Sick stack

After the Alamo Bowl which Missou won last night, I logged on to FullTilt to play a few SNGs. I opened the "Hanson Hangout" 6-max PLO table to witness what may be the best run in the history of on-line poker to date.

When I opened the table, Ziigmund had around $800,000 on the table, and everyone else was somewhere around $30K to $50K. Then I watched him run it up this --












Someone in the chat said he reloaded several times to $250K total, so his win at this point is around $1.3 million. I had two thoughts as I watched this:

My $30 SNGs seem to incredibly insignificant.

This gives me hope.

I've always subscribed to the view that if someone else can do it, then I can do it, too. But would I really have the balls to plunk down $250K at one table to run it up like this? Maybe, if I had this type of bankroll. But i dunno.

40

Has it really been four months since my last post? Still, I won't apologize because I write this for myself to chronicle my poker. I hate poker blogs that apologize for the frequency of posts.

*****************

I am now 40. Upon reaching the official date of middle age, I reflect that I remain a avid poker player and fan. I still play as often as I can, which is not often enough. I need to go to Vegas for a weekend and play in a few donkaments and easier cash games than I encounter in Missouri.

Since its been so long since my last post, it is time to dump all of the stuff I’ve written over the last few months but haven’t taken the time to actually publish.

********************

Punished for a Good Read

$2/5 NLHE game at Harrahs. Villain has about $500 and I have him covered. Villain is somewhat loose, not too aggressive, but I don’t have a lot of history with him and we have only been at the table together for maybe 30 minutes.

Villain limps UTG+2, and there are a few other callers. I have JJ and make it $25. Villain calls, the remainder fold.

Pot is about $60. Flop is 6d-7d-4c. Villain checks. I bet $50, Villain calls. My read is that he is on a draw of some sort, probably diamonds. His mannerisms in calling said to me, “Don’t try to push me around. I can’t be pushed off this hand so easily.” Like he was sort of offended by my bet.

Pot is now about $160. Turn is (6d-7d-4c)-Th. Villain checks. I bet $100. Villain calls. I get the same read as on the flop from his call.

Pot is about $360. River is (6d-7d-4c-Th)-9s. Villain quickly pushes for about $325. Given the action in this hand, this is a huge bet. My immediate reaction is that he is trying to bully me out of the pot. This cannot be a value bet. If he had the straight or a two-pair hand, he would bet much less to get a call out of me.

I think for while. He is staring at me. I get an extremely strong read that he does not want me to call. Its as if I can read his mind. I am reluctant given the size of the bet. The Golden Rule of No Limit is screaming at me: “Don’t go broke with one pair.” But my read is completely overriding the Golden Rule.

So I call, and wait for him to table his hand. He does not, and there is a long pause. The dealer tells him to show his hand. He very sheepishly says, “Pair of fours.” He turns over 8d-4d. I table my jacks. I’m congratulated for a very tough call. The dealer starts to collect the pot and push it my way.

The someone at the other end of the table says, “He has a straight.” Villain, the dealer, and the entire table initially missed that he had a straight, 10 to 6. Villain says, “Oh shit, sorry. I was only thinking about the flush. I just thought I missed my flush. I didn’t see the straight.”

So this fucker stumbles upon the winner without realizing it, runner-runner for the straight. This means that he really did think that he was bluffing at the river. My read was exactly right – he thought he was way behind and he did not want me to call. During a break in the action later, he apologized again for missing the straight, and I believe that he actually missed the straight and misread his hand on the river.

So, congratulations to me for making the right read, but I lose about $500. This hand, and specifically my river call for about $325, made the difference between having a winning and losing night. I later dug myself most of the way out of this hole during the remainder of the session, and ended up losing about $200 for the night.

********************

Trust Your Read

During this session my read was on. Not just during the game, but even as I sat down.

Something I always do when I arrive at a table is scope everyone out and make an initial read as to their ability and style. Hey, they’re doing the same about me, right?

So I have learned to trust my instincts on these matters. Whatever I feel about a player determines how I play against them, until proven otherwise. For example, someone may be trying to give off the appearance of being cocky and the table captain, but if I detect fear underlying this appearance then I will play against him knowing that his decisions are ultimately controlled by his fear rather than his cocky act.

So when I sat down at the Main Game and checked out the players, I said to myself about Seat 7: “Looks quiet, and knowledgeable but scared. Probably plays too tight and gives away PF hand strength based on the frequency of his raises. Looks like the kind of guy that could lose his stack with a one-pair hand.”

About 90 minutes later this hand comes up:

Seat 7 has around $600 and I have around $1000. I raise to $20 UTG in Seat 4 with 88. UTG+1 calls, Seat 7 raises to $65 total. SB calls, I call, UTG+1 calls.

Four players to the flop of K-8-4, all spades. SB and I check, UTG+1 checks. Seat 7 bets $80, SB folds. Time to announce that this is my pot. I raise to $250 total. UTG+1 folds. Seat 7 thinks for a bit and just calls.

Hmmm…now what does he have? PF I think that his range is AA-JJ, AK, maybe getting frisky on the re-raise with AQ, TT, 99. The call of my check-raise signals one of three things – (1) AK with or without the A-spades, (2) AA with or without the A-spades or (3) KK. But thinking further, would he just call my flop check-raise with KK? No, he would shove.

That leaves us with two hands – AA and AK – neither of which give him the flush yet, both of which I beat, and both of which fit my read of him the moment I sat down. He’s going broke with a one pair hand unless he hits the flush with the A-spades.

Turn is a non-spade low card, I push and he calls the remainder of his chips which is around $300. The river gives me the boat with 88844. He reveals AK (both red), confirming my read.

An now is a good time to reinforce my Golden Rule of No-Limit Hold ‘em: Don’t go broke with one pair.

********************

Mississippi Straddle Hand

THE SHORT VERSION for the reading impaired and impatient

$2/5 NLHE with a Mississippi Straddle (See explanation in long version). Villain is a 40-something, shade-wearing LAG, bordering on a tilting spew-monkey LAGtard based on recent hands.

I am UTG+1 with about $735, Villain has me covered. UTG folds, and I raise to $20 with JJ. But after the UTG fold and my action, dealer then announces that button straddled, so SB is first to act instead of UTG. I pull my bet back.

SB completes, BB folds, and I announce raise. Dealer will only let me raise to my original $20 raise, which is now a min-raise with the straddle in play. Villain is to my immediate left and calls. Button calls, SB calls. Four to the flop with a $80 pot.

Flop is 6c-7d-8d. SB checks. I bet $60. Villain calls, Button folds, and SB calls. Pot is now $265.

Turn is (6c-7d-8d)-Qc. SB checks. I check. Villain bets $225. SB folds.


THE LONG VERSION

This is a very interesting hand and a long one because there’s a lot that goes into my read. Are you willing to take the time think through this one with me?

The Game:

$2/5 NLHE, Harrahs in Kansas City. This is played with the “Mississippi Straddle” which is new to this card-room. Any one player besides BB and SB can straddle, which is double the BB. The player in latest position has the first option to straddle. Examples: If UTG and cut-off both want to straddle, CO has priority; if CO and Button both want to straddle, Button has priority. Pre-flop, the first player to act is the player immediately after the straddle. If button straddles, the SB must act first PF; if CO straddles, then button must act first, etc.

This option is relatively new, and both the dealer and players are getting used to it. Its not always used in every hand, so the dealer has to announce when someone is straddling to let the table know who should act first PF. Sometimes its goofed up by players and the dealer…

The Set-Up and My Table Image:

I have $735 to start this hand. I am at the main game, having played at the feeder table for only about 30 minutes. I’ve been up and down in this game, from a high of $1200 to a low of $400. I got back to over $700 about an hour earlier. I’ve been loose PF, but have hit absolutely nothing so my appearance is relatively tight for about the last hour.

The Hand:

I am UTG+1 with JJ. UTG folds and I raise to $20. Standard PF raise has been to $20 or $25 at this table.

Dealer then says, “Take that back, there is a straddle on the button.” I did not see the straddle and dealer did not call it out before UTG started the action. The SB also did not see the straddle. I simply acted after UTG folded. So, it turns out that UTG and I acted out of turn. I pull my bet back.

