Poker is like a roller coaster. Like a sine wave. Like the ocean. That quality of rising and falling, ups and downs, ecstasy to joy, pleasure to pain pervades the game on every level. A single hand is just like a session, which is just like a year, which is just like a career. From the flop until the river, depending on how the cards are dealt and what your opponents do, you can experience the full range of emotions – from pure joy to pure anguish within a matter of minutes. You can go from the trapper to the trapped, from shark to donk, from master to student. The same can be said for a session of poker, for a week of poker, and on and on. You can be on top of the poker world one moment and in the doldrums the next.
As you can guess by the title of this little number, I’m currently experiencing one of poker’s dreaded downswings. It’s lasted a few months. Granted, I haven’t been fully rounding since January, but when I do get the time to play, for the most part it hasn’t been pretty. I’m struggling even to win heads up matches, which has been a specialty of mine for quite a while. I can’t beat Billy in a series to save my life. I can’t even cash in Connor’s game, which I used to friggin’ dominate. It’s getting alarming, in a way. Is everyone else really getting that much better? Or is my poker game simply growing stagnant? Or both?
I’m not really sure what’s going on with me. Maybe I just haven’t worked on my game enough or something. At any rate, I find this troubling, so I’m going to rededicate myself to reading literature and keeping up with the evolutions of the various games and how they’re being played. Because right now I feel like I’m on that first drop of a huge roller coaster … only the drop keeps going, and going, and going …
It’s about time that the train swings back up a little bit. I want to hear that click-click-click as the coaster gets ready for another peak. It’s time to turn this baby around.
It’s time to win again.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Underestimating Opponents
I was playing in the $1/2 NL game at the Hustler today, up $35 on my $50 buy-in. I had been in the game for 20 minutes at this point, so being either up that much or down that much was pretty much expected. The game was pretty good, a few obvious fish, some players that are more solid. I hadn’t noticed any obvious Level 3’ers yet, so was feeling pretty at ease. I like the small game at the Hustler because I can make decent money at it without worrying too much about being outplayed. Outflopped or otherwise outdrawn, sure, but very rarely outplayed. So I typically don’t worry too much about the information I give off – I feel free to bet according to hand strength, visibly react to other players’ actions and the cards that come out, audibly mutter my observations to myself. There’s no need to be Chris Ferguson in the $1/2 NL – no one’s savvy enough to spot your tells anyway.
Right?
Two hands reminded me that there are exceptions to just about every rule. The first was kind of interesting. I raised second-to-act preflop with AT off. The guppy at the table called my raise cold from middle position, as did the big blind. Now, typically when the flop is dealt I’m looking at my opponents rather than the cards. See how they react to them, whether or not they got what they were looking for. This time I was watching the player from the big blind. I couldn’t watch both players from my seat, and the big blind was the tightest guy at the table, so his overcall concerned me. Well, I turned to him to get my read, and I was flabbergasted to find him already staring right back at me. He was doing exactly what I was doing – trying to get a read and see if I had connected with the flop. We seriously locked eyes for a good seven seconds before the dealer nudged him with a quiet “Check or bet, sir?” Finally the guy looked over at the flop and checked. It contained an ace, so I bet out. The rest of the hand wasn't that spectacular, I was just blown away because it was the first time I’d seen that at this level at the Hustler.
About a round later, another guy at the table surprised me in similar fashion. I picked up J7 offsuit in the small blind and was ready to muck it before the action even came to me. There were several callers, and I half mucked before I realized I was halfway in already. I looked at my cards again to make sure I had the suits down and tossed in the extra chip. The big blind checked.
The flop was nice, Q-J-7 and two-toned giving me bottom two pair. I bet out $7, hoping someone that someone hit the queen and hoping to make players pay to hit their flush or straight draws. In a seven-handed pot, someone had to have something. One guy called from late position, everyone else folded. Oh well. The turn was an offsuit trey – beautiful card. I figured the guy wasn’t going anywhere with a queen or a strong draw, but he also didn’t seem to have a strong enough hand to bet if I checked it, so I bet out another $15.
The guy goes into the think tank, and starts to puzzle it out. “Hmmmm, you called before the flop,” he says, “but you almost folded. What could you do that with? You almost fold from the small blind, check your cards, and then come out betting strong on the flop. You must have flopped two pair … a bad-looking hand like jack-seven. Yeah, that’s what you have, jack-seven. I fold.” He mucks his AQ face up.
All I could do was smile and show him how great a read he'd just made. His analysis sounded exactly like what I would work myself through in the opposite situation. Again, I had underestimated an opponent’s poker acumen and this time is had cost me. Shot myself in the foot.
So what’s the lesson for me? Take the pros’ advice and stop giving away information. Like shooting free throws, pick a routine and stick with it.
Awesome, another hole in my game that needs pluggin'.
That’s what makes poker fun.
Right?
Two hands reminded me that there are exceptions to just about every rule. The first was kind of interesting. I raised second-to-act preflop with AT off. The guppy at the table called my raise cold from middle position, as did the big blind. Now, typically when the flop is dealt I’m looking at my opponents rather than the cards. See how they react to them, whether or not they got what they were looking for. This time I was watching the player from the big blind. I couldn’t watch both players from my seat, and the big blind was the tightest guy at the table, so his overcall concerned me. Well, I turned to him to get my read, and I was flabbergasted to find him already staring right back at me. He was doing exactly what I was doing – trying to get a read and see if I had connected with the flop. We seriously locked eyes for a good seven seconds before the dealer nudged him with a quiet “Check or bet, sir?” Finally the guy looked over at the flop and checked. It contained an ace, so I bet out. The rest of the hand wasn't that spectacular, I was just blown away because it was the first time I’d seen that at this level at the Hustler.
