ken_p's Journal
[Most Recent Entries]
[Calendar View]
[Friends]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
ken_p's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
| Thursday, November 13th, 2008 | | 5:06 am |
| | Monday, September 29th, 2008 | | 7:19 am |
 This is from a recent WCOOP final table. I don't know why the disconnect but I feel certain that the player wasn't a happy camper. The loss of all in protection hurts fair play. | | Wednesday, February 27th, 2008 | | 12:17 pm |
| | Friday, October 6th, 2006 | | 5:49 pm |
| | Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006 | | 9:15 am |
Risk:Reward Benefit:Damage
When we look for a view that echos our player's mentality we look to the poker sites and publications. Seldom do we think of Time magazine. Yet there is a great article on poker as a positive impact on the lives of those young people that have so concerned our Congress. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1538649,00.htmlIt is a balanced article and quite thoughtful. In fact it is so good I'm not going to paraphrase the article but let you read it in it's entirety. Compulsive behavior is a minority activity. There are various descriptions and psychological concerns. But, the fact is that these are outliers in the human condition. Success in controlling such individual behavior is difficult. The step programs and treatment programs are there for those that finally seek help--but they are a minority. So, is a parent to help direct their children by hoping ignorance is bliss or provide them with knowledge that might help carry them through life? Time gives an interesting example. Although, I can never find the referenced quote; I believe it was either Jay or Marshal--two leading jurists--who said, "You cannot legislate morality." In taking a Philosophy course we learn that morality is hard to define. Unfortunately, our Congress has never had a problem doing so. We've allowed them to create bad laws with regularity going back to our first congress. That is why we have a tripartite system. There are checks and balances and they tend to work things out rather well over time. So, the outlier of the Leigh student who robbed a bank is being challenged by some concerned parents who believe poker can teach their youngster life lessons. Two outliers in the scheme of things with dramatically different conclusions. Unfortunately the positive one goes right over the head of our elected officials. | | Monday, October 2nd, 2006 | | 12:35 pm |
Keeping my head in the sand
That is better than the other spot it often resides. First off, you and I aren't headed for the slammer. The bill addresses moving money and little more. Can the government outlaw Neteller--which has 1700 sites that use it and a limited number are gambling sites. If I can buy a book or a pair of socks using Neteller then the government can't stop my bank sending money to it. To do otherwise would be restraint of trade. Is it in the interest of any offshore entity to cooperate with this law? What they are doing is not illegal in their jurisdiction. They don't fill out W2-G forms now. They have been breaking U.S. law with impunity since the start. The banking industry process millions of checks a day. Is it likely they can review each of those checks for legality under the new law? Do you realize the software involved and liability associated with making a mistake? EFTs are just as difficult. And each of these is part of a network of very secure software that's revision each time exposes the banking community to huge liability. You don't make sweeping changes in 270 days with these kinds of transaction facilitators. I would say that if you want a decent gamble then buying some of the highly damaged stock will be a decent play in about 3 days. Of course this isn't investment advice. I am not a gambler in the market but it sure looks like a better shot than a sports/race bet. There are a couple of looks that I'll recommend here: Craig Cunningham made a very nice post about all the other things that would be impacted if this works out. http://ccexplore.pokerworks.com/2006/10/02/what-now/#more-102And, Attorney Michael Craig goes on one of his rants about this silliness at: http://craigsjournal.pokerworks.com/2006/10/02/409-2/#more-116The best is an analysis by a professor with a background in gambling law: http://www.billrini.com/2006/10/02/professor-i-nelson-rose-analyzes-the-unlawful-internet-gambling-enforcement-act-of-2006/And Allyn Shulman adds a bit of info in a brief piece at: http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_news/news_story/1428?class=PokerNews | | Sunday, October 1st, 2006 | | 7:40 am |
Your Ineptness
