PokerStars Festival NJ: Gagliano Wins Six-Max, Moneymaker Bags on Kickoff Day

The PokerStars Festival kicked off today with several events, including a $2,000 Six-Max No-Limit Hold’em. The event drew nine players and after five hours of poker, Michael Gagliano was the last man standing, outlasting the field for a first-place prize of $11,350.

Gagliano found himself on the lower end of the leaderboard early on when he flopped bottom two pair and ran into top set. However, his climb to the top began shortly thereafter. A short-stacked Darren Elias raised all in from the small blind with and Gagliano woke up with kings in the big blind. His hand held up and from there, Gagliano found two more crucial double ups to take the chip lead.

Facing a raise and a call before him, Gagliano three-bet shoved with . Jason Rivkin looked him up with and Gagliano’s hand held up once again.

With four players remaining, Gagliano was the smallest stack of the bunch, but won a crucial race against Jonathan Little to seize the chip lead which he would never relinquish. Facing a raise and an all-in reraise in front of him, Gagliano called all in for 31 big blinds with , racing with Little’s . Gagliano paired his queen on the flop and further improved to a flush to score the double. He eliminated Little a few hands later, and David Vamplew shortly after that.

The king-queen hand gave Gagliano pause, as he admitted in the immediate aftermath of the hand that he wasn’t sure about his play. He reiterated that when speaking with PokerNews as he headed to collect his payout.

“I still don’t know if it was the right call,” he said. “I’ll have to do a bunch of math later and try to figure it out. I know he shoves wide in those spots. It’s probably the worst hand I’d put in there.”

A key factor was the bubble. The next two players out would receive nothing, but if Gagliano was able to chip up in that high-leverage spot, he would be in great shape to cash. As he was the shortest stack, he felt compelled to gamble a little bit.

“With two paying, the jump from third to second is bigger than the jump from second to to first,” he explained. “But, I was still the shortest so I figured I’d go with …

continue reading in source www.pokernews.com