About a round later, another guy at the table surprised me in similar fashion. I picked up J7 offsuit in the small blind and was ready to muck it before the action even came to me. There were several callers, and I half mucked before I realized I was halfway in already. I looked at my cards again to make sure I had the suits down and tossed in the extra chip. The big blind checked.
The flop was nice, Q-J-7 and two-toned giving me bottom two pair. I bet out $7, hoping someone that someone hit the queen and hoping to make players pay to hit their flush or straight draws. In a seven-handed pot, someone had to have something. One guy called from late position, everyone else folded. Oh well. The turn was an offsuit trey – beautiful card. I figured the guy wasn’t going anywhere with a queen or a strong draw, but he also didn’t seem to have a strong enough hand to bet if I checked it, so I bet out another $15.
The guy goes into the think tank, and starts to puzzle it out. “Hmmmm, you called before the flop,” he says, “but you almost folded. What could you do that with? You almost fold from the small blind, check your cards, and then come out betting strong on the flop. You must have flopped two pair … a bad-looking hand like jack-seven. Yeah, that’s what you have, jack-seven. I fold.” He mucks his AQ face up.
All I could do was smile and show him how great a read he'd just made. His analysis sounded exactly like what I would work myself through in the opposite situation. Again, I had underestimated an opponent’s poker acumen and this time is had cost me. Shot myself in the foot.
So what’s the lesson for me? Take the pros’ advice and stop giving away information. Like shooting free throws, pick a routine and stick with it.
Awesome, another hole in my game that needs pluggin'.
That’s what makes poker fun.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Thanks for the Heads Up: No Pun Intended
Match #1 in the best of 3 Tattoo Match between Jamin and Yo Soy.
7:28 Jackie draws first blood.
7:31 Jamin takes down the first showdown of the evening with his queen kicker.
7:33 Blinds are going up.
7:35 Jackie disgustedly shows pocket aces when Jamin folds preflop.
7:38 Blinds up to 75-150.
Jamin: 1250
Jackie: 1750
7:40 Jamin takes down a decent pot when Jackie folds to his reraise.
7:41 First all in of the night but no caller. Jamin claims he had Q-2 of clubs.
7:43 Blinds going up.
7:47 Lots of preflop folding going on.
7:48 Blinds up again. Chip stacks are fairly even still.
7:50 Jamin goes all in and Jackie calls.
Jamin shows Ace-four offsuit and Jackie shows 9-6 of clubs. The board is no help to Jackie and Jamin takes the first match.
Match #2 will be featured later tonight after our HORSE tourney.
7:28 Jackie draws first blood.
7:31 Jamin takes down the first showdown of the evening with his queen kicker.
7:33 Blinds are going up.
7:35 Jackie disgustedly shows pocket aces when Jamin folds preflop.
7:38 Blinds up to 75-150.
Jamin: 1250
Jackie: 1750
7:40 Jamin takes down a decent pot when Jackie folds to his reraise.
7:41 First all in of the night but no caller. Jamin claims he had Q-2 of clubs.
7:43 Blinds going up.
7:47 Lots of preflop folding going on.
7:48 Blinds up again. Chip stacks are fairly even still.
7:50 Jamin goes all in and Jackie calls.
Jamin shows Ace-four offsuit and Jackie shows 9-6 of clubs. The board is no help to Jackie and Jamin takes the first match.
Match #2 will be featured later tonight after our HORSE tourney.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Sunday, March 4, 2007
Shout Out
I came across a great tip today courtesy of Poker on a Mac.
Apparently you can read a lot of information from various poker books at Google. This is a great option for someone who wants to see what they are getting before they go buy a book or for someone like me who normally only gets 1/3rd through a poker book before they get bored.
Here's the link to Poker on a Mac's tip.
Apparently you can read a lot of information from various poker books at Google. This is a great option for someone who wants to see what they are getting before they go buy a book or for someone like me who normally only gets 1/3rd through a poker book before they get bored.
Here's the link to Poker on a Mac's tip.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Incompetence at Spirit Mountain
Normally when I hear about people acting out of line at a casino, it is followed quickly with comments about how the dealer and casino did not properly handle the situation. This was not the case last night. The only incompetence came from my fellow poker players.
Hand #1:
I look down at Ace-King off under the gun. We are playing limit Hold'em so I pop it up. The guy directly to my left calls. A loose passive chick calls from middle position. A solid but hyper-aggressive player calls on the button and the big blind who is just killing time till his buddy gets knocked out of the tournament also calls.
The flop is K-Q-J with two hearts. Big blind bets out with confidence. This looks like a dangerous board. However, the guy on my left and the girl in middle position could have anything. The hyper-aggressive player would have re-raised preflop if he had two face cards. So all I'm really worried about are players on drawing hands and the big blind. I raise to put pressure on the draws. The guy behind me calls. Middle chick and the aggressive guy fold. The big blind calls.
The turn is a miss. Big blind considers betting but in an obvious sign of weakness he chickens out checks. I toss in a bet and both players call.
The river is the 9 of hearts. It's the worst card in the deck. Big blind may have had a pair and a draw. The guy behind me could have had anything. Big blind checks and I check too. The guy on my left bets. The big blind calls. I take my time with my decision. Is there any way I can fold the hand? Why would big blind just call if he hit a draw? What could the guy behind me have to bet with?
I've probably been thinking for ten seconds when the guy on my left announces that he can't win the hand and tables ace-5 of diamonds. He was just bluffing at the scare card on the river. I still haven't called but he made my decision really easy. I have to be ahead of the big blind. However, before I'm able to place my call, big blind tables his hand too. K-2. Top pair crap kicker. I call and take down the rather large pot. People can be so dumb.