If you meet a Cardinal, you call him Your Eminence. If you hang with Kings you call them Your Highness. For the Congress, go with Your Ineptness. This thing ain't agona fly. The law allows 270 days to implement and I can just about guarantee it will be extended and extended and the result will be clouded in fog. The law addresses EFTs (Electronic Fund Transfer) which were implemented over a multi-year period by the Federal Reserve. Programming these kinds of things is very anal. When you are talking about transfers of multi-million amounts multiple times in a short timeframe, you don't allow changes to the code without testing and validation that is on a par with Government Most Secret. EFTs are also international. Will the Bank of England et al be willing to go to the expense and trouble to help a bunch of politicians make an election tick on their pamphlets? Given the international climate, I doubt the bill will be well received. And they have recourse to the WTO (World Trade Organization) that has already ruled that the U.S. is out-of-line against Antiquan poker operations. If England is granted the right of punitive tariffs the Congress will cave in like one of Arnold Schwarzeneggar's sissy boys. There is going to be a ton of advise and worry about the bill. As laypersons in the world of law and international finance, we don't have a real clue. But, we're all aware that the online rooms don't pay any attention to existing U.S. law. If they did, they'd be providing info to the IRS about winnings. If they ignore that they will ignore the rest. Neteller looks to be unaffected in their off-shore location. They are a sham now and if they need to operate as a different sham then they will create that entity. | | Saturday, September 30th, 2006 | | 6:11 am |
I'm officially a member of the PPL???
The title above is stolen from Daniel Negreanu's journal. It is here; take a read and come back: http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-journal.php?subaction=showfull&id=1159395353&archive=&start_from=&ucat=&This thing is so wrong. What did you learn? Well, it looks like it will be 8 SnG shootouts. This child of online poker rooms is popular; it is my choice for games. I sit at one and either win a couple of bucks or get carried off on my shield. Why do I like it? It is a defined game with a known win loss ratio that I find acceptable. It may or may not be poker in the next guys eye. I know a high limit friend (_Fil) kicks sand in my forum posts over it 'not being poker' but it works for a lot of people OK, how about the PPL version? Well, that is interesting. But, lets do some lead-in first. TV Poker really got started with the WPT. It is another form of 'Reality TV' where a situation is provided and people try to make the virtual kill on the other guy. The WPT even gets the players to put up the cash where 'Survivors Vanalu' or whatever gets a real network to put up the prize. On screen we see coniving little rats we can root for in surviving the hell hole of the season and their manufactured problems. We know in the background there is a camp for the camera guys and all the rest where they eat nice meals and sleep on nice beds with EMT and a copter to get them across into the reasonably nearby civilization. So, back to Daniel Negraneau and his Journal. Evidently he and others have been working on this and how is it described? There will be: - A draft meeting ala Fantasy Baseball - The Venetian building the 'theater' - A 'Network deal' that is 'done' - A lot of little surprises in store - Production values that are now in place In China they have the Year of the Dragon etc. In poker it looks like this year is The Year of the Agent. Soon the eight 'Team Captains' will meet to draft their players. This will take place under the lights instead of Joe Willy's basement with pizza and beer for the gang. After all, we have 'production values' to consider. And there will be scripting instead of sharks in the water for the coniving gay guy's ad libs. The hope and prayer for all this is that--even with the 'little surprises' we get to see some decent poker. Truth be told there isn't a lot of that on TV. The WPT has been production driven from the git-go. Gimick abound from Fred Willard to poker in a downtown Vegas fish bowl. And here comes another 'concept driven' poker show. Welcome to the poker world of Newton Minnow. To bad they didn't consult with me. I have some great little surprises they could throw in. - Make Chris "Jesus" Ferguson play strapped to a cross - Put a gun in Doyle Brunson's crutch to blast any player calling hand. - Play with Mike 'The Mouth" Matusow's meds to make for a real surprise. - Make Howard 'The Professor' Lederer diagram his hands on a blackboard. - Give Dave "Devilfish" Ulliott some badly prepared Fugu. - Had an idea for Michael "The Grinder" Mizrachi but don't think all the blood would get by the censors. This thing looks like it could be more embarrassing than Celebrity Poker. Why? Well, the manufactured reality is really overshadowing the real reality of the reality genre's production value reality of TV reality that, in reality, ... Well, you get the idea... | | Sunday, September 24th, 2006 | | 6:05 am |