Now SB completes to $10, BB folds and the action is on me. Dealer says, “If you want to play this hand, your previous action is binding.” I do want to play the hand, and announce raise. Now I want to raise to $50 total. I ask for clarification about what the dealer meant by “previous action.” Dealer explains that my raise amount was also binding. So, according to the dealer, if I want to play the hand, I must to raise to exactly $20, which is now just a min-raise.

I contemplate calling the floor for a ruling, but decide that would probably be detrimental because the floor would either: (1) uphold the ruling, in which case my $20 raise stands and I’ve stopped the action and called unwanted attention to myself; or (2) overrule the dealer, in which case I would raise to a larger amount and spook everyone that didn’t already have a premium pair, scaring away all action. That’s what some players want to do with JJ pre-flop. But, I don’t like to play scared. So I let it go and just raise to $20.

Villain to my immediate left calls, and everyone else folds. So its SB, me, Villain and Button in the hand.

Flop is 6c-7d-8d. SB checks. I bet $60. Villain calls, Button folds, and SB calls. At this point I’m thinking that Villain and SB are probably on draws, or I could be up against a big hand, but I’m leaning more toward draws because a big hand would probably put in a healthy raise here given the coordinated nature of the board.. Pot is now $265.

Turn is (6c-7d-8d)-Qc. SB checks. I get the vibe that SB is scared of the board and is done with the hand. I check with the intention of check-raising Villain if he bets, or bailing out, depending upon my read of Villain’s action.

Villain bets $225. SB, as I thought, folds. Action is now on me. Time to size things up. I go into the tank for several minutes on this one.

The Villain:

I sat to the left of Villain at the feeder table and now he has position on me. He’s 40-ish and wearing silly oversized shades, dressed business casual – better dressed than most in the room. He thinks he’s a player. He’s been one of the loosest players at both tables. I can tell he’s been bluffing a lot, not afraid to mix it up. Bets at a lot of orphan pots. So going to the flop his range is wide open – he’ll call a standard PF raise with any two playable cards.

I have not seen him make any big calls when he is way behind. He did get unlucky within the last hour and got stacked for nearly $800, and he re-bought for the max $500. He’s quickly built that up to around $800 and now just has me covered. I think he may still be steaming a bit from the beat that he took, which is why he appears to be pushing the action even more right now.

My analysis:

First, the pot odds. The pot is $490 and its $225 for me to call. What if I pushed? I have about $665 in my stack, so if I pushed my raise to him would be about another $430 more in a $1155 pot. He would get better than 2 to 1 if he called my push, but I still think that this is enough of a raise that he would fold everything but a very strong hand.

What does he have? I can start by ruling out a big pocket pair. Given what happened PF with the straddle goof, he would certainly have re-raised with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, and maybe also AQ and TT. Given how the PF action went, his call signals any pair 99 or lower and any two other playable cards, including all manner of suited connectors. So he doesn’t have a big PF hand, but he could have anything else.

Does he have a big hand, including a set of 888, 777, 666, QQQ or T9/54? I’m sure he does not have a set of queens. I think its unlikely that he flopped a set, because then he very likely would have raised my $60 bet on the flop. Either the SB or I could easily have had two diamonds on the flop and he would bet a set hard to drive out a flush draw. The same analysis applies to T9/54 for the flopped straight – he would raise that hand to protect on the flop.

What about a good but not very strong hand, like 87, 86, or 76 for two pair? Yes, these seem like real possibilities. He might call with these hands, see how the board develops on the flop and if another diamond comes.

What about AQ? Maybe, but I can’t see him floating the flop with SB yet to act with just two overcards, unless his design was to take the hand away later. Unless… he has AQ diamond. This would be a perfect hand to bet here on the turn because he now has top pair and the nut flush draw.

What about a no-pair flush draw, like AK diamonds? He likely would have raised PF with any AK hand, so I don’t see this holding.

What about a bluff? Yes, also a very real possibility, given his playing style and the fact that he might be somewhat steaming and also smelling weakness by SB and me. (I have to factor in SB somewhat in this hand even though he’s already folded, because Villain bet $225 with SB and me still to act on the turn.)

So, I settle on this range:

Big pair like AA, KK, QQ, JJ – not really possible.
AK – not really possible
Set of 888, 777, 666 or T9/65 for the straight – about 10%, because he probably would have raised on the flop
AQ-diamonds – 10%
Two pair with 87, 86 or 76 – 30%
Bluff – 50%

Overall, this hand smells most like a bluff because my flop bet plus a check on the turn looks weakish, and because SB really seemed to be on a draw. My CR push here would look most like a set of QQQ or AA/KK. He calls if he has a set or the straight, he probably calls with the flush draw (especially with AQ flush draw) and its 50/50 whether he calls or folds two pair because my push looks most like a set of QQQ.

Finally, is he capable of analyze this hand enough to lay down two-pair? I think so, based on his prior play.

So I pushed. What do you think of my reasoning and action?

********************

29 days

We have now been in the new house for 4 weeks and 1 day. Moving is really tiring. We are 35% unpacked. Basement work continues. Life chugs on without regard to whether you're moving, I have discovered.

I will post more on my poker exploits in the near future.

*************

WHAT IS UP with the Giant Fucking Sunglasses that every woman wears these days? I can't be the only one that thinks Giant Sunglasses are completely silly, can I?

The first time I saw a pair of modern Giant Sunglasses on a woman, I thought to myself, "She must have gotten punched and she's covering up a black eye." Even now when I see a pair of Giant Sunglasses on a women (which is all the time and everywhere during the summer) the same thought runs through my head, even though I have now realized that this is the current fashion. The world is filled with women who have been punched in the face and are trying to hide it.

My wife gave in at some point, maybe last Autumn, and purchased a pair of Giant Sunglasses. I giggled. She knows what I think about them. I've even seen them on some men, which makes me really sad for these poor bastards.

**************

Scotty Nguyen's victory on ESPN last week was quite a poker show. I've played with guys like that, but not very much. We've all seen someone act like that in a non-poker setting. You're out with a group having drinks, and the liquid flows freely for a while. Then someone has too much, gets pissed off at something, and turns on the raging anger.

Everyone gets uncomfortable. It ends in a fight, or the group just sort of disperses into the night. Later, that guy either doesn't get invited, or everyone tip-toes carefully around him when the drinking starts again.

If you have one of these guys at the the poker table, I guess the goal is to get all of his chips before someone else does. If he gets lucky, oh well.

***********

Not having a poker "champ" at the end of the WSOP doesn't feel right. Yeah, its gonna build drama as the Main Event starts airing, but it still feels unfinished.

"I'm a Gambler"

So immediately after my tilt-inducing fucked up hand last night, this curious exchange occurred with the guy on my immediate left.

I had just pulled another $500 buy-in from my pocket and put it on the table, and was dealt 22 in the SB. There was a Mississippi straddle to $10 on the button, so I was the first to act PF in the SB. I call the $10 straddle, and then guy on my right in the BB raises to $45. Its folded around to me and I call. Yeah, a bit tilty.

The flop is K-J-9. Another air ball, and I check. BB quickly checks. I just want him to bet so I can fold and regroup.

Turn is J, check-check. River is a small card, and we check-check again.

As I am turning over my deuces, I say, "I think I missed a bet." An honest statement, because his three checks would seem to indicate extreme weakness.

This guy turns over two queens, and says, "No, I wasn't going anywhere." Then, he launches into an odd speech.

"I wasn't going anywhere. I would have called if you bet. I'm a gambler. I don't want to take anyone's chips. You don't want me to take your chips, do you? Because I would have called. There's no way I would fold to a bet. That flop didn't scare me, and I would have called."

This goes on for a bit as he keeps pestering me with different variations of this question. "Do you want me to take your chips? Cause I'm a gambler, and I will if you want me to." He was yapping earlier, before this speech, so I don't think he's trying to encourage my tilt. He's not that clever. He's just one of these guys that boasts and yammers a lot. He's maybe 55, and sort of socially inept. However, I am in no mood for his bullshit.

Its like I am playing an odd logic game, and my options are:
A. Tell him to shut the fuck up (not really my character)
B. Ignore him (impossible, since he won't shut up on his own)
C. Reply with an honest response
D. Escalate the dispute, to induce his tilt

I selected "C. Honest response" and went this route: "Gee, and here I thought we were playing poker to take each others' chips."