Hand #2:
I would have had the best hand if I had played and could have diffused this entire situation. However, I didn't so here's what went down. It is heads up at the river. The board shows Q-J-3-7-2. There's no possible flush. Once again the guy on my left is involved. The other guy is really loud and aggressive. He's kinda a prick. The guy on my left was on the button and the loud guy was the big blind. Big blind bet out on every street and the guy on my left called him down.
After the final call, the aggressor says "Good call. I only have a pair of threes." He flashes his cards so quickly that I didn't get to see them and then he mucks his hand. The guy on my left didn't know what to do. In his defense, he was a really nice guy but he just didn't know anything about playing poker as was the case here. He had ace-king high and couldn't beat the threes but the other guy mucked. So he just placed his cards down, face up, and looked around for help. The dealer immediately pushes the pot his direction but he doesn't start picking up the chips.
Big blind looks surprised that the chips aren't being picked up right away. Then he looks at his opponents cards and notices for the first time that he mucked the best hand. He blows up. The dealer says that you have to table your cards to win the hand. The guy tells her to fuck off. She calls the floor over who explains the same thing and awards the pot to the ace-king guy. The guy with threes immediately leaves, still complaining and kicks over some dude's cane on the way out. What an ass.
Hand #1:
I look down at Ace-King off under the gun. We are playing limit Hold'em so I pop it up. The guy directly to my left calls. A loose passive chick calls from middle position. A solid but hyper-aggressive player calls on the button and the big blind who is just killing time till his buddy gets knocked out of the tournament also calls.
The flop is K-Q-J with two hearts. Big blind bets out with confidence. This looks like a dangerous board. However, the guy on my left and the girl in middle position could have anything. The hyper-aggressive player would have re-raised preflop if he had two face cards. So all I'm really worried about are players on drawing hands and the big blind. I raise to put pressure on the draws. The guy behind me calls. Middle chick and the aggressive guy fold. The big blind calls.
The turn is a miss. Big blind considers betting but in an obvious sign of weakness he chickens out checks. I toss in a bet and both players call.
The river is the 9 of hearts. It's the worst card in the deck. Big blind may have had a pair and a draw. The guy behind me could have had anything. Big blind checks and I check too. The guy on my left bets. The big blind calls. I take my time with my decision. Is there any way I can fold the hand? Why would big blind just call if he hit a draw? What could the guy behind me have to bet with?
I've probably been thinking for ten seconds when the guy on my left announces that he can't win the hand and tables ace-5 of diamonds. He was just bluffing at the scare card on the river. I still haven't called but he made my decision really easy. I have to be ahead of the big blind. However, before I'm able to place my call, big blind tables his hand too. K-2. Top pair crap kicker. I call and take down the rather large pot. People can be so dumb.
Hand #2:
I would have had the best hand if I had played and could have diffused this entire situation. However, I didn't so here's what went down. It is heads up at the river. The board shows Q-J-3-7-2. There's no possible flush. Once again the guy on my left is involved. The other guy is really loud and aggressive. He's kinda a prick. The guy on my left was on the button and the loud guy was the big blind. Big blind bet out on every street and the guy on my left called him down.
After the final call, the aggressor says "Good call. I only have a pair of threes." He flashes his cards so quickly that I didn't get to see them and then he mucks his hand. The guy on my left didn't know what to do. In his defense, he was a really nice guy but he just didn't know anything about playing poker as was the case here. He had ace-king high and couldn't beat the threes but the other guy mucked. So he just placed his cards down, face up, and looked around for help. The dealer immediately pushes the pot his direction but he doesn't start picking up the chips.
Big blind looks surprised that the chips aren't being picked up right away. Then he looks at his opponents cards and notices for the first time that he mucked the best hand. He blows up. The dealer says that you have to table your cards to win the hand. The guy tells her to fuck off. She calls the floor over who explains the same thing and awards the pot to the ace-king guy. The guy with threes immediately leaves, still complaining and kicks over some dude's cane on the way out. What an ass.
Ego Boost.
I recently took an online "Poker IQ Quiz," and let's just say my results were less than stellar. It was around like 50 questions about different poker scenarios, and was supposed to test the way you think about poker. I was pleased to do rather well in certain aspects (such as small/medium pair play, recognizing betting patterns, use of logic, and computational speed) but a little puzzled that I didn't do so well in other areas I generally consider my strengths (like tournament play, bluffing, understanding of pot odds, and aggression). It seemed pretty strange to me. Either my understanding of my own game is pretty off the mark, or the test is quite flawed.
My overall reaction to the thing?
"Whatev."
I didn't put too much stock into the results. I have hard data that proves that I'm nowhere close to a "break-even player in home games and a slow loser at raked casino tables." I'm definitely much further along than that. In addition, I took the test during a spare 10 minutes at work, while chatting with Billy, listening to music and having a mid-afternoon snack. The test is designed to be taken in 30 minutes. So I wasn't reading the questions all that carefully and generally didn't take the thing seriously.
I know, I'm making excuses. The truth is, while I really didn't care that much about the results, it still rankles a little bit to be called "average" under any circumstances. Call me a pro, call me a donk, but don't label me the hated "A-word." I don't know, for some reason I just find mediocrity irritating.
I decided to take that irritation out on Connor's home game.
Connor's game is interesting. As I've mentioned in an earlier post, they play a $20 Sit n Go, sometimes with a rebuy period and sometimes not. What's interesting to me is that there are definitely some good players in the mix, but that I always find a way to win. And it's not like I don't lose my share of big hands. I can share my secret to success in a later post. For now, suffice it to say that they usually only pay 1st and 2nd place and I've walked out a bit richer every time. Out of the four tourneys I've played there, I've taken three 1st's and a 2nd (including tonight). And the one 2nd place, I got it all in with A-K suited vs. pocket Jacks preflop when the guy had me just barely covered. What can you do?