Marathon Man
--A look a big tournament online poker-- --The movie was a scary thriller. People never saw their dentist in the same light.-- --Hopefully, you'll look at your poker room in a similar light-- Sunday the Million went off at Stars with 4,495 putting up tourney tickets or good ol' cash to the tune of 500+30. That is six-percent juice and compares with brick and mortar WSOP events and even a chintzy Harrah's manages to survive with an assumed nice profit. The report says the tournament was a 13-hour Marathon and the blinds at the final table were 20-40,000 with a 4000 ante. That translates to Level 22 on their charts so we can extrapolate about 30-minute blinds if the final table started before the 12-hour blind increase. There is a full report of the Million here [ http://www.pokernews.com/news/2006/9/wcoop-event-two-rambo5-crushes.htm ] that has details of the day. Let me just highlight: The first major battle was a race between two of the shortest stacks...With several short stacks still in play, two more eliminations soon followed...tried his last $220,000 in with a J-9 steal...'Feb19' was similarly desperate for chips, and committed his last $300,000 with a suited A-3. Bing, Bang, Boom and the table shrinks and quickly. You'll see in the article that there was an on-fire player that came to the table with the big stack. He seemed unbeatable. The remaining late stacks were close in value with roughly a million. A circuit of the table cost 84K. Which means one bad play and you are down below M=10[1] and maybe much worse. I wrote a long article about blinds and I will refer you there for more of the why. [ http://pokerworks.com/article-510.html] I sweatered some friends in a big tournament on PokerRoom with, as I recall, a bigger buyin that I mention in an article that is currently unpublished. The blinds in that one were one hour. And the tournament was run over a two day period. So what is the difference? The people who survived were still in a position to play good poker. With an average stack, they could go card dead for a period without total panic. A big stack has trouble running over the table with his raises and is more vulnerable when he overbets at players who can stalk him. It gives everyone a chance to play their best poker. Felicia [Z. Dyer] Blogger and husband Glenn [Bagsnowski]--who also blogs--played tournaments at the Orleans while the WSOP was going and found a lot of mid-level pros they knew. Why were they there? Felicia said the blinds were far more fair. You can be dumb and select the worse deal but dumb pros don't survive. And, Felicia, Glenn and a host of others voted with their feet and the Orleans got its business just from giving the players a decent shot. Ignoring the juice taken from all the satellites, Poker Stars made $134,850. For a player to do better he had to finish second. And Poker Stars structure made that very hard to do. There were 4,495 players; this was a very big tournament and one had to suspect the blind structure was to become the major factor in play. One can say that it wasn't Poker Stars fault because the huge turn-out wasn't anticipated. But they were advertising it as the WCOOP and that should adjust things comfortably beyond normal blinds to provide the best quality of competition. The only thing I can see that is truly special is the amount of money put in play by the players. I admire the people who lasted 13-hours to make the final table. It would have been nice if they had blinds that left most of them with a shot. Maybe next time...or in a galaxy far, far away... --------------------- [1] M is the your cost to make a circuit of the table divided into your stack. You need to get pretty loose while you can still try to steal and survive with hands you wouldn't push with when it gets around ten. You need to start thinking any two cards when it get to five or below. An average M=5 at the table was a stack of T410,000. Take another look at the highlights. With all but one player having a late M of roughly 12 or below it is gamble time for all others;--you need to catch hands or die trying. And! Not only do you calculate your M but you do it for the opposition which gives you an idea of the hand strength he'll commit with and what your M will be if you call his move—a big clue and a huge grace note for the big stack. | | Saturday, September 23rd, 2006 | | 1:15 pm |
Two nice friends