Apparently, this is the wrong approach, and I have suddenly hit a nerve. The rant is just getting started

"I didn't want to take your chips," he continues. "I'm really a nice guy, but I'm a gambler. I just like friendly poker. If I don't like someone, I will go after them and take all their chips. You don't want to get on my bad side, cause I will take all your chips. I can't stand assholes at the table. That's what gets me going. And I can gamble. I've placed five-figure bets on the craps table. I gamble big, so you don't want to mess with me."

What the hell did I do to deserve this? This goes on as the hands continue. I have shifted into 'ignore mode' and now I am silent, to no avail. He continues. "Do you know how to play craps?" Yes, but I remain silent.

"See those craps tables over there?" He's now kneeling on his seat, twisting around and pointing. "I placed a ten thousand dollar odds bet when I was rolling for a six. Ten thousand dollars! I'm not afraid to gamble. I can gamble big, if that's what you want to do."

As a general rule, I stay quiet at the tables. I don't talk during hands. I will engage in friendly conversation between hands, mostly to gather information. But I am not at the poker table to make friends or for the social interaction. I am there to win and take everyone's chips, plain and simple.

So, I have absolutely no idea why The Gambler launched into me. As he is rambling, I replay the last few orbits to see if there is something I did to set him off. The only thing I can think about, however, is the horrible hand where I just donked off my $750 stack to Mega-Rock who flopped a set of kings.

I remain silent, and while The Gambler is still babbling I run QQ into AA and proceed to donate another buy-in to the Mega-Rock. I think I was on tilt, but I'm not really sure. My poker judgment was far too cloudy at that point to properly assess what was happening. I guess clouded judgment is my form of tilt.

I finally got to escape The Gambler. What a sad poker night.

Distractions

We are closing on our new house on Tuesday. At that point, for the first time in my life, I will own two houses. Odd thought. We move in one week, and close on the sale of our current house at the end of August.

Things have been crazy busy in my non-poker life. House showings, offers, negotiations, packing, loan arrangements, moving companies, new house insurance, new carpet in the new house, basement improvements. And then there is work, which has been extremely busy. The economy and the legal work is in a slump -- except for me. Every project for nearly every client that I have is active. Meetings, contract negotiations, speeches, e-mail, phone conference calls, court documents, conferences.

Its a wonder that I manage to keep on top of everything. At least I think I am.

So I went to play some poker tonight. Poker remains my get-away from my non-poker life. Unfortunately, life distractions cause lack of focus at the table.

Early on, at the $2-5 NL feeder table, I ran my starting $500 stack up to about $1200. Good start, things going smoothly. By the time I got moved to the main game, I was around $800. Then I play this train-wreck of a hand:

I have about $750 at the start of this hand. I raise UTG with A8-hearts. Mega-rock re-raises to $60. Everyone else folds but me, and I just call.

Flop is Kh-Qs-8d. I check, and Mega-Rock checks. I think he missed.

Turn is (Kh-Qs-8d)-4h. Now I have a pair and a flush draw. I lead for $80. Mega-Rock raises to $300. He has about $300 more behind, very close to the rest of my stack. He just has me covered. I go into the tank and then emerge with this conclusion:

He has AK and is overplaying a one-pair hand, and he will lay down to pressure for the remainder of his stack. He re-raises PF, checked the flop because he had only one pair, and is scared I might have a set. At the feeder table, he gave the appearance of an extremely scared player in several occasions, and I pegged him as someone that could be bet off a hand.

So I push. He quickly calls, and I have that "Oh shit moment." I immediately know I made a bad read. I know what he has even before he shows -- a set of KKK or QQQ. I need a heart to win.

The river bricks out, no heart, and he shows a set of Kings. I have managed to cough up my entire stack on a third -pair, flush draw hand with one card to go when he was already pot-committed and had top set.

What the fuck was I doing? I should have lost only $60 in that hand, and not $750. Clearly I was unfocused and upon reflection I can't imagine ever playing this hand this poorly under normal circumstances.

Yuck.

Strangely, I think the aggravation of not being able to make it to Vegas this year is also causing me some sort of odd poker frustration that I have not experienced before. I am ready to take the next step in poker, but continue to dink around in the local $2-5 NL game, which is the best my little slice of the poker world has to offer. I see some of the players still in the WSOP Main Event, and I so want to take my shot.

Some day.

Missing Vegas

I really don't understand how some of the pros can keep buying into so many WSOP events and not cashing. At all. I saw that Gavin Smith busted from Day 1-A of the Main Event. He said on the most recent episode of PokerRoad Radio that he has not cashed in a single event, and he's played in many of the 51 events. Financially and psychologically, how does someone accomplish this?

*******

I got away to Harrahs last night. I called in and got on the $2-5 NLHE list at 8:15pm, and I was #8. By 10:30pm I had moved up to #2 on the list, so I said "fuck it" and went home.

I was prepared to declare that poker was in a serious decline in the KC area, but the game lists were close to 20-deep last night.

*******

I've been sticking to a very strict on-line bankroll management plan. No more than than 5% of my total account for any single site on any table. I'm playing a very steady pace and things are starting to build back up. I'm keeping the bluffs and loose calls to a minimum, and it helps ease the variance. ABC poker can be somewhat boring, but its more profitable for me. Usually, I'm just happy to be playing, consideraing how busy life and work have been for me.

*******

I am currently reading Every Hand Revealed by Gus Hansen and Bigger Deal by Anthony Holden. I like Gus's post-flop thinking process. I like Holden's writing style, and I think this book is better than Big Deal. The problem that I had with Big Deal is that it was seriously dated by the modern poker boom. Reading about the world travels of a tournament player in the late 80's was just not exciting compared to the cash in play during the modern tournament era.

*******

I am seriously disappointed about not being able to take a Vegas trip during the WSOP this year. I have been following the WSOP news on a daily basis, and it makes me miss live play that much more. Even if I could not play in a tournament, I would love to teleport to the Rio and play in the cash games for two days. My goal is to make it to Vegas in June/July 2009, and possibly a trip early Winter this year if life will allow.

The State of Modern Pop Poker

HISTORY WILL REVEAL that the height of the poker boom coincided with the last days of Shana Hiatt as the perky sideline commentator for the World Poker Tour. The decline of the modern poker era begins exactly with the announcement that Shana was leaving the WPT.

This is not to suggest that there is necessarily a causal relationship between these two events, although her departure may have played some role, however slight. Shana’s departure started the revolving door of beautiful but ignorant WPT sideline commentators, punctuated by the world’s worst interview question posed by replacement Courtney Friel as players were eliminated from a WPT final table: “So how did you feel when you busted out?”

Although hardcore poker players may have been reluctant to admit it, Season 4 of the WPT was a watershed event for poker in one primary respect – its when we all fully realized that the WPT format was really boring. The accelerated blind schedule in the final stages of a WPT tournament reduced the options of the world’s most highly skilled poker experts to a single action – push all-in or fold.

It was at this point that poker aficionados started skipping the weekly WPT broadcast in favor of logging on to their favorite internet poker site and playing a few more sit-n-goes before bedtime. We had all become educated regarding how to play final tables, and we could experience more real action in an on-line sit-n-go instead of watching six pudgy unknown dudes in shades and ball caps or beanies sit and try to act stoic while masking sheer televised terror, a la David Williams heads-up final table play at the WSOP 2004 Main Event. The WPT may have been on the tube in the background as viewers/players battled for their own personal final table victory on PokerStars, but they were no longer really paying attention to the WPT. Today, the WPT has moved to a second network, and has already started shopping for a third. The WPT’s days are numbered.

Along comes High Stakes Poker, televised cash game poker at its finest. Compared to the WPT, this show was exciting – real players it a cozy back-room lounge setting, exchanging barbs and playing for “cold hard cash,” as we were constantly reminded by AJ Benza. We watched Daniel Negreanu repeatedly call off fifteen WPT tournament buy-ins on the river as he explained with perfect accuracy how his flopped straight had been crushed by lucky a suckout. We could see he was beat, he know he was beat, he explained to the table and the audience how he was beat, and he still called. A player with crystal clear poker vision going completely blind in the heat of battle. This was poker excitement.

But then even High Stakes Poker outgrew its own skin. The stakes were raised as players bought in for a brain-melting $500,000 to $1 million, fueled by higher blinds and double-blind straddles. The stakes were clearly too high for certain participants, as they routinely started to “run it three times” in order to reduce variance and generate split pots.