Anyway, tonight was another win. A cool extra $120 in the pocket for two hours of work. Not an amazing amount of money, but enough to pay the gas for a couple weeks. I'll take that. And it's definitely enough to get my ego back where it belongs ... high up in the sky and swollen like a hot air balloon. Chalk up another one for the good guys. And f*ck IQ tests. I hate the number 102.
March Madness and NBC Heads Up Poker
I love the holiday season. March and April are the best two months of the year and there is no better way to kick off the festivities than by filing out a bracket for NBC's heads up poker championship. Without further ado, here are my first round picks.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pHPKIFJDO2nzx3K1oMWpWAA
I'll work on getting the full bracket up on GoG over the weekend.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pHPKIFJDO2nzx3K1oMWpWAA
I'll work on getting the full bracket up on GoG over the weekend.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Return to the Basics
Decent review of the basics for HORSE.
http://www.cardplayer.com/magazine/article/16530
http://www.cardplayer.com/magazine/article/16530
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Poker Stars Review
Here is my preliminary review of Poker Stars.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
Rebuy.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
Rebuy.
Bad Beat.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
I'm not being biased at all.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
Rebuy.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
Rebuy.
Bad Beat.
Do well, do well, do well... get bad beat for it all.
I'm not being biased at all.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Jamie Gold
Could we have had this Jamie Gold thing wrong this entire time? I wasn't around for the World Series of Poker fiasco but what I learned from reading about it and listening to my friends is that Jamie Gold won by pushing around the final table with aggressive talk and aggressive play. Also, I learned that Jamie Gold had made a promise to a friend/business partner to split his winnings and that a lawsuit was filed over it presumably because Jamie Gold didn't want to do it anymore. Looking back though, could we have been ass-backward about the situation the whole time?
Here are the facts to the best of my knowledge.
1) Jamie Gold promises to split winnings.
2) Jamie Gold makes phone call during the WSOP telling the other guy not to worry because he will get his half.
3) Gold gives ridiculously generous gift to dealers and casino staff.
4) The other guy files a law suit to make sure he gets his money.
5) Gold appears at different poker events. The ones that I've seen (High Stakes and Poker After Dark) show a Gold who is uncomfortable with his new star status and seems to try to be relatively humble towards the other players. Also, it appears as if most of the other players like him (Doyle being the exception).
6) Gold settles the lawsuit out of court.
Everything here shows Gold as a relatively decent fellow except the part where the other guy files a law suit. Could it be possible that we all just assumed Gold was a prick and decided he didn't want to share when in reality the other guy went "Holy crap! I'm going to get millions. I better find a lawyer and get this thing out in the open to make sure he doesn't change him mind?"
I don't know Gold and I don't know everything about the situation but we all jumped to conclusions about the guy and it would suck if we've been trashing a relatively nice guy for the past half a year.
Here are the facts to the best of my knowledge.
1) Jamie Gold promises to split winnings.
2) Jamie Gold makes phone call during the WSOP telling the other guy not to worry because he will get his half.
3) Gold gives ridiculously generous gift to dealers and casino staff.
4) The other guy files a law suit to make sure he gets his money.
5) Gold appears at different poker events. The ones that I've seen (High Stakes and Poker After Dark) show a Gold who is uncomfortable with his new star status and seems to try to be relatively humble towards the other players. Also, it appears as if most of the other players like him (Doyle being the exception).
6) Gold settles the lawsuit out of court.
Everything here shows Gold as a relatively decent fellow except the part where the other guy files a law suit. Could it be possible that we all just assumed Gold was a prick and decided he didn't want to share when in reality the other guy went "Holy crap! I'm going to get millions. I better find a lawyer and get this thing out in the open to make sure he doesn't change him mind?"
I don't know Gold and I don't know everything about the situation but we all jumped to conclusions about the guy and it would suck if we've been trashing a relatively nice guy for the past half a year.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Hustler Highlights
I’m a huge fan of table talk – in my mind it’s one of the greatest advantages live poker has over online poker. That and being legal. Anyway, here are a few “soundbytes,” if you will, from yesterday’s 5-hour sesh at the Hustler. There was a cash-game full of pros right next to my table … kind of a who’s who of sorts. David “Chip” Reese, Ted Forrest, Phil Ivey, Johnny “World” Hennigan, Larry Flynt, Barry Greenstein, and a few guys I didn’t recognize. Each of them had huge stacks of $1,000 chips in front of them. Pretty cool stuff. So here are the gems I remember. Enjoy.
_ _
Seat 7: Yeah, we knew you had a pocket pair.
Me: Really? Wow, good read.
Seat 7: Actually, it wasn’t that good a read. Before the flop you were muttering “Come on, let me hit a set!”
Me: Was I really?
Seat 7: Yeah.
Me: Seriously???
Seat 7: Hahaha, yeah.
Me: Jeez, I gotta work on my poker face. Giving tells left and right here … I mean, literally telling what I have!
Seat 3: Damn it, that’s almost like … almost twice that I’ve laid down the best hand!
Me: Almost twice, huh? So you mean … once?
*Laughter*
Seat 7: Check it out!
Seat 6 (his girlfriend): What? What is it?
Seat 7: That’s Phil Ivey!!!
Seat 6: Oh really? Wow! Oh wait … who’s Phil Ivey?
Seat 3: ‘Who’s Phil Ivey?’ Man, not only does she not belong in a poker game – she deserves to be shot for asking that question!
Seat 5: Nice jacket, where’d you get it?
Me: In South Carolina … when I went to see my folks.
Seat 5: I see. Well it looks really good on you.
Me: Uh, thanks … bro …
Floorman: I’m sorry sir, but you have to remove your hood while at the table.
Me: You’re joking right?
Floorman: No, sir.
Me: Really? Wow! Is that really a casino rule? I mean Phil Laak wears a hood!
Floorman: Who?
Me: You know … The Unabomber.