I have to online acquaintances that I very much like. They are exact opposites. But super people and don't read this wrong in that respect. The one's close to my age. The other could be either of ours child and with a few indiscretions my grandchild. Friend A riles against the world. Nothing goes her way and it is the world conspiring against her. She isn't a happy camper. She does have some medical problems and apparently a nice medical package to see her through the difficulty. She's what most would call comfortably middle class. She has enough that she can satisfy whims as well or better than most. Friend B had a nice job when I met her. And at online poker she was better than ok. When she had ongoing health problem she lost her job and medical. And that didn't resolve itself well. Decent prospect came along but got stymied. Then she found her medical problems were worse than thought. And now members of her family are joining her with problems. And these are major problems. I said to another friend, “If you wrote this as a soap opera, it wouldn't be believable and they'd make you remove half the problems.” And it isn't just to the older members but her peers and even little kids. B has never really complained to me or others that I know of a single time. She is an upbeat person—even with horrendous circumstances. Throw in all the cliches here: swimming up stream; swimming in shark infested waters; didn't have bad luck then would have any; etc. etc. etc. The bible tells us the story of Lazarus whom God afflicted. With all due respect to the Bible wanting to make a point, B has it every bit as bad. OK, less painful inflictions but she's seeing awful things happening to loved ones. I would call that as bad. How can two people approach life so differently? They both get kicked in the backside at times past and present. One somehow stays optimistic and the other damn the uncaring world. Well, the world has always been uncaring and will never give anyone all they want. When we get a bit full of ourselves it always find a way to move us down a peg or ten. There is what is often referred to as a Indian or Chief's prayer. There are many similar prayers. They contain something along the lines of “grant me the grace to know the difference”; when we consider ourselves beset on all sides you can find someone worse off who can tell the difference and doesn't waste the effort tilting at their windmills or real, honest problems that can't be just set aside. I think the first will say that she cannot be made to bow and has strength. Well, Friend B is the one I admire most. I really wish she was my daughter. I could not help the hurt and make it go away but I could and do love her for her strength and know that the following generation improved on mine. That isn't something that is always apparent. And, it is a solace as I look toward the sunset. | | Wednesday, September 20th, 2006 | | 2:36 am |
Froggy went a courtin'
Well, the French have joined the gambling witch hunt. My last name is Prevo which is an Americanizing of Prevost. That is French but if you don't know that it could be close to a lot of middle European names. I don't brag up the fact and it actually a minority part of my gene pool. The French seem to embarrass themselves at every turn--including yesterday at the UN. I have enough to embarrass myself over without falling back on that. So, without pride, I read that the French have joined the indignation against gambling that isn't their own, licensed bit of profitability--joining another Napoleonic Code entity--Louisiana--in gambling self-righteousness. The On-line poker rooms are a fairly recent phenomenon. There's a group that question it integrity--which is a carryover from the general view. It is unfortunate but founded in fact. Legal gambling was never found outside Nevada in our Puritanic past. Fallwell et al also have historic counterparts in the Billy Sunday crowd and right back to Cotton Mather. So it is doubtful gambling's nemesis will be going away or that some of their less attractive side will disappear with the loss of a born-again President. When Las Vegas started to grow up, the states manage to put aside their puritanical ire and join in the greed with lotteries, riverboats and Indian Casinos while thinking they could maintain their righteousness. Politicians get as weird a collection of ideas as the rest of us. To do the weirdness justice the politicians have to also play the suckers from both sides of the street. France it seems has joined that cause. They have licensed gambling entities as does Louisiana. They promote their good above all else. For France it is the EU hypocrisy of fairness until they see alternate profit. For Louisiana, it is shaking down the rest of America to get a city rebuilt that should either be bulldozed or reduced to a theme park to let them still get their riverboat cut and a bit of tourism with a combination of the two being the intelligent answer. So, when you talk gambling in any form, you don't own the moral high-ground and you are faced with a political view that is disingenuous to say