High Stakes Poker bottomed out when Guy Laliberte graciously wrote off significant equity as he agreed to split a very large pot with David Benyamine to prevent a significant financial impact to Benyamine. Doyle Brunson summed up the hand by noting that it represented just another pot to Laliberte but a “lifetime” to Benyamine. Even if an exaggeration, we knew that this was painful for Benyamine.

These split pot bail-outs were contrary to the very spirit of poker. Poker is a zero-sum game of clear winners and losers. You make a bet, put your chips in the middle, and deal with the outcome. Someone wins the pot, and the rest lose. In America, we want touchdowns, home runs, grand slams and bust outs! We will not tolerate exciting foreplay followed by a limp-dicked fade-out.

So that brings us to the WSOP in 2008. We are nearly one year from the most boring final table in the history of the WSOP, where Jerry Yang hijacked the table by invoking the Almighty Himself to make the correct cards appear on the board. His empassioned appeals to God were almost drowned out by the wife of Lee Watkinson, who was likewise pleading to a higher power in favor of her husband over the small, undeserving, anonymous amateur.

The highlight of the 2008 WSOP appears to be poker players as gamblers, who are so bored with the game of poker that they require side action in the form of prop bets that exceed the value of the prize pools for which they compete. The world’s best players have sucked so much money out of the poker economy that the tournament stakes no longer bring the buzz that made the first season of the WPT so terribly exciting.

Harrahs and the other gaming corporations have co-opted the world of tournament poker because they remain true to the secret ingredient of gaming: lots of money in a casino means higher profits. By all means necessary, the casino corporations’ collective goal is to bring more money from the poker economy onto the casino property. There, creative gamblers will find ways to empty their pockets. Even the cream of the poker crop – none other than Phil Ivey – boasts about his million-dollar losses at the craps table in the form of shaky hand-held videos shot by Barry Greenstein. The new cool is not just to win at poker, but take your poker winnings and piss them away to the casino.

Harrahs has done a masterful job of ensuring maximum revenue from the WSOP. They run six tournaments simultaneously in multiple conference rooms to ensure that all tables are filled to capacity at all times. To ensure maximum excitement for the Series, Harrahs has managed, either by design or happenstance, to have created a fever among the top tier of the poker community for one magic talisman – bracelets!

The players have a seemingly unquenchable thirst for more bracelets. Who has the most bracelets? Who won the most bracelets last year? Who’s going to win the most bracelets this year? Who has the most prop bets for bracelets? Money is no longer the most important method of keeping score in poker. The poker world needs more bracelets!

To satisfy this new demand, Harrahs offers more tournaments, giving players even more opportunities to collect more bracelets – and allowing Harrahs to collect more juice. Players are bewildered by the flurry of overlapping tournaments, while Harrahs ensures that juice is being collected from every chair at every table in every room, every day and all day from the start of the tournament until the final bracelet is handed out. And, they even run added tournaments after the Main Event has started, to keep the busted players in a chair with the juice running. A player watching the final table of the WSOP represents lost potential revenue – put them in a seat and charge the juice one more time.

So we have been conditioned to love poker through television broadcasts, and to pay homage to the victors. Harrahs has finally figured out how to wring the most money from the poker community, and the players are willing, if unwitting, accomplices in their zeal to rack up tournament wins and then donate significant portions to the casino. The victors boast of their wins to the omnipresent poker media, who are eager to report chip counts, tournament results, and outrageous prop bets that keep the poker community entertained.

And we will still continue to play, regardless. Because underneath it all, we still love the game of poker, even if it has become too mainstream.

Math and other stuff

WATCHING the Life of Ivey videos on PokerRoad, I realize something. There are lot of players that have substantial talent, but his extra strength seems to be the complete and absolute disregard for the real value of money. If you're a natural and you don't care about the money -- I mean really don't care -- then you can play without an ounce of fear. There are a lot of legendary gamblers, but Ivey seems to be in that extremely rare class that just does not care about the value of money even a little bit and is therefore devoid of any fear while playing at any level.

I've come close to this feeling on a few occasions, in my little corner of the poker world. When playing in the Ameristar Thursday night tournament (the only tournament in town worth playing), there have been a few nights where I was completely ambivalent about my outcome in the tournament. I had a medium to shortish stack in the middle stages, and the NL cash tables were bursting with the donks that had already busted out.

*************

POKER MEDIA PEOPLE, please stop interviewing Durrrr. He may be the latest poker prodigy, but he interviews poorly and has nothing to offer the audience.

*************

THE EGO OF POKER PLAYERS is starting to really show. Everyone has a writing blog or a video blog or a website or is being interviewed for their amazing and outlandish prop bets during the WSOP. For some its just a natural method of expression. For many others, its a pure ego trip to get their face on the tube and be watched by others.

*************

Listening to PokerRoad, I get the impression that a good number of players just sign up and play the WSOP tournaments, but don't regularly study the game or take the time to analyze their own game and improve, fill their leaks, etc. Its amazing how many buy-ins appear to be carelessly pissed away by careless play. Its as if some of the players are treating each tournament like just another boring day at the office rather than giving it the focus and attention needed to succeed on a continuous basis. Not everyone, but a lot of them.

*************

And now let's play -- Did I Play AK Like Donk?

Potentially big hand at the Main Table from this session, for which some math is required.

Villain plays with Team Yellow but has shown a propensity for overly tight play recently. I started with him at the Feeder Table and he was much more loose back then. I think his natural tendency is looser play, but has felt a bit ‘snake bit’ by this table. He has $435 and I have $1800. We are in the later part of my session and I am table boss.

Villain raises UTG to $35. Standard opening PF raise has been to $20 or $25 and I have been calling raises with a frustrating frequency to the other players. If Villain had a bigger stack I think a raise to $35 would signal a wider range of hands (including medium pocket pairs) but because he has recently lost several hundred and is visibly frustrated by his results at this table, my instinct is that he is protecting a genuinely big hand with the extra large raise.

One MP players calls. I have AK-spades in the CO an raise to $135. Its folded to Villain and he quickly pushes for about $300 over my raise. Squeezed caller in between us folds, and now its up to me.

Pot is 35 + 35 + 135 + 5 + 400 = $610. I am getting just over 2 to 1. What is his range of hands?

I think he has AA, KK, maybe QQ or JJ. I can put him on QQ or JJ only if I think he is extra frustrated and because he thinks I am bullying the table too much. His actions seem genuine, like he finally has the goods and is not afraid of the action. I do not see him doing this with AK, and absolutely not AQ or worse. He is clearly a cash game player, and is not treating this like a tournament.

So, I settle on 75% AA or KK and 25% QQ, possibly JJ. I fold, doing some quick calculations and deciding that the $300 call is better left in my stack against a close decision. Should I have called?

My equity against AA and KK is 77%/23%:
77% x -$300 = -$231
23% x $610 = $140
Total EV against AA and KK is -$91

My equity against QQ and JJ is 54%/46%:
54% x -$300 = -$162
46% x $610 = $280
Total EV against QQ and JJ is $118

75% x -$91 = -$68
25% x $118 = $30

Total EV against his weighted hand range is -$38. Yeah, I can find better situations for my chips.

This would become a +$18 EV if I think there is an equal chance he has AA, KK, QQ and JJ. Still not very good for my $300 call, compared to how I have been running this table.. I should be able to turn $300 into $500 based on how this table has been treating me.

I folded face down and said I had JJ, thinking that this lie would make it more likely for him to disclose his real hand if it beat mine. (The psychology of this lie is that he would have less inclination to lie that he had a bigger hand then he really did.) Villain did not show, but later said that he had QQ and did not want a call. Over the course of the next few hands, several other players at the table said they think he was lying about QQ and thought he had AA or KK, supporting my evaluation of the hand.

If I knew that he actually had exactly QQ, the EV of my call is $118, which is a clear call even considering how I was dominating this table. But I think he was lying, and not just as a rationalization of my calculations.

I Play Live

As sad as my on-line results have been, my live play continues in the opposite direction.

Harrahs $2/5 NLHE last night, bought in for $500, cashed out for $2209. Sweet night. I had a dead-on read on every player at the table at all times. I can just feel where players are at when I am focused. I made three of my best reads ever for river calls with weakish hands.