Floorman: Sir, I don’t negotiate with terrorists, and I’m not negotiating with you.
Me: Hahaha … this guy has balls … he’d probably make Osama remove his turban.
(I take off the hood).
Me: Nice Tens.
Seat 2, raking the pot: Wha …?
Me: You had pocket Tens, right?
Seat 2 smiles and shakes his head.
A few hands later the same guy check-raises me …
Me: Damn it, you have two pair. You have Aces and Jacks … outflopped the crap out of me. I’m gonna lay this down.
(I lay down my Ace-King face up.)
Seat 2: Jesus, you have reads … am I getting hustled at the Hustler?
Me: Haha thanks for the Chris Ferguson comparison, but if I were Jesus I’d for sure be at the next table over.
Seat 7: I wish I could sit down at that table. Just to learn from those guys.
Seat 8: Yeah, you’d be like – “Um, I’d like to buy in for the small blind.”
Seat 2: Wow, you called me with middle pair? Amazing. Nice hand, though.
Seat 6: You just had that “I’m full of sh—” look on your face.
Seat 4: Ouch man, she just said you look like sh—!
Seat 6: Not so much that he looks like sh—, but he certainly plays like it.
(I make a great call on the river with Ace high to take down an $80 pot.)
Me: Sorry man, but your bet just didn’t make sense to me. Smelled like a bluff.
Seat 3: So if he’d moved all in you would have folded?
(I ponder this for a moment)
Me. Against a good player, I’d lay it down in a heartbeat. Against you, though … I’d probably beat you into the pot.
Seat 3: Hahaha
_ _
Seat 7: Yeah, we knew you had a pocket pair.
Me: Really? Wow, good read.
Seat 7: Actually, it wasn’t that good a read. Before the flop you were muttering “Come on, let me hit a set!”
Me: Was I really?
Seat 7: Yeah.
Me: Seriously???
Seat 7: Hahaha, yeah.
Me: Jeez, I gotta work on my poker face. Giving tells left and right here … I mean, literally telling what I have!
Seat 3: Damn it, that’s almost like … almost twice that I’ve laid down the best hand!
Me: Almost twice, huh? So you mean … once?
*Laughter*
Seat 7: Check it out!
Seat 6 (his girlfriend): What? What is it?
Seat 7: That’s Phil Ivey!!!
Seat 6: Oh really? Wow! Oh wait … who’s Phil Ivey?
Seat 3: ‘Who’s Phil Ivey?’ Man, not only does she not belong in a poker game – she deserves to be shot for asking that question!
Seat 5: Nice jacket, where’d you get it?
Me: In South Carolina … when I went to see my folks.
Seat 5: I see. Well it looks really good on you.
Me: Uh, thanks … bro …
Floorman: I’m sorry sir, but you have to remove your hood while at the table.
Me: You’re joking right?
Floorman: No, sir.
Me: Really? Wow! Is that really a casino rule? I mean Phil Laak wears a hood!
Floorman: Who?
Me: You know … The Unabomber.
Floorman: Sir, I don’t negotiate with terrorists, and I’m not negotiating with you.
Me: Hahaha … this guy has balls … he’d probably make Osama remove his turban.
(I take off the hood).
Me: Nice Tens.
Seat 2, raking the pot: Wha …?
Me: You had pocket Tens, right?
Seat 2 smiles and shakes his head.
A few hands later the same guy check-raises me …
Me: Damn it, you have two pair. You have Aces and Jacks … outflopped the crap out of me. I’m gonna lay this down.
(I lay down my Ace-King face up.)
Seat 2: Jesus, you have reads … am I getting hustled at the Hustler?
Me: Haha thanks for the Chris Ferguson comparison, but if I were Jesus I’d for sure be at the next table over.
Seat 7: I wish I could sit down at that table. Just to learn from those guys.
Seat 8: Yeah, you’d be like – “Um, I’d like to buy in for the small blind.”
Seat 2: Wow, you called me with middle pair? Amazing. Nice hand, though.
Seat 6: You just had that “I’m full of sh—” look on your face.
Seat 4: Ouch man, she just said you look like sh—!
Seat 6: Not so much that he looks like sh—, but he certainly plays like it.
(I make a great call on the river with Ace high to take down an $80 pot.)
Me: Sorry man, but your bet just didn’t make sense to me. Smelled like a bluff.
Seat 3: So if he’d moved all in you would have folded?
(I ponder this for a moment)
Me. Against a good player, I’d lay it down in a heartbeat. Against you, though … I’d probably beat you into the pot.
Seat 3: Hahaha
Saturday, February 10, 2007
El Stinko
Poker in my life has been “El Stinko” lately. Unless I have a really good showing in the CP VIP Tourney, that will be it.
Let’s start with the news today. Tony G no longer allows US customers. They claim that if I want my money, I have to transfer it to Tony G and he will in turn transfer it to me at Poker Stars or Full Tilt. Shady.
Here’s what I really want to post about.
Last night, I played in a $20 rebuy tournament at the local elks lodge. There was a $10 add-on at the break. I have to say that it was fun and the prize pool was decent with first place taking home $500. However, the structure in my opinion was horrible. For the first hour, the blinds increased every fifteen minutes. I was at a slow table. We couldn’t make it through a round before the blinds increased. I would guess that at the other tables, they were playing approx. one round per blind level.
After the break, things changed. They redrew seats and I started out on the button. They also changed the length of the blind levels. Now I would have guessed that they would make it longer now since players could no longer rebuy. However, the opposite happened. I’m not exactly sure what they did but it was one of three things. Either a) they shortened the blind levels to 6-8 minutes each, b) they increased the blinds every time someone got knocked out, or c) both. Like I said, I started on the button and the blinds went up 3 times before I got to be in the blind. This was at an 8-handed table.