the least. So, what is our favorite poker room to do? At this point, it is screw up along with all the rest of us. The pols and media are popping out all the buzz words: crooked, money laundering, unreliable, etc. etc. etc. And, they are so quiet it looks like they have something to hide. Las Vegas has surmounted the Puritans using PR firms and lobby groups. That gets no wrath from the Politicians. Instead it gives them a warm glow in the coffers. Maybe, online poker with its developing relationship to the casino big boys is hoping they'll bail them out. But, the fact is the only benefit Vegas sees is the added traffic and they are pretty good at building that on their own. If the poker boom died tomorrow, it would likely increase their take by letting them reduce payroll and put more profitable per square foot slots in its place. The online folks are spread from across the globe—from the funny names in the Caribbean to the ones in the Mediterranean where we say, “That's a country?” to a few legit countries we don't need an atlas to find. Dutch Boyd started the tradition of suspicious online ownership and while there are a few public companies that can claim audited reliability the rest are in clouded partnerships. The private owners may be the salt of the earth or the second coming of the guys from NY, Detroit and Chicago that came to Vegas for it relatively-speaking healthier climate and the legalizing of their home business. And that creates a problem of perception—real or imagined. It also spreads them across the map which tends to make them another kind of mob rather than an army. Uncoordinated is the kind way to describe them. There is hope in all this. And, as people willing to gamble, that is often all we have. If they can get together and fund the PR and Lobbyist for themselves, they can reach the mainstream audience that their Dot-Net ads are angling for. Polls say that even most of the Bible belt bigots would be happy seeing them kicking into our tax base rather than kicking from the end of Congress' rope. The $64 dollar question here is: can a bunch of greedy entities--each trying to hatch their own golden goose egg--join their efforts? It isn't the best choice of a group to have hopes on that on. But, its all we've got going for us. | | Monday, September 18th, 2006 | | 9:55 am |
Omaha High
I have been doing the voyeur bit more than normal. It is fun watching those Full Tilt pros playing for real-honest-to-god amounts. The OH table seems to draw them. I played some .25-50 on PokerRoom with some dregs won in a freeroll of all things and manage to turn a few bucks into a huge (relative) win. Reported the silly details in a thread in the forums of Pokerworks.com: http://pokerworks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=611It is a hard game to continue in without the nuts. Yet, pot odds can dictate crying calls. Hence, there is real variance to the game and if you throw in pot limit then it is Katy bar the door. I played full tables and at those limits you are going to have the chasers and suckouts. At their 1-2K limit table it is 6 max and often 4 playing. It is a whole different game. It isn't unusual to see the 'names' push crap all the way to the river and win. The 'doom switch' crowd will point and gesture. But, it is just a different version of the same game. | | Sunday, September 17th, 2006 | | 9:10 am |
Pogo-stick Poker
We have met the enemy and he is us! – Pogo but, that isn't exactly what we are talking about. During the WSOP I've been a reader of RPG; but that is a whole other story and more suited to The National Inquirer. Today, someone called OldWolf lamented over his misfortune and even provided a hand history. It detailed another horrible beat which is his lamented lot in life. Sounded like he played a bunch of tournaments and not reached the first break. PokerStars Game #5960074191: Tournament #29830440, $3.00+$0.30 Hold'em No Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2006/08/18 - 04:49:00 (ET) Table '29830440 43' 9-max Seat #5 is the button Seat 1: biksta (670 in chips) Seat 2: QONF&@* (1240 in chips) Seat 3: squeakyh11 (3165 in chips) Seat 4: ace1ofhearts (1395 in chips) Seat 5: oscelio (2985 in chips) Seat 6: Old Wolf NZ (3495 in chips) Seat 7: noofster (2180 in chips) Seat 8: brnblk (1440 in chips) is sitting out Seat 9: Alchera (2010 in chips) Old Wolf NZ: posts small blind 15 noofster: posts big blind 30 *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to Old Wolf NZ [Qd Qs] brnblk: folds Alchera: folds biksta: raises 30 to 60 QONF&@*: raises 30 to 90 squeakyh11: folds ace1ofhearts: folds oscelio: calls 90 Old Wolf NZ: raises 3405 to 3495 and is all-in noofster: folds biksta: calls 610 and is all-in QONF&@*: folds oscelio: calls 2895 and is all-in *** FLOP *** [8s 3c 7c] *** TURN *** [8s 3c 7c] [3s] *** RIVER *** [8s 3c 7c 