As I was driving home I realized something -- I did not lose even one hand at showdown all night. I bailed before the river, bluffed before the river or won at showdown. That is a receipe for running a table.

I so wish I could jump on a plane and hit the Rio cash games right now.

***********

As for on-line play, I've found a game that is profitable -- 2-7 triple draw. Its actually a fun game, and not filled with sharks. I'm not sure who plays this, but the majority are weak players. I would assume anyone spending a significant amount of time playing this would know what they're doing, but I guess not.

This game seems intuitive for me, and I ran some calculations on Friday to get a better grasp on the math of the game. I don't have the math completely figured out, but I think I've got a lot of it. I reviewed this section in Super/System and I will read some more.

Game Over

I am ready to formally announce that the on-line games have gone bad. Real bad.

Two years ago, every low level SNG (up to around the $20 level, and maybe higher) was composed of maybe 5 donks, 2-3 decent to good players and 1-2 solid players. Usually someone, and maybe more than 1 player, was gone after 5-10 hands. After 20 hands, you might have lost 2 or 3. The 50-100 of the 75-150 level was the money bubble.

I've been playing in $30 to $50 SNGs, and I've hit a cold streak. So, like a good bankroll manager, I dropped down to the $20 SNGs. I am in one right now and every player is still in the game at the 60/120 level. Everyone is playing a solid, basic, winning SNG strategy.

And now we're at the 80/160 level with 7 players left and they are all playing solid pushbot strategy. There are no clear donks.

The UIGEA has eviscerated on-line poker.

Can You Fleece a Donkey?

What the hell is with all the "poker training" sites? Is it just this obvious to anyone else but me?

Sample Advertizament

1. I've won a lot of money playing on-line poker!
Yeah, it was back before the UIGEA. And yeah, the games have gotten a lot harder to make money on-line. In fact, things are drying up for me, just like everyone else. But wait ... just listen to this!

2. I can teach you to play poker! I can show you exactly how I used to make a lot of money playing on-line poker. Just pay me $100 per hour (which, by the way, was my former win/100BB before the UIGEA).

3. You can win lots of money like me! Assuming the UIGEA is overturned and the fish can find a way to deposit, just like back when I used to win a lot. Go get'em!

Dear Heaven

Yeah, this rocks. You know who it is, but I'll bet you haven't hard it yet...

Dear Heaven

And then check out "Thought You Knew" ...

An American Idol

David Cook came home to Blue Springs on Friday and there was a huge parade and rally at his high school, Blue Springs South. My wife got tickets and we took the kids.

After the parade, he and his family processed into the high school football and track stadium. The show was on a stage in the middle of the field at about the 10 yard line, The stands on both sides were packed, and there were thousands more standing along the sides and around the field. Only a few hundred lucky people got onto the field. We did not get a seat (not by a long shot) but I managed to find a nice little spot at a location that was immediately to the right of the stage (the very furthest point from the entrance), with nothing between us and a clear view of the stage but a chain-link fence just outside the running track.

He ended up sitting on the right side of the stage, so we were among the fortunate few to have an unobstructed and straight view of him, although at a significant distance. As I later told my wife, aside from Roman (my son) this was the most pictures that I have ever taken of a guy.

At the start of the show he said a few words, and it was clearly an extremely emotional moment. As he described it, he has been living in his little "American Idol bubble" and now he comes home to 10,000 people packed into his high school stadium to honor his achievement.

Immediately when he sat down, they starting shooting fireworks off behind the stage. The pictures below were taken just as he stood back up, very likely choking back tears and taking in the moment.

We have a neat connection to this event. One of Amelia's (my daughter) best friends at school is named Aylish. David Cook is Aylish's uncle. Aylish and her mom were part of the family entourage and were on the stage, but on the other side and not visible except partially in a few of my pictures. I ran into them on Saturday and she said that they "partied like rock stars" until after 1am that night/morning with David and family.

It was a very cool experience.

Iron Man

Still playing poker, and thinking about it when I’m not playing. I’ve played a few live sessions since my last blog post, and I also finally won the Thursday night Chiptalk tournament. Here is my most recent live $2/5 NL session at Harrahs, max $500 buy-in.

My worst hand of the night, at the feeder table –

Folded to me in MP and I raise to $20 with KJ-not-suited. Button calls. He’s a quiet, somewhat creepy but observant and solid old guy. He might be an accountant. I have some history with this guy, and some of the biggest pots I’ve ever played in KC have been against him. Overall, he’s gotten the best of me several times, which I can’t say for very many players in KC.

Before the flop, the floor calls my name for the main table.

Flop is K-7-4, all clubs. I have no club. I bet $30, and button calls. I think he’s drawing to the flush. Turn is a low card, non-club. I bet $80, and he raises to $280 total. He only has about $55 behind, so he is effectively all-in. This bet just screams flush draw, and I’m positive he has the A-clubs. But does be have another club in his hand?

Time to size him up. His left hand is holding his cards, the way players will hold their cards maybe ½ inch off the table. His right hand is covering his mouth. He is absolutely motionless. I pull two $100 stacks from their moorings, to see if I get any reaction. He remains frozen, like a scared rabbit hunkered down before it flees. He is staring at a point on the table between me and the community cards. All signs point to a bluff, or rather a semi-bluff. I don’t think he wants a call. I don’t think he has AK, which means that I’m ahead. And, I'm about to move to the main game -- which somehow played a minor role in my decision, but I'm not sure how or why.

So I push, and he promptly calls his few remaining chips and shows me AQ-clubs. Bad read by me. I really believe that he knew I was trying to get a read on him, and he was intentionally giving off weak tells – hand on the mouth, motionless, afraid of eye contact. Fuckin’ sneaky old bastard.


My two best hands of the night, now at the main table –

1. Button is somewhat of an action player. As the cards are dealt, but before looking, he says “I feel a button raise coming on.” Folded to me in MP, I raise to $20 with A7-diamonds. Button calls, SB folds, BB calls. I say to Button, “You were supposed to re-raise.”

Flop is A-J-7 rainbow, giving me two pair. BB checks, I lead out for $45, button calls, BB folds. Turn is (A-J-7)-5, and I bet $90, button calls. River is (A-J-7-5)-7. I think for a long time, like I might be unsure what to do here, trying to give the “I missed my draw” signal. Or maybe the “Are my kings any good?” vibe. I’m actually just trying to figure out the maximum that he will call. Then I bet $160. Button quickly calls, and shows AQ after I reveal my boat.

He acts aggravated, and says “Nice catch. Good raise with A7.” I’m not sure if he’s serious or sarcastic, and whether he is aggravated with himself or me. After giving me $315, he donked off his remaining $400 or so after a couple more orbits. I’m pretty sure my hand tilted him.


2. Lots of limpers to me on the button, and I limp with 47-diamonds. SB and BB check. Flop is 3d-Kc-6d. Checked to me, and I bet $20. Its folded to MP guy, who just sat down a few hands ago and is the only player wearing shades. He raises to $50 total, and has about $370 more behind. I have him covered. Its folded to me, and I raise $200 more, which should signal that we are playing for his whole stack. I’m pretty sure he has a high king, probably not AK or he would have raised PF.

He pushes, and I quickly call $170 more. Turn and river both bring help, as the final board reads 3d-Kc-6d-2d-5c, completing my straight and flush. My opponent is shocked and dismayed when I table my hand. Everyone else is shocked to see 47s.

Mr. Shades slinks away, claiming that he called "with a high king." Like KQ?! One of the players at his end of the table says, "If he pushed with KQ or worse, he deserves to lose." I guess I would have to agree there. But then again, he didn't know too much about how I play. And, he was technically ahead -- but all in all risking your whole stack with top pair, non-nut kicker cleary breaks my Golden Rule of No Limit Hold 'Em -- Don't go broke with one pair.

I get lots of respect for the remainder of the session. My reputation is now that I could have any two cards and I don’t appear to be bluffing too often. Which, of course, opens the door to lots of bluffing opportunities at small and medium orphan pots. Showing down some goofy strong hands really frightens skittish players.





I rack up for $1475 and head home.

In The Long Run

I read the Antonius article in the most recent CardPlayer issue, noting with particular interest where he called out Doyle Brunson to any game for any stakes at any time. Doyle!