How did I play? Well if my cards held up through the night, I probably would have had a chance to win. But you can say that about any tournament with any format. I’d venture to guess that in two hours I played 11 hands. At a round every 15-20 minutes, that’s 1-2 hands per round. My hand selection was pocket kings, pocket queens, pocket fours, ace-king, ace-queen, ace-queen, ace-nine, ace-five, ace-four, king-queen, and jack-ten. It was a below average night in terms of luck as I won small pots with ace-queen, ace-nine, ace-four, king-queen, and jack-ten and managed to lose big pots with the other 6.
Really I’m just complaining because I didn’t do as well as I hoped. However, with the structure, any skill advantage I may have is severely hindered and it’s not worth the time and money unless I continue to get staked in the game.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Sharks and Fish
*I wrote this while I was in Thailand and I thought it was pretty decent. I tried to shop it to Two Plus Two but they weren't interested so here it is. In the future, I plan on going in depth on a couple of the ideas I bring up in this. *
INTRODUCTION
Shark. Fish. They are two of the more common expressions in poker. One conjures images of great hunters of the sea: savage aggression, flesh-severing teeth, and a hauntingly efficient nose for blood. The latter is shark food. They are more numerous but less dangerous and more… ordinary.
Poker players share many similarities with wild animals such as sharks and fish. To both, survival is of the utmost importance as there are always hunters and competitors lurking. However, survival alone is not enough to be successful. For this, one needs to survive AND reproduce. Good players understand that the goal isn’t merely to protect your chips. Nor is it to put your chips constantly at risk while attempting to generate more. Instead, the optimal ratio lies somewhere in between these polar strategies.
Behavioral ecologists have found that animals also must find this balance. Only they don’t study texts and theory to determine which way is best. Instead they discover it through trial and error while risking something much more valuable than the chips that are in front of us. The ones that use the most efficient strategies are the ones that survive and reproduce. The rest, at varying rates, eventually go broke.
Despite the prevalence of terms like shark and fish, and perhaps because of them, much of the wealth of information available from the natural world has been overlooked. For millions of years, predators and prey have waged an evolutionary arms race towards survival and greater reproductive success. There have been strategies and counter-strategies and counter-counter-strategies. Poker players have a chance to learn from the best of the best.
A few examples of prey strategies used for thwarting predators and of hunter counter-methods should illustrate the applicability of these tactics to poker.
Detection and anti-detection strategies are often the simplest and most intuitive methods. For example, some desert rodents such as Banner-Tailed Kangaroo Rats forage more on moonless nights than on well-lit ones (Kotler 1984; Lockard 1978). This is presumably because their avian hunters have a more difficult time spotting them when there is no moon (Kotler 1984; Lockard 1978). Similarly it would be advantageous for a relatively unskilled poker player to avoid playing when many better players are around.
Many creatures also use cryptic behavior to avoid detection; they use camouflage to blend into the background. Predators have developed a method to counter-act this and to decrease the amount of time spent looking for food. They make use of search images (Tinbergen 1960). Blue Jays do this by stressing subtle visual markers associated with their food while searching (Pietrewicz and Kamil 1979). Poker players can do the same by creating stereotypes and generalizations, then applying them to the people sitting at the table around them. This timesaving shortcut will increase the speed with which one can identify everyone at the table. It could also be used to identify the variety of fish preferred from the others in a quick and timely fashion.
Even if they are detected, prey have strategies that can deter predators from attacking. One such method is association with a protected species. For example, close proximity to wasps or ants that are particularly aggressive towards one’s predators could provide some safety (Alcock 1997). A monkey will prefer to raid someone else’s nest if it has to brave painful wasps in order to reach yours (Joyce 1993). Similarly, if one is seated near a wild, lucky player with a big stack or near a good loose and aggressive player that player could be used as a buffer or shield. It would be very difficult for a shark to target you because he is also risking a tango with the other player’s stack.
Displaying warning coloration is another attack deterrent strategy. The goal is to advertise your unpleasantness so that the predator recognizes and avoids you (Alcock 1997). Even though the predator would probably still be able to eat the prey, it won’t like it very much if it gets sick, injured, or dies from the process. Thus warning coloration spares both the predator and the prey from unpleasantness. Monarch butterflies are famous for this (Wiklund and Sillén-Tullberg 1985). Their predators become ill and vomit after digestion and quickly learn to avoid them in the future (Wiklund and Sillén-Tullberg 1985). Many good poker players also use this strategy. They utilize a tight and aggressive table image to advertise that any potential attackers would be playing from behind.
All is not lost if you aren’t a good poker player or a toxic butterfly. There is also a deceptive side to warning coloration called Batesian Mimicry after Henry Bates, the naturalist who discovered it (Alcock 1997). Non-toxic and fishy individuals both can display warning coloration to deceive predators away from what would otherwise be a tasty snack. This is because although they, themselves, are not dangerous, the predators will avoid them due to their resemblance, at a glance, to their more unpleasant brethren.
Finally Optimal Foraging Theory warrants mentioning. This states that for one to forage optimally, it should choose food that provides the most energy for the least amount of effort (Wikipedia OFT). For clam-eating crows, this means ignoring smaller clams and focusing instead on larger ones (Richardson and Verbeek 1986). Small clams do not maximize food per energy spent (Richardson and Verbeek 1986). For poker sharks, this means searching for fish with a lot of money already on the table a.k.a. ATMs. Neither the poker players or the crows will be performing as well as they could if they wasted time on small prey when they could go for the larger stacks instead.
There is also a silver lining to this for people who find that he/she is being seated at a table consisting of more talented and stronger players. By buying in for a small amount, say the minimum buy-in, one might be able to play under the radar. After all, good players will be trying to forage optimally and to them you are only small clams.
