The axiom "those who can't do, teach" is not always the case, especially in the world of poker, wherein many world-renowned players - Doyle Brunson, for instance - have written books meant to train readers to become better poker players. Another exception is poker author Matthew "ionlyplayAA" Hilger, who took down the $750,000-guaranteed event on Full Tilt last Sunday, pocketing a cool $133,000.

For Hilger, whose numerous poker books (find two of his books here) and strategy columns for Card Player magazine have taught countless poker enthusiasts, winning is nothing new. He has also landed a first-place finish in a Nightly Hundred Grand tournament on PokerStars, a victory that he wrote columns about for Card Player. (Find those columns here and here.) This recent win in the $750,000 guarantee was also simply a matter of completing what he barely missed out on accomplishing before, when he made the final table of the event earlier this year, ultimately finishing in sixth place.

Hilger spoke with Card Player about his win, as well as what the main factors were that helped him accomplish his feat and how to exploit players in these events. He also discussed bluffing on the river in both no-limit hold'em and limit hold'em tournaments.

Shawn Patrick Green: First off, when can we expect to see a Card Player magazine column about this win?

Matthew "ionlyplayAA" Hilger: Good question. With the World Series coming up, it may take a few months, but I'm definitely going to do something on it.

SPG: What are some likely topics that come to mind?

MH: I'll probably just go through and pick out some of the interesting hands. I actually looked through the final table [hand histories], and there are probably three, four, or five interesting hands worth maybe discussing some of the strategy of in a column.

SPG: Can you talk about one or two of those right now, if you remember them?

MH: There was one hand, and I'm trying to remember the details, when it was sixhanded and the under-the-gun player raised. I think the blinds were 80,000-160,000, but I'm not sure about that. He raise, the next player called, and I was in the small blind with A-Q. I think the key thing on that particular hand was that I knew the guy who called wasn't capable of trying to trap with aces or kings, so I was really confident that he had a medium-strength hand and that he was definitely going to fold if I reraised. So, I thought it was a great place to put pressure on the original raiser; he had been raising rather loosely in any case, so there was a good chance that I was going to get him to fold. So, I reraised to about 1 million in chips, and they both folded. That was a big hand.

I also lost a big hand at the final table. I raised with A-K to 300,000, so the blinds were probably 60,000-120,000, and I got reraised to 1.1 million. So, I called with A-K and I lost to K-K; a pretty straightforward hand, but that took a big chunk out of my stack. I think what is an important point about that particular hand is that when I started off at the final table, I was a slight chip leader, but there were four other guys like right behind me. And then, really between when there were nine players and six players, I doubled my stack pretty much never showing down a hand. So, when I finally ended up losing that A-K hand, I think it was important that I was able to build up my stack so that when I did suffer a beat, I had the chips to lose.

SPG: This was your biggest score to date. What was working for you in the tournament?

MH: Well, I got unlucky and I got lucky. Talking specific hands, I lost a huge pot early on in the tournament where I had aces. There was three-way preflop action, and queens hit a set. I probably would have been in the top 10 in chips, and this was within the first couple of hours. But I lost it, so I was back down to slightly below average. And, to be honest with you, the rest is kind of a blur until I made the money, because I was playing about 10 different tournaments. I need to go back and look at the hand history; I didn't do anything . well, I can't remember anything big. I was never really high in chips or really low. I just kind of kept playing my normal game, picking my spots when I could.

SPG: Well, what's your normal game? Is it more tight-aggressive? Loose-aggressive? Is there even much aggression in it?

MH: It depends, I try to play the situation, but it's more of a loose-aggressive strategy until I make the money. And then, once I make the money, I really focus on two things . well, I really shouldn't say it's the money, I should say once we get to the bubble. I start really focusing on two things: chips-stack sizes and then I try to break down the players between people who I think are really good and people who are probably amateurs there for the first time just interested in making a little bit more money.

SPG: Are you just as focused at the beginning of an online tournament as you are at the end, or do you find that you tend to become more focused once the money becomes more real?

MH: That's a hard question. I'm focused the whole time, it's just that in the beginning of the tournament I'm usually multitabling. So, I'm focused, but I'm obviously not as focused as I could be on every single player and what they're doing. And then, after I get knocked out of some of the tournaments, by the time we're in the money I'm down to one or two tables and I'm focusing a lot on the specific playing tendencies of my opponents. I don't want to say that I'm not focused at the beginning of a tournament, but you know what I mean, it's a different kind of focused, I guess.

READ THE FULL INTERVIEW