Then I read the most recent entry in Doyle's blog last night where he accepts the challenge. The interest part is where he says "I’m willing to commit to for at least a seven figure match." I can only assume that this statement means that the match could also possibly involve both players putting up eight figures. Yikes. I just think its cool that Doyle has a blog. It certainly sounds like his voice -- I can hear the folksy, easy-going southern drawl in my head as I read his blog.

********

Dr. Pauly devoted an entire blog post to my all-time favorite hand, which is T8s, and specifially T8-spades if I can select a suit. Cool.

********

I read poker blogs much more than I write in my own. I try to learn what I can from the mistakes and discussions of others. There are not to many that consistently stick to the meat of the game -- strategy, hand analysis and review of their own play.

One thing that I have noticed to be almost a universal truth about the way poker players think. In the early and middle stages of a player's career arc, there is intense focus on hand analysis and learning game strategy to reach a desired skill level. Then when the player believes they have reached that skill level, they slow down or entirely stop the strategy discussion and just play, and their focus turns to other aspects of the game.

This is when many players get beat -- they focus more on bad beats, variance, the behavior of other players, and generally stop learning the game. But I have noticed that the very best players acknowledge that they are always learning. They learn from each mistake in each session.

When you read poker blogs or maybe the poker forums, you can quickly tell where players are at in their career arc and which players will continue to learn the game.

********

I went skiing today in Utah. Actually, the rest of the family went skiing, and I went snowboarding for the first time. Learning to snowboard involves a lot of falling down. I already know that tomorrow morning I will feel like I have been beat up by secret police during the night.

********

While on vacation, I still get a bit of poker in at night after everyone else crashes. Its still my refuge from the world, no matter whether I am at home or on vacation. Its my thing that I do for myself and that I don't have to explain to anyone else, except those that are interested in listenng. My charm at the on-line NLHE cash games seems to have returned. Despite my prior whining about the downfall of on-line cash games -- of maybe because of that? -- I have rediscovered a winning game. I think I know why.

I saw the movie "No Country for Old Men" a few days ago. I will save a full discussion of that movie for another time, but the movie had an interesting effect on my mindset toward life, and also poker. Only the poker part is relevant to this blog. It made me realize that life is very long and that over the course of my life, God willing, I will play hundreds of thousands and maybe even millions of poker hands. I will be playing this game for the rest of my life. I already know this to be true.

Consequently, I am in no rush for immediate victory. I know that my "long run" will be as long of a run as I can put in -- the rest of my life. I have a newfound contentment to play at a steady, even pace and patiently wait for the good starting hands and the best board cards to get my money in the pot. This is my style. Its wonderful when you can dig deep into a work of art -- a book, a movie, whatever catches your interest -- and pull out meaning that changes your life. These sort of events don't happen to often, and you have to pay attention or they will slip out of view like a ghost.

Poker is Easy

First hand of a new SNG –

PokerStars Game Tournament Level I (10/20)
Seat 1: (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: (1500 in chips)
Seat 3: (1500 in chips)
Seat 4: (1500 in chips)
Seat 5: (1500 in chips)
Seat 6: (1500 in chips)
Seat 7: Darvcus (1500 in chips)
Seat 8: (1500 in chips)
Seat 9: (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: posts small blind 10
Seat 3: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Darvcus [Ad Ac]
folds
folds
Seat 6: raises 20 to 40
Darvcus: raises 80 to 120
folds
folds
folds
Seat 2: raises 80 to 200
folds
Seat 6: calls 160
Darvcus: raises 460 to 660
Seat 2: calls 460
Seat 6: calls 460
*** FLOP *** [Ah As Qc]
Seat 2: bets 840 and is all-in
Seat 6: folds
Darvcus: calls 840 and is all-in
*** TURN *** [Ah As Qc] [Qh]
*** RIVER *** [Ah As Qc Qh] [Kh]
Seat 6 said, "nh"
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Seat 2: shows [7d 7s] (two pair, Aces and Queens)
Darvcus: shows [Ad Ac] (four of a kind, Aces)Darvcus collected 3680 from pot

On Bluffing

Gus Hansen has some recent blog post about bluffing here. Some interesting thoughts by him that are worth consideration:

“Bluffing is a key component to a winning poker strategy, and therefore I am constantly trying to add more and more bluffing features into my game. Some might think that I already bluff too much, but truth be told I still need to work on my bluffing frequencies in some specific situations.The fact that trickery and deception play a significantly larger role in short-handed poker makes the matter even more imminent. In heads-up play you are constantly on the move, and being able to pull the trigger in all sorts of situations with or without a hand is of utmost importance.”

“Notice that if I don't have any experience playing 'live' against someone, I always put them in a much tighter category than where I would be found. Against most opponents in big buy-in tournaments, a decent-sized bet on the turn will be enough to take out hands like AQ and AJ and maybe even 88 as well.”

“From past experiences I know for a fact, that each and every tournament player, I have encountered out there, cherish their chips to such a degree that bluffing should be upgraded from an occasional occurrence to a major weapon at your disposal in every hand you play.”

I don’t know if he is just advertising, but I would wager not. Against the right players, its very important to keep these thoughts in mind. Against the right players.

Call of the Day

Occasionally, rarely, I can make a read on-line.

PokerStars Tournament $25+$2 WSOP Steps
Hold'em No Limit - Level III (25/50)
9-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 3 (1270 in chips)
Seat 8 (1445 in chips)
Seat 9: Darvcus (1715 in chips)
Darvcus: posts small blind 25
Seat 1 posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Darvcus [Ac 9c]
folds
Seat 3 raises 100 to 150
folds
folds
folds
Seat 8 calls 150
Darvcus: calls 125
folds
*** FLOP *** [3c 4d 9h]
Darvcus: checks
Seat 3 bets 150
Seat 8 folds
Darvcus: raises 300 to 450
Seat 3 raises 670 to 1120 and is all-in
Darvcus: calls 670
*** TURN *** [3c 4d 9h] [As]
*** RIVER *** [3c 4d 9h As] [2s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Darvcus: shows [Ac 9c] (two pair, Aces and Nines)
Seat 3 shows [Kh Qh] (high card Ace)
Darvcus collected 2740 from pot

My C/R was to test whether I was ahead. His push should signal that I am not. He could very easily have something like JJ here, or any overpair. No real logic to the decision, and this was not a math based call. I could just feel it. This often happens live for me, but so rarely on-line.

American Beauty

Quite by accident I have watched most of the movie American Beauty twice in the last couple of weeks. Upon the second viewing, I am struck by the symbolism in the movie.

I liked this movie when I originally saw it in the theaters, but it did not strike the chord with me then as it does now. I do not exactly relate to Lester Burnham, but I understand what brought him down in his world. I have seen in others how the stress of life’s routines can create what happened to his family.

There is significant use of color in the movie, and a few other symbols. My take on their meaning:

Red = The unobtainable for Lester

Red is the most significant color in the movie. Lester’s front door is red. Lester’s wife, Carolyn, meticulously grows red roses. Before Carolyn starts to clean the house that she is trying to to sell, she takes off her dress and reveals a bright red slip, in which she runs around the house in a frantic cleaning spree. Lester’s object of desire, Angela, is viewed alternately covered by, showered by, and bathing in a sea of red rose petals.

Lester’s first encounter with Angela at the basketball game concludes with Angela opening her sweater to a burst of red rose petals. Lester sees Angela on his bedroom ceiling awash in red rose petals. In a dream, Lester wanders into the bathroom to find Angela in a bathtub filled with water and red rose petals. Lester’s root-beer encounter with Angela in his kitchen results in him urping up a red rose petal. In the final scenes of the movie, where Lester and Angela almost consummate their lustful relationship, a vase of red roses is in the background behind Angela in nearly every shot. The dancing white grocery bag that symbolizes the ultimate beauty for Ricky Fitz appears before bright red doors; Lester sees this scene while delivering his eulogy at the end of the movie. Red symbolizes the things that Lester wants but cannot or will not have in life.

Blue = sexuality

Jim and Jim, the gay couple that live on Robin Hood Trail with whom Lester jogs, both wear blue. The wife of the Real Estate King wears blue at the party. The Real Estate King wears a blue suit when he seduces Jane at their lunch. When Jane strips in her bedroom for Ricky while he is filming her from his bedroom next door, the curtains framing Jane’s figure are blue.