CONCLUSION
The strategies discussed are just the tip of the iceberg. They represent a simplified sampling of predator and prey strategies that could be found in most animal behavior and behavioral ecology textbooks such as Alcock’s Animal Behavior. More complex strategies and greater analysis are published in various scientific journals; many of which are available on the Internet. Finally, predator and prey strategies aren’t the only aspects of behavioral ecology relevant to poker. Others include coping strategies for unpredictable and changing environments, stimulus filtering, habitat selection, migration, and competition with like individuals.
Much can be learned from these effective stratagems, which have been evolving for millions of years. Even if some seem elementary, one should remember that often the simplest strategies are the most efficient. But they are often the most overlooked.
REFERENCES
Alcock, J. Animal Behavior, 6th Ed. Sinauer Associates, Inc: Sunderland, Massachusetts. 1997.
Joyce, F.J. “Nesting Success of Rufous-Naped Wrens (Campylorhynchus ruifnucha) is Greater Near Wasp Nests.” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32: pp. 71-78. 1993.
Kotler, B.P. “Effects of Illumination on the Rate of Resource Harvesting in a Community of Desert Rodents.” American Midland Naturalist 11: pp. 383-389. 1984.
Lockard, R.B. “Seasonal Change in the Activity Pattern of Dipodomys spectabilis.” Journal of Mammalogy 59: pp. 563-568. 1978.
“Optimal Foraging Theory.” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_foraging_theory. 2006.
Pietrewicz, A.T. and Kamil, A.C. “Search Image Formation in the Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata).” Science 204: pp. 1332-1333. 1979.
Richardson, H. and Verbeek, N.A.M. “Diet Selection and Optimization by Northwestern Crows Feeding on Japanese Littleneck Clams.” Ecology 67: pp. 1219-1226. 1986.
Tinbergen, N. The Herring Gull’s World. Doubleday: Garden City, New York. 1960.
Wiklund, C. and Sillén-Tullberg, B. “Why Distasteful Butterflies Have Aposematic Larvae and Adults, But Cryptic Pupae: Evidence from Predation Experiments on the Monarch and the European Swallowtail.” Evolution 39: pp. 1155-1158. 1985.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Weekend Recap
- Friday Night Casino – Not a whole lot to report. I played some $2-$4 limit and posted my first losing live session since I came back in December. I feel that I played well but just didn’t have a lot to work with. I will be glad when I get my check from Bodog or get a job and can play something other then $2/$4.
- Saturday Night Home Game – Back to back losing nights for me. I didn’t feel like I played particularly well towards the end but it didn’t matter since I would have lost everything anyways on the last hand when I went all in with a straight and someone called with a set and filled up on the river. The extra few dollars I could have had from playing better wouldn’t have been enough to change the result of the final hand.
- Jamin called my bluff. I won’t post any hand histories. I’m not that insecure about my game and I’m way too lazy.
- Super Bowl – First, Jamin watched the game with a girl instead of with his buddies. There should be a man-law against that. Second, two weeks ago I thought the Colts would win. With each passing day, I’ve become a little less confident. So as with the NCAA Championship, I’m making a game day reversal and choosing the Bears to win. I also made a 5-prop bet-parlay just for fun. I have:
- Neither team scoring three straight times without the other team scoring. LOST
- Either team scoring in the first six and a half minutes of the game. WON
- Both teams making a field goal 33 yards or longer. LOST
- Peyton Manning’s first pass being a completion. LOST
- Rex Grossman’s first pass being incomplete or intercepted. LOST
- I’m way more excited for this week’s television lineup then I should be. Then again I’m adding the return of Lost and what should be a classic UCLA-USC match-up to my already terrific lineup of High Stakes, Poker After Dark (I watch a week behind so I start on the Laak-Esfandiari week), 24, and Heroes so perhaps I should be even more excited.
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Heads Up Series between Billy & I
Jamin: Dos :-D
Billy: Cero :-X
Billy threatened to post the hand histories if I did this, to show the world how big of a suckout artist I am. I guess I'm the luckiest player ever. :-P
Friday, February 2, 2007
You Know You're Way Too Into Poker When...
Billy: well i think thats a good idea
Billy: ive generally had good experiences on double dates
Jamin: definitely... i called it
Jamin: would be too nervous heads up
Jamin: damn i called it heads up
Jamin: i'm such an addict
Jamin: like when i asked for a set of cookies that time at diddy riese
Billy: ive generally had good experiences on double dates
Jamin: definitely... i called it
Jamin: would be too nervous heads up
Jamin: damn i called it heads up
Jamin: i'm such an addict
Jamin: like when i asked for a set of cookies that time at diddy riese
Drawing Red Lines
*There seems to be an interesting correlation with how many hours I play and how much I post or rather how little I play. I seem to have found a good balance right now.*
Drawing Red Lines is Jim McManus's bluffing at poker and at war. It's a good read.
The first part can be found online at Cardplayer.
The second part can be found in your local casino addition of Cardplayer and also online.
Drawing Red Lines is Jim McManus's bluffing at poker and at war. It's a good read.
The first part can be found online at Cardplayer.
The second part can be found in your local casino addition of Cardplayer and also online.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
How Could I Play This Differently? #2b
To recap: I am heads up in the big blind with 3-5 against a loose aggressive player in the small blind. We saw the A-2-4 flop for cheap. All the cards are hearts. She checked-raised my $2 bet for another $6. I just called.
The turn is the jack of clubs. This is a great card for me as it doesn’t scare her and at the same time probably didn’t increase her chances of catching up to me. She bets $4 into me.