3s] [Ks] *** SHOW DOWN *** Old Wolf NZ: shows [Qd Qs] (two pair, Queens and Threes) oscelio: shows [As Kh] (two pair, Kings and Threes) oscelio collected 4630 from side pot biksta: shows [4c Ad] (a pair of Threes) oscelio collected 2130 from main pot *** SUMMARY *** Seat 5: oscelio (button) showed [As Kh] and won (6760) with two pair, Kings and Threes What does this jewel tell us? First, the game has barely begun. Blinds are at Level II. And, it is a low rent tournament with even more novice players than the norm. That is a good time to try to build a stack but it is also the time of the most suckouts. Our hero is in the small blind. The betting is: a raise from early position; a reraise from early middle position and the button just calls. With 3 competing we can assume that others will call the T90 for pot odds and we have a 270 pot without our hero who proceeds to go all in. He gets two callers. Heads up he would have been 56:42 against the Ako. In the 3-way pot he drops only slightly and became an even bigger favorite with the eventual winner falling to 1:3. That is only because of the really dog hand that played; against 89s he'd have no longer been a favorite Yes, he should have won the pot. And we can give him further props for forcing from early position which eliminates all positional advantage. The reason I don't care for the all-in bet is the number of players remaining. Strong pocket pairs play best heads-up. The fact there is a calling donkey with a horrid hand is really immaterial. Put him on suited connectors or such and the cheese gets really binding. Getting two callers is a worst nightmare. And, 2/3rds of his stack is now at risk. I wouldn't just call; I would bet T270 here—the pot. It would put the early short stack at risk and really require him committing to the pot. Lets say he does and throws in his 610; a good player on the button will fold Ako. With 2000 chips I might do an easy fold in his position with another strong raiser to act but we'll have him call or raise. If the raise is significant—like an all-in—what does our hero do. He folds. At best he has a race but based on the betting he could easily be dominated. He chose to gamble and it failed with him having the best hand preflop. That happens to us in a tournament almost every time we get a Class-1 hand and miss the flop and see a strong bet; having the best preflop hand and losing or folding is far from unusual. Had he raised and been just been called on the benign flop he would have made himself a prohibitive favorite. We can't say with certainty that the button would have folded but his call would have been very -EV and hero would have had more to hang his hat on. There are many ways to play the start of a tournament. I have played just like he played and reaped similar results or gotten stacks that would pretty much assure approaching the money.. It is a viable option to try to build a big stack while the dogs are still barking. The thing is it isn't that +EV and there should be no complaining when it flames out. Many, if not most, on-line tournaments are pogo-stick tournaments. They are filled with gamblers. Even good players will often gamble because of the situation. But, if you've been watching the Pro Poker Tour broadcast, you'll have seen the pros play lower blinds and you have seen some low pot poker where the pro is actually trying to keep the pot reasonable with his bets—just like Mr. Button above. If you visit card player results and look at the graphs for the consistent pros you will usually see a steady climb. And you can find some charts of major tournament forces with charts that look like the skyline of the Titons. The difference is having a preflop or postflop mentality. If you can become confident in your post flop play, you will have more consistent success. Underline that sentence and take it to the bank. Can one fold QQ? Yes, it shouldn't be that hard. I can even make a case for folding AA. | | Saturday, September 16th, 2006 | | 9:29 pm |
Poker, Me, and all the rest of the baggage
I haven't been able to figure out how I lost interest in Poker and yet didn't lose interest in poker. I think it is because I take too many things seriously. I have a sister that makes me a piker in that respect and I do have the saving grace of a sense of humor--strange as it might be. I don't have a problem with the beats. I can actually laugh at a lot of them. And there is a little, tiny part of me that enjoys being beat by a good play--minuscule but it is there. What I have never done is suffered fools with grace. And, that 'isn't allowed' at a poker table--you don't tap on the glass, right? I think that is why I don't play as much. I don't know if this makes any sense. I am not sure if I really think that is it. But, it is as close as I have come to date. | | 8:49 am |
My last SnG report...I promise.
Played this morning. Really tight table. One noticeably solid player who I ended up heads up with and half the stack with others making frustration calls as things stretched out. No real excitement to report. I got second with patience and the occasional hand. Only one loose player at the table and he was a luckbox all the way. Happily, he went out before the money. So, it should be roses but I was a donk. I signed up for a MTT figuring that I'd be out of the SnG before it started. But there were still 4 left when it started and I don't multi-table well. So, when it hit heads up I gambled and when I got to the MTT I gambled. Tilt! from frustration... I should have been smarter; I even typed: it is stupid to make this call, but... It was stupid | | Friday, September 15th, 2006 | | 1:12 pm |
A loss
I probably had stupid one. I'd had a fairly decent go and got chopped back a bit. Hand came up between two of us and I held AK--which I am very selective to raise. As the button I did and was reraised by the BB. The flop came xTQ and the BB went all in. I was suspicious. He was a fairly short stack and the bet made me think weak. I had the two overcards and the gutshot for 10-outs which didn't make me that much of a dog to anything but a set. I called and lost to his pocket jacks which made my actual outs 8. This is a hand I'd usually fold. I guess I've been listening to too many pros and announcers and called with my 40%er; letting the pot odds dictate the call. Donk or not, I am not fully certain but I was then left with a few hundred chips which got all in with a set to be rivered by a flush. You can't win em all. And I figure if I keep playing decent pot odds plays like a pro, I'll be sidelined a lot more than they will. And they would have surely consider the fold with the semi-decent stack jeopardy. But, hitting too would have put me right up there. So, the crap shoot wasn't all bad...I think... Usually, I know if I was a donk; today it seems, at least, in the gray zone. | | Thursday, September 14th, 2006 | | 8:39 am |
SnG update
Yesterday, I played two SnGs. I shoulda stood in bed. I looked, felt, acted like a donkey. I was as card dead as it gets in both. Trying to manufacture a game with nothing is going to make one into a perceived donkey. And yesterday, my ears grew like Pinocchio's nose as the games progressed. My original bankroll on FT went slightly red today after buying in. What a difference a day makes! Today, I positively killed. It started with picking up QQ early on. There was a 10x bet that was called. I had both as loose players so I did the normal early, donkey move and pushed em all out there. To my shock I ended up with 3 callers. (Gambling hands all; more suited to a bluff when your M=5.) The flop brought hearts and the turn paired the 9 and the river pretty much blanked. I hadn't held much hope with four players but the QQ's held up and I had a massive stack. Many will turn on the aggression at that point. I don't. I become a rock and try to either break or fold players with better post flop play. It wasn't all roses. I called an overbet with 99 and the flop came 9KK. The other player was aggressive and had been the original better so I check and he bet big and I put him all-in. He turned up AA and I felt pretty good until he hit his 4-outer when the K on the turn counterfeited my boat. I typed NH and he said TY. I did get the enjoyment of busting him later when he called with a weak draw. When we got to the money, I had best stack by a nice bit. One of the players was semi-passive but had to show down some bluff-type hands. The other was pure aggression and fortunately on my right. I turned passive and let them duke it out but caught a hand against the more passive player and went to heads up with over a two to one advantage. He kept pounding out his standard 500-chip bets and I let him run a bit with the occasional raise of my own to keep it fairly even. I finally picked up 77 in the big blind and got his standard 500 bet. I raised him all in and was happy to see A4 be turned up. He didn't suck out and I left the table feeling damn good about myself. In other times, I'd have rushed to the next SnG. Today, I shut down FT to gloat a bit. Why turn feeling like a god back into being a Grand Canyon pack animal? | | Monday, September 11th, 2006 | | 10:04 am |
Today's post doesn't need a title. The date says it all. I browsed the Reuters site today. They were showing a reading of the names and readers of a particular sequence got to mention their loved one in a bit more detail and anguish. I shared again, like I did 5-years ago, their anguish and tears. And, contrary to some reporting views, I have not forgotten. Last night I watched the documentary on the fire company. Just average and confused guys trying to do something where there was nothing that could be done. I wouldn't have done it as well but that is beside the point. The point is they were just average guys willing to do heroic deeds. A lot of that has gone on in our history and the other guys always miss the fact that their descendent are from the same mold. People crossed the field at Gettysberg or left a landing craft on Omaha beach or went over the top at the Marne or crossed the river to Trenton--and, yes, dropped into a hot LZ--for family and country fully prepared to do what needed to be done or die trying. I hadn't fully remembered everything. Those walls of pictures weren't vivid until I saw them again. So many involved; so much worry; so little hope. Some call it Jihad; I call it something else. And, I am waiting for more Muslim Americans to call it something else. Many have but not enough and not with a loud enough voice. Instead, many are offended or all too mute on the subject. If you want me to look at you without suspicion, do something that persuades me I should. If others are perverting your faith, shout it to the world and keep shouting it. You seem afraid and as an American you can't be that. | | Sunday, September 10th, 2006 | | 7:33 pm |
The sun stands a better chance to rise tomorrow
I went out quickly in the third one I played. It was a rock of a table. I had a bit of conversation in a forum about the loose-aggresive world that SnGs had become. Well, in my early play we would see such tables and not that infrequently. Being able to adjust is one of those things that marks improvements to your game. | | Friday, September 8th, 2006 | | 7:58 pm |
Another -- another big $22.50
Yup, played one little SnG and positively killed. I was short stack at times but never for long. Played a bit more aggressive earlier than I normally do. Yesterday, I was in deep doo-doo until a rush; today, that wasn't a problem. I had good reads and put them to use. Based on a couple of frustration calls, I got to several players and they just gave me their chips. That said--like all wins--I was damn lucky again. I am a good player but not a great one. The last two days produced great wins. I remember a game on UB back when I thought I knew a bit more than I really did. I played a game and was a luck box from start to finish. I busted every guy at the table. After the heads up, the guy said I was the best player he'd ever seen or played. To my credit, I laughed and disabused him of the idea. The thing is this is starting to look like I am selling snakeoil. No matter who you are. There is variance. You can kill a hundred players that can usually outplay you at times. Some people get taken with that. Makes for a long fall. It was fun today; it was a lot of fun; but, not most of the time. Most of the time you are a veg dumping cards into the muck. After so many hours of play, I have a hard time wanting to do that. So, I write a bit or play an RPG or wander the net. I keep thinking the fire will relight and it just simmers on low. That isn't bad. I have had a hundred hobbies it seems and they get traction and then go away. Besides riding cutting horse this one has been the most enjoyment. So, I am, in fact, lucky. What I have never been is a gambler. I have had as much fun in the 1.10 SnGs as I did in the $33's. It has never been about the money. I am profitable and have been for a couple of years but that just a score card that never meant much. People have laughed at that but that is me. Different strokes for different folks works for me. If you aren't as good as me--however unlikely that may be--and making money hand over fist, I am happy for you and have zero envy. But, don't think I'm not competitive! You'd be wrong. |
[ << Previous 20 ]
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
ken_p's journal