[JS0085]

Hey all,

I'm a rather active Sng player at PokerStars, so I know the value of avoiding coin flips, or other close gambles early in an sng. However, in tonight's Tournament of Champions, winner-take-all event, there was a hand rather early, in which I felt Howard Lederer should have gambled. I think you all remember it-he got AK in late position, made a standard raise, got reraised by Reese (small stack all-in in the SB, JJ); Chan then called the all-in in the BB with QQ; Lederer folded his AK; the A hit on the flop. Also, please do not view my commentary on this hand as being "results-orientated".

Now in your standard, online Sng, Lederer's lay down is a no brainer. However, I believe that in such a structure (winner take all), with 10 of the top players in the world (as opposed to your average online player), a player has to make some early gambles and hope to double, or triple up. Don't get me wrong, Lederer is great, but he can't believe that he's that much better than any other player at that particular table so that he can necessarily wait for a better opportunity. In fact, with the quality present at that table, a 'crap-shoot' type game can develop. However, if a player takes a commanding chip lead early, he can use it to bully the rest of the table, as, with the quality present, there will be a lot of laydowns. Again, we all know the value of AK late in a tourney, but, in this particular tourney, I believe its value was just as great early, as it would have been later. Any comments are appreciated.

Later