I was a little surprised at this. I didn’t expect this card to scare her but it looks as if it did. She bets really weakly $4 into a pot of almost $20. Why would she do this? If she had a pair and a flush draw I don’t think she would be so obviously weak. I would expect her to either continue her strong image or check and hope I so scared of getting check-raised again that I give her a free card. If she has a set, she could be trying to trap me into a re-raise or she could be scared by my call that I have the flush and am trying to trap. If she has a vulnerable two-pair she might be scared that I just made a bigger two pair. Also, she could just be doing what I did on the flop and made a small bet to try to force me to reveal information about my hand.
I believe that my table sees me as a tight aggressive player because I am worried about getting outplayed. Therefore I don’t think she can put me on a hand like ace jack because I would have raised before the flop. Also, I think that she would expect me to have played a lot stronger on the flop if I had had a made hand. Factoring this in, I think she is making an informational bet and wants to see just where I am at in the hand. Also, I think this is a strong move because it means she isn’t worried that much about the river card hurting her chances of winnings. She is probably confident that if I just call and the fourth flush card hits, she could lay her hand down. Therefore I narrow her down further to either two-pair or a set that she thinks is good or she is on the draw and is trying to set her own price for seeing the river.
What should I do? I am facing a $4 bet and including the bet, the pot is $24 minus the rake. I rule out calling. I am leaning towards the read that she has two-pair or a set over the flush draw. If I call and the flush card hits, she will act cautiously which means I won’t make much on the river. Thus I need to extract some value now. How much should I bet?
I ended up raising to $15.
I chose this amount because it was almost 4 times the amount of her bet but was still small enough where I wouldn’t lose her. I have decided to wait for the river to bring down the hammer. I am waiting to make sure I have the best hand because I’m sure if she has two pair or a set, all the money will go in the middle as long as the scare card doesn’t come. However, I’m not sure if this is a good amount. She has to call $11 if she is on the flush draw. That means she is getting almost 4:1. I don’t think she’s on the flush so that means she is getting almost 4:1 to fill up. Perhaps I should have bet slightly more to give her worse odds towards filling up.
Small blind just calls. The river is the ace of diamonds. She bets $10. I call. She shows the ace of clubs and the four of diamonds for a full house and I muck my straight.
This was about the worst card in the deck for me. All I could do was call and hope that she had pair of aces and the flush draw and not that she had the two pair or set that I was reading her for.
I don’t have a lot of problems with how I played the hand. However, it was out of the ordinary for me and I am not really comfortable with how it went. Normally I would have re-raised her on the flop. This would create a number of problems for me though. I am pretty sure that she would have moved all-in on me. She was riding a rush and was loose aggressive. I would end up guessing between whether she made the flush or was making a play. I would probably have folded and been bluffed but I also lose a significant % if I call when she is on the flush draw and when she is on the full house draw not to mention if she made the move with the flush.
I guess what I’m really asking isn’t whether I should have played the hand in this manner but where I could improve on this strategy.
The turn is the jack of clubs. This is a great card for me as it doesn’t scare her and at the same time probably didn’t increase her chances of catching up to me. She bets $4 into me.
I was a little surprised at this. I didn’t expect this card to scare her but it looks as if it did. She bets really weakly $4 into a pot of almost $20. Why would she do this? If she had a pair and a flush draw I don’t think she would be so obviously weak. I would expect her to either continue her strong image or check and hope I so scared of getting check-raised again that I give her a free card. If she has a set, she could be trying to trap me into a re-raise or she could be scared by my call that I have the flush and am trying to trap. If she has a vulnerable two-pair she might be scared that I just made a bigger two pair. Also, she could just be doing what I did on the flop and made a small bet to try to force me to reveal information about my hand.
I believe that my table sees me as a tight aggressive player because I am worried about getting outplayed. Therefore I don’t think she can put me on a hand like ace jack because I would have raised before the flop. Also, I think that she would expect me to have played a lot stronger on the flop if I had had a made hand. Factoring this in, I think she is making an informational bet and wants to see just where I am at in the hand. Also, I think this is a strong move because it means she isn’t worried that much about the river card hurting her chances of winnings. She is probably confident that if I just call and the fourth flush card hits, she could lay her hand down. Therefore I narrow her down further to either two-pair or a set that she thinks is good or she is on the draw and is trying to set her own price for seeing the river.
What should I do? I am facing a $4 bet and including the bet, the pot is $24 minus the rake. I rule out calling. I am leaning towards the read that she has two-pair or a set over the flush draw. If I call and the flush card hits, she will act cautiously which means I won’t make much on the river. Thus I need to extract some value now. How much should I bet?
I ended up raising to $15.
I chose this amount because it was almost 4 times the amount of her bet but was still small enough where I wouldn’t lose her. I have decided to wait for the river to bring down the hammer. I am waiting to make sure I have the best hand because I’m sure if she has two pair or a set, all the money will go in the middle as long as the scare card doesn’t come. However, I’m not sure if this is a good amount. She has to call $11 if she is on the flush draw. That means she is getting almost 4:1. I don’t think she’s on the flush so that means she is getting almost 4:1 to fill up. Perhaps I should have bet slightly more to give her worse odds towards filling up.
Small blind just calls. The river is the ace of diamonds. She bets $10. I call. She shows the ace of clubs and the four of diamonds for a full house and I muck my straight.
This was about the worst card in the deck for me. All I could do was call and hope that she had pair of aces and the flush draw and not that she had the two pair or set that I was reading her for.
I don’t have a lot of problems with how I played the hand. However, it was out of the ordinary for me and I am not really comfortable with how it went. Normally I would have re-raised her on the flop. This would create a number of problems for me though. I am pretty sure that she would have moved all-in on me. She was riding a rush and was loose aggressive. I would end up guessing between whether she made the flush or was making a play. I would probably have folded and been bluffed but I also lose a significant % if I call when she is on the flush draw and when she is on the full house draw not to mention if she made the move with the flush.
I guess what I’m really asking isn’t whether I should have played the hand in this manner but where I could improve on this strategy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