When Ricky’s father, Frank, watches Ricky and Lester through the window of Lester’s garage, when Frank mistakenly believes that Ricky is going down on Lester, Lester is reclining in a large, round chair with blue cushions. Lester and Carolyn almost get it on their blue and white striped couch in their living room, before Carolyn warns Lester that he’s about to spill beer on the couch and ruins the moment.

Black & white = normalcy

Ricky wears only black and white clothes. Ricky’s room consists of black and white, mostly video tapes lining the shelves. Ricky wears a tuxedo with a white jacket for his catering work at the party. Jane is always dressed in black and white. Her lipstick is some dark, colorless shade. Ricky films things that are white – the dead dove, the dancing white grocery sack. By the end of the movie, despite their troubles, Jane and Ricky are the normal people who survive their twisted family lives and presumably escape to New York to start their new life.

Gun = release and salvation

The Real Estate King tells Jane that he relieves stress by shooting a gun. Jane takes up handgun target practice to relieve the stress in her life. She is most happy after shooting a gun. Frank has a handgun collection that is housed in locked cabinets. Ricky opens a cabinet with a duplicate key to show Jane the Nazi serving plate. His access to an item stored with the gun collection is a way of connecting with Jane, to later escape his world with Jane.

At the end of the movie, Carolyn is walking up to the house in the rain clutching a gun, energized by her self-help tapes and ready to kill Lester. Frank kills Lester at the end of the movie with a handgun, which saves Lester from his depressing world. Lester’s red blood splatters on a pure white wall when he is shot in the head.

Reality Check

“Play is the work of children.” My children work very hard, at times! If this statement is also true for adults playing poker, then I can see why so many teens and 20-somethings are enamored with the idea of playing poker for a living. They think that work could be just a fun game. I do not want to play poker for a living. But, poker needs to remain fun. Which leads me to the reality check…

Its good to be brutally honest with yourself as a poker player. I am way past whining about bad beats and variance. Its just part of the game. But after a while, its hard to ignore trends, even if you are immune to and account for the variance. So, here is how my current game stacks up –

Live Cash Games – Love it, and I've had much success. I’ve won a lot in live cash games. Both in Vegas and locally. I’ve never ventured beyond $5/10 NLHE, but I’ve had success at all levels up to this level. I’ve worked hard on my reads and my feel of the game, and its what I like the most. For me, the most satisfying aspect of playing poker is sitting at a table, shutting out the real world for the entire session, tuning in to the vibe of the table, using all the math that I have learned without consciously thinking about the calculations, and then making good reads. When I am in the zone and making good decisions based on my read, this is ultimately why I play the game.

Live tournaments – Decent results, some nice cashes, but I haven’t really played that many tournaments. The luck factor is higher than in cash games, which is why I like deeped-stacked cash games the best. I would play more tournaments if I had the time, but for now I will have to settle for the annual Vegas pilgrimage and the occasional Ameristar tournament. Live tournaments are fun because they are an event, even if the variance is high, which is why I still like to play them.

On-line tournaments – Very high variance. I don’t have the time or take the time to play many on-line tournaments except the Thursday night Chiptalk tournament. I’m relatively satisfied with my ITM% over several years in the Chiptalk series, but I still have yet to win the damn thing. I don’t play the Chiptalk tournament as much due to work and life commitments.

On-line SNGs – This is clearly my strongest on-line game. I have consistently won SNGs up to the $50 level. Sharkscope.com data keeps track better than I do (“Darvcus” on PokerStars). I like the strategy that I have developed over the years for SNGs, and there are still a good number of players that make easily avoidable mistakes in SNGs up to the $30 level. I’ve had much more success at SNGs than on-line cash games.

On-Line Cash Games – After the UIGEA, I am a losing on-line cash game player. Not huge losses, I just don’t have an edge in these games any more. Back during the good PartyPoker days, I was a big winner in the cash games. I guess everyone was (except for the contributors, of course). Its how I built my on-line bankroll from $200 into the thousands. But after the UIGEA, I think the cash games became extremely hard. I sense that a lot of the grinders have learned to live at the low stakes tables, and just play a lot of tables to minimize variance. Last week, I sat at two tables where one player on each table was taking an incredibly long time with each decision. I did a search on each, and they were both playing 15+ tables! Crazy.

Very recently, I’ve come to realize something else about on-line cash games: I need more time to make my decisions. I don’t need any more time that is allotted to make decisions in SNGs, but I routinely need more time than allowed in cash games. So, my decisions are often hurried. Not all the time, and not by a significant amount, but still often hurried. Routinely feeling slightly hurried can make a huge difference between making good laydowns and horrible, money-losing calls. Make this mistake a few times each session, and you have a recipe for –EV results.

I’m not saying this as an excuse for my poor on-line cash game performance, but its just a reality of my game. Admitting your weakness is a strength, right? Feeling hurried, coupled with limited reading abilities at the on-line cash tables, plus playing at night when I am generally tired, has resulted in losses. I don’t have an edge in on-line cash games any more. I’m sure this will change when the law changes at some point in the future, when donators can again easily make deposits, but until these floodgates re-open, I’m going to stick to on-line SNGs for a positive return.

Iowa

I traveled to Iowa this last weekend to attend to family-related business. My home state. I took the opportunity to squeeze in some poker at a few locations around the state.

Meskwaki Bingo Casino Hotel

First, there was Meskwaki near Tama, Iowa on Friday night. Smallish poker room. Biggest game was a $1/2 NLHE game with a max $200 buy-in. Painful. I sat with several reloads, and needed one reload after my stack dwindled.

I used this as an exercise to see how quickly I could get a read on the players at the table. I’ve decided that if I am paying close attention, I should be able to get a decent read on everyone in about four orbits. This is necessary when you only have time for short sessions.

Initial conclusion: Iowa players are easy to read. Their problem is that, to a man, they play cash games like they would play a tournament. They give away their PF hand strength, and are completely unable to lay down a big pocket pair. Strategy: see a lot of flops with any playable NL hand, wait to flop something that can beat one pair, and then blast away. This basic strategy proved successful. No stack pics because I could not get cell phone coverage at this casino, so I didn’t take my phone to the table.

One astounding fact about the Meskwaki Bingo Casino Hotel (besides a name that is too long) – they don’t serve alcohol! A casino that does not serve alcohol – what the hell is up with that?! It made for some tame poker, and I bet it seriously huts the casino’s bottom line, too.

Final tally: +$200.

Riverside Casino

Next up was $2/5 NLHE at the Riverside Casino on Saturday afternoon. Nice casino, and they do serve alcohol. I did not partake, but I did take one player’s money in about a 2 hour session.

I played two odd hands against a dude to my right. Odd because of the betting that occurred. He was 40-ish, from Cedar Rapids, and was talking up a storm about an upcoming trip to the Bellagio to play $30-60 limit HE. Claimed to like limit better than NL. Not much of a tournament player. Seemed to know what he was doing and willing to mix it up with a wide range of hands.

First significant hand. I sat down about 20 minutes earlier and I have just over $300. Villain has me covered –

Limped to me on the button, I call with 99. Pot is $25.
Flop is 9h-8s-7s. Checked to Villain who bets $25. I raise to $75. Folded to Villain who calls.

Turn is (9h-8s-7s)-3s. Villain bets $100. I am concerned about the flush and just call. Pot is $375.

River is (9h-8s-7s-3s)-Tc. Villain check, and I happily check behind on a very scary board. He shows A8-hearts (??) and I win with a set of 999. My stack looked like this:
Afterwards, he says: “I put you on an overpair.” I presume this means that he thought he could have bet me off the hand on the turn. But how would I have an overpair to this flop on the button without raising PF? Whatever.

Second significant hand. I have maybe $675 and Villain has around $600. Several limpers to me on the button and I have JJ. I raise to $25, and everyone folds except Villain. We are heads up to a flop of –

Js-Tc-8c. Villain checks and I bet $35. This is intentionally a smallish bet to disguise my hand. Villain now min-raises to $70. Odd. I raise to $170 total. Villain quickly calls, so he has something here. Pot is about $210.

Turn is (Js-Tc-8c)-6c. Villain bets $150. Again I am concerned about the flush, but something felt like he did not have the flush. I call. Pot is about $510.

River is (Js-Tc-8c-6c)-Ts. Excellent. Villain checks. I have around $375 left and bet $200. I wanted to bet the max that he would call, while making sure that he did not fold. He quickly called. I win a $900+ pot and he mucks. My stack then looked like this:

Villain later claimed that he also had a boat – 999TT. He really sounded like he was telling the truth. But if so, I have no idea why he did not bet the river and instead check-called.

Poker is alive and well in Iowa, and from my limited experience there, the players are not very good.

Any Given Session

Every poker session falls into one of four categories:

1. You played like shit and you lost. You feel bad.

2. You played like shit but got lucky and won. You might feel bad about how you played, if you care about your skill in the game, but you'll keep the winnings anyway.

3. You played good but got unlucky and lost. You might feel satisfied about your play, but losing still sucks.

4. You played well and won. This is one of the main reasons I keep playing poker. Playing well and winning is extremely satisfying, if you're a real poker player.

Discovery

Remember back in the hey-day of on-line poker when you could sit at the low-limit NLHE games on PartyPoker and just rake in the money? Double your buy-in after about 10-15 minutes per table because your victims routinely paid off with weak hands?

No one does this any more because everyone had read Harrington on Hold 'Em and watched High Stakes Poker and plays NLHE 12 hours per day at all levels.

Well, I've discovered the modern-day Party-Poker NLHE circa 2004: low-limit Omaha high.

I've finally figured out Omaha to play straight-forward ABC strategy. And its like minting money. Its slow, but its a sure thing. Weak players routinely pay off with second best hands, just like the old NLHE PartyPoker days.

Epiphany

I have a new favorite local casino poker game. For about a year, the only casino poker cash game I have played is the Ameristar $1/$2 NLHE game, which is the biggest NL game they have (sad). I play this mainly because they have the 75% rule – you can sit down with 75% of the biggest stack at the table. This sort of compensates for the antiquated Missouri “loss limit” rule, where you can only purchase $500 in chips every two hours. To my knowledge, no other state in the nation follows this silly rule.

But I played in the Harrahs $2/$5 NL game last Saturday, which does not have the 75% rule. This is a better game in terms of player mix and structure. Although the stacks are nearly the same size as the Ameristar game, the slightly bigger blinds make the game play bigger. This I like. I sat down with $500 and cashed out for over $1600:

I was in seat 10. I had to go extra tall with the stacks rather than wide, because the dealers had trouble keeping their elbows off my stack. Shift to the right, go high. Being a chip snob, stack configuration is important to me.

I went into the game extremely focused, and had a read on nearly every player for the entire session. I was focused enough to plan ahead in each hand – figure out what I would do on future streets in a hand based on player styles, stack sizes and my read at the very start of the hand.

By the end of the session, something occurred to me. This seems to be a fundamental truth about my live cash games:

My best cash game sessions happen when I lose the fewest number of showdowns.

At first, this may seem like a fairly unremarkable statement. Of course you do better when you win more showdowns. But that’s not it. My very best sessions are when I lose the fewest showdowns, not necessarily win the most showdowns.

This can be the result of several factors that mark a good cash game session:
--Winning only a few pots early on, but big pots.
--Folding before the river when you are behind.
--Playing tight early and building up a solid image.
--Later in the session, winning lots of smallish pots before the showdown based on your image.

Something else I was very happy about – I maintained the discipline to fold a lot, despite having the big stack at the table. Even though I more than tripled up in this session, overall my cards were terrible. I went for extended stretches where I was forced to fold crap like K3, Q4, 92, endless junk. When I have a big stack in a cash game, I’m willing to play nearly any playable hand for a standard raise, down to small suited connectors. But I wasn’t even getting those type of hands. I’m sure I looked like the biggest nit at the table, but as the session wore on I really didn’t care, because I could pick up the occasional modest pot based on my tight image.

I lost one showdown all night, which was a small and inconsequential pot. Every other hand at showdown was a winner, including 2 hands where I held the nuts and managed to get paid for maximum value.

Trouble Tourney Hand

I finished in 4th place in the CT Thursday night tournament for two consecutives weeks. I had average to above average luck -- some key suckouts suffered, and a few dealt to others. I've had good patience when my stack has been short, which can make all the difference in this tournment since there are many players that play close to optimal pre-flop strategy.

Here's a hand that was aggravating. Its a relatively inconsequential hand overall, but I kept thinking about it later and had to go back and review. This type of hand comes up a lot in cash games and can be troubling.

Villian: Very solid player overall. Calls too much PF with a medium to average sized stack. Calls too much OOP. Plays a large stack very well -- one of the best big stack players among the CT regulars. Not afraid to run a bluff. Often plays distracted -- surfing and doing other computer stuff. He's been calling raises a lot in this tourney. I believe that he thinks I bluff more often than most CTers.

The Hand:
PokerStars Level II (15/30)
Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: Villain (1215 in chips)
Seat 9: Darvcus (2065 in chips)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Darvcus [8d Ac]
Seat 8: calls 30
Darvcus: calls 30
Villain: calls 30
SB: calls 15
BB: checks
*** FLOP *** [8h 6c 3c]
SB: checks
BB: checks
Seat 8, : checks
Darvcus: bets 90
[I have TPTK and very likely the best hand since everyone limped PF. The board is uncoordinated but for the spades.]
Villain: calls 90
SB: folds
BB: folds
Seat 8: folds
[I put Villain on spades, some sort of straight draw such as T9 or 75, or less likely a slow-played set.]

*** TURN *** [8h 6c 3c] [Kh]
Darvcus: bets 180
[This card would not complete any of his draws. If I was ahead on the flop, I'm likely still ahead now. I also assume that if I am behind now he will raise and I'll know where I am at. This bet should chase him away if he is on a draw. Finally, if I check and he bets, I may be forced to fold the best hand. So I have to bet here.]
Villain: calls 180
[Still on a draw? Its seems very unlikely that he has a king. He could have called on the flop with KcXc, but if so I think he would raise here especially if he thinks I am double-barrel-semi-bluffing with a draw, which he knows I will do. The only thing I can settle on is that he's still drawing.]

*** RIVER *** [8h 6c 3c Kh] [Ts]
Darvcus: bets 210
[Based on my turn evaluation, this is a value bet. The ten on the river is unlikely to have hit any of his drawing hands. It occurs to me that he might have an 8 with a worse kicker.]
Villain: calls 210

*** SHOW DOWN ***
Darvcus: shows [8d Ac] (a pair of Eights)
Villain: shows [Ks Qh] (a pair of Kings)
Villain collected 1110 from pot

Analysis:
My immediate reaction was -- what the hell was he calling for on the flop?! Floating to take it away later? No, because he hit his best card on the turn and just called. So I have no explanation for the call.

I could give him credit for two spades that had a king, but there is no reason to call my flop bet with KQo. Upon further reflection, I do not like my river bet because there is no hand that would call that I beat, except maybe an 8 with a worse kicker. And the ten might have hit some draws, and might still call on the river.

When my opponent calls on the flop with a hand that really should be folded on the flop, I have trouble connecting the dots on the turn and river. I need to work on that -- but how do you re-evaluate on the turn so drastically that you nearly throw out his original hand range and devise a completely new hand range?

My PLO Education Begins

On-line, its my contention that most hobby players do not have a significant edge over the majority of on-line hold ‘em players, either limit or NL. The market is saturated with books and on-line instruction which serves to educate and create a more equalized playing field, as far as pre-flop play is concerned. Since most on-line tournaments and SNGs are short-stacked play, most of the action is PF where there is not much edge for a hobby player. Yes, lots of players still make lots of mistakes, but from my observations the hold ‘em games are no where near as good as they were 3 years ago.

So, I am learning PLO on-line. Based on what little I have read about PLO, most significantly the Chris Ferguson PLO Chapter in the Full Tilt Tournament Strategy book, I see lots of players playing PLO like hold ‘em. Aside from the Full Tilt book, I am essentially educating myself. So, here is my first Top 10 strategy observations about on-line PLO:

1. Pre-flop you should devalue pairs. A hand like Q-Q-8-6 is almost nothing but trouble if played like a hold ‘em hand. This hand has the same value as something like 8-8-Q-6 – you need to hit a set on the flop to go anywhere. If an overcard hits on the flop, the pocket pair is worthless. If the board is connected at all, the pocket pair is worthless or will become worthless very shortly. You cannot go to showdown without improving a single pocket pair.

2. