poker Room, visit their website or call 302-355-1050. The property is located on 777 Delaware Park Road in Wilmington, Delaware, approximately an hour northeast of Baltimore, Maryland and just 45 southwest of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Nipun Java headlines the day 1B survivors in the Card Player Poker Tour Bicycle Casino $1,100 no-limit hold’em main event. The World Series of Poker Circuit ring winner ended the day with 268,300. Java has upwards of $1.2 million in live tournament winnings and a win in the CPPT main event would be his third major career title.
Ross Tesser finished as chipleader of the 37 players who survived the day with 350,000.

World Poker Tour Season XI Player of the Year Matt Salsberg also finished the day in the mix with 52,200. Other Day 1B survivors include Nathan Bjerno, Nick Bonnefoi and Elmo Imperial.

Shan Jing, who won this event last year for nearly $136,000, and Thomas Beckstead, who won the inaugural CPPT Bicycle series in 2013, both returned to defend their respective titles but were eliminated before the night was over.

Other eliminations on Day 1B included Daniel Strelitz, Dana Kellstrom, Cord Garcia, Oddie Dardon, and Dan Heimiller.

Day 1C begins Monday, Oct. 12 at 12pm.

The main event features three starting days and uses the Bike’s own patented Quantum Reload concept.

Players have the option to buy-in directly for $1,100 on any of the three starting days, but those who wish to skip day 1 altogether can buy directly into day 2 for $4,300. Players that choose the latter option will begin with 60 big blinds with blinds at 1,000-2,000. There will be no-late entry on day 2, however players who are eliminated on any day 1 may re-enter the following day.

The final table will be streamed on Live at the Bike.

Rank Player Chip Count
1 Ross Tesser 350,000
2 Nipun Java 268,300
3 Gevork Khsabyan 256,300
4 Alan Snow 247,000
5 Levon Khachatnyan 239,700
6 Michael Yoshino 208,500
7 Matt Elsby 167,600
8 Neil Ho 162,600
9 Elmo Imperial 155,500
10 William Sturiano 153,600
11 Nathan Bjerno 142,200
12 Stephen Plache 137,800
13 Nicholas Voyatzis 130,100
14 Vadim Baranovsky 128,000
15 Jared Greiner 115,300
16 Scott Johnson 111,400
17 RJ Connor 111,100
18 Jay Helfert 106,000
19 Tennessee Benjamin 99,200
20 Edvin Setaghian 95,200
21 Nicolas Bonnefoi 86,500
22 James Pilpa 83,300
23 Jesus Jimenez 72,200
24 Xuan Nguyen 70,900
25 Arma Zadoyan 68,900
26 Edward Lin 67,900
27 Paul Lui 63,800
28 Alex Masek 57,700
29 Matt Salsberg 52,200
30 Armen Nazaryan 48,000
31 Michael Zelman 46,900
32 Stephan Hans 46,700
33 Jason Jung 46,000
34 Jordan Warkol 46,000
35 Maxwell Lineberger 44,900
36 Adam Furgatch 42,600
37 Heath Mendelsohn 37,600

The only games I like to play are games where I can win and keep winning and then win some more.
images (58)
Sometimes it’s impossible to win because the math just doesn’t work — like craps, where the house has the advantage every time on every bet. You might win now and then, but over time, you end up getting killed. It might be better to put a match to the dollar bills and enjoy the momentary brilliance of the flames.

Sometimes the math works — as with blackjack — but the proper conditions for winning cannot be found. That’s pretty much the case in casinos these days as counter measures to card counting have taken the fun — and the profits — out of educated play.

Where blackjacks once paid 3 to 2 they now pay 6 to 5 most everywhere. That makes it tough to come out ahead. You could probably find decent rules at some single deck tables, but they’re so closely monitored these days that your chances of being allowed to win for more than a very short time are slim.

What’s a mathematically-inclined risk taker to do?

After years of losing at poker or barely playing even, I’ve discovered that I can win at Texas Hold Em poker — if I play a certain way and keep away from the high stakes tables. I mean that I’ve started winning more often than I lose and that when I win it’s for larger amounts than the losses when I don’t win. Not that much different than the stock trading that I do.

This is not news to players who’ve been at it since they first watched Matt Damon in Rounders in the late 90′s — or to on-line addicts who’ve been applying software to research the play of opponents. Entire schools of how-to-approach the tables have taken root — even if I’ve only recently discovered the party.

I’m grateful to James “Split Suit” Sweeney at Red Chip Poker for introducing me to skilled Hold Em play. I’m only now getting completely up-to-date on the all of the differences between tight-aggressive and loose-aggressive and how either or both might be appropriate depending on the players you’re facing and the cards you’re dealt.

This week I’m dipping back into my “Casino Poker for Beginners” series to warn about a practice that is common among players new to poker, who engage in it innocently, not realizing that it is both unethical and a violation of one of the most important rules of the game. That practice is collusion.
images (58)
A typical example is two friends heading to the casino to spend a few hours playing poker together. They’re worried that the cutthroat nature of the game — a game in which the whole point, after all, is to win the other players’ money — may cause hard feelings and damage their friendship if they really go at each other hard. So they make a deal to prevent this.

The deal may take any of several forms.

Maybe if one of them puts in a raise, the other has to drop out of the pot.
Maybe they’ll never bluff each other, so that a strong bet always indicates a strong hand.
Maybe they’ll never slow play each other when dealt a monster hand.
Maybe they’ll use a secret hand signal to indicate “I’ve got the goods this time, so you should fold and let me take these other people’s chips.”
Maybe if they end up as the only two in a hand, they’ll always just check every street rather than betting and raising each other.
For our purposes, all of these agreements, plus many other forms they might take, are equal — and equally wrong.

Poker is not a team sport. It is an intensely individualistic, dog-eat-dog game. In fact, poker doesn’t even work right if the players don’t approach it with that attitude. Over the last ten years of the “poker boom,” many organizations have tried to put together forms of poker that use teams, often for the purposes of making exciting television. None has been that successful. Introducing collusion, wherein a player tries to help or at least not hurt specific other players, tends to distort the essence of the game so much the result is often barely recognizable as poker.

I think it’s important to state this bluntly: Collusion in poker between two or more players, in all of its many forms, is always cheating, pure and simple. You should never engage in it, never agree to it, and actively warn others against it if they propose that you join them. Furthermore, if you suspect that collusion is occurring at your table — whether the culprits are friends or strangers to you — you should report it to the poker room management. Both your personal integrity and the integrity of the game require these things of you.

As Mike Caro once correctly pointed out in an article on the subject, “when you soft play friends at the table others get hurt in the crossfire.” In other words, trying to make things easier for a friend often amounts to making things unfairly difficult for others at the table.

“Aggressive opponents, who are playing honestly, especially suffer,” Caro continues. “That’s because they mistake what’s happening through secret alliances as tactical traits exhibited by the group of friends. This causes those honest players to make poor decisions for the wrong reasons on future hands.”

There is only one kind of agreement you should make with friends before sitting down at a poker table with them: You will all do everything in your ability (and within the rules, of course) to win all of each other’s money, just as you will do against all of the other players. However the cards and chips may fall, there will be no hard feelings about it, and you will leave the game just as much friends as when you sat down, regardless of who won or lost.

If you can’t make and stick to that kind of deal with your friends, then you cannot play poker with them — period. And that’s perfectly fine! I understand and appreciate that, for example, some married couples just can’t stand to play hard against each other, because each finds it too stressful to inflict pain and loss on his or her partner. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having that kind of relationship. It just means that you can’t play poker against each other.

If you’re playing cash games, you can decide simply to be at different tables — problem solved. In a tournament, however, you don’t get to control table assignments, which means that you can’t enter a tournament with any other person against whom you cannot agree to compete full-bore.

It has been said that there are no friends at a poker table. I understand the point of that aphorism, but I’m too literal-minded to approve of it. Of course you can have friends at the poker table — both ones that you came with and ones that you make while playing. In fact, friends make poker more fun.

The only requirement is that you not play compete less fully against them because they’re your friends.

Shares of Amaya have surged some 30 percent in the past week, after news that New Jersey has granted the company's PokerStars and Full Tilt sites regulatory approval for real-money online poker in New Jersey.
images (63)
And according to one analyst, shares of the poker stock still have a great deal more upside from here.

"We see this stock as a double—you just have to be patient and stick through some of these catalysts," said Chad Beynon, who covers the stock for Macquarie. "And we think this New Jersey announcement was a big one, and the first of many to come."

In 2011, the sites were shut down by the U.S. government. Two years later, PokerStars made an attempt to buy the now-defunct Atlantic Club casino. In 2014, Amaya gaming group acquired Rational Group, the owner of PokerStars and Full Tilt.

Now the New Jersey ruling should serve to "put a stamp of approval on the company," which makes it "a significant milestone, given the 'Bad Actor' debate and the level of due diligence the NJ Division of Gaming Enforcement conducted," the analyst wrote.

Read MorePokerStars Returns to the U.S.
There are a few caveats. Players will only be able to play in New Jersey, and only against fellow New Jersey players. And each site must be partnered with a bricks-and-mortar casino; PokerStars and Full Tilt are set to be attached to Resorts (a Boardwalk casino that, interestingly, does not currently have a poker room).

While he doesn't believe it will make a huge difference in terms of earnings, "what we think will change is the valuation and the multiples that will be ascribed to this company," Beynon said in a Friday "Trading Nation" interview.

The analyst has a $40 price target on the $24 stock. He sees the company's earnings doubling over the next few years, with much of that growth coming from its casino and sports gambling businesses, in addition to poker expansion.

Annie Duke was about to win $2 million.

Hidden Brain logo
Subscribe to the Hidden Brain podcast!
It was 2004, and she was at the final hand of the World Series of Poker Tournament of Champions. Annie had beat out some of the best poker players in the world — all men — to get to this point.
images (18)
But she wasn't sure she deserved to be there.

Annie Duke acknowledges applause from the audience as she is introduced for the final table of a limit hold-em game Wednesday, June 30, 2005 at the Rio Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas during the World Series of Poker.i
Annie Duke acknowledges applause from the audience as she is introduced for the final table of a limit hold-em game Wednesday, June 30, 2005 at the Rio Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas during the World Series of Poker.

In fact, in spite of her skill, there were many times during that tournament when Annie felt like an imposter. She worried that ESPN had invited her not because of her abilities, but because it was "good optics" to have a woman at the table.

Annie spoke with Hidden Brain host Shankar Vedantam in 2014, and described what it was like to succumb to the fear that stereotypes about women in poker might be true. This is an idea in psychology called Stereotype Threat.

"I'm sort of thinking, if I fold and I'm wrong, everybody's going to be like, 'See she plays like a girl, look how he pushed her around,' " said Annie. In becoming distracted by her worries about proving herself, Annie became more likely to play poorly — fulfilling exactly the stereotype she was trying to avoid.

But Annie also found ways to use stereotypes to her advantage — which illustrates a second idea, called Stereotype Tax. Annie learned to make her opponents pay, quite literally, for the stereotypes they held about women. As she said, "Given what I know about them, given that they're treating me that way, how can I come up with the best strategy to take their money? 'Cause in the end, isn't that the best revenge?' "

Social science researchers might have figured out a way to help people overcome stereotype threat. Greg Walton at Stanford University was concerned that black students at Stanford might feel that they were impostors on campus. He conducted an experiment where he pointed out that if they got a bad grade or had a difficult interaction, two weeks later, it wasn't a big deal anymore. As Shankar explains, "It's only when you see local setbacks as global problems that the risk of stereotype threat comes in, and you start to feel like an imposter."

Annie said that's a strategy she has used at the table. "You know, when I lose a big pot and it feels like the end of the world, I try to think about how will that really affect my bottom line in the long run."

And in the end, using stereotypes to her advantage, Annie defeated nine of the best poker players in the world to become the 2004 World Series of Poker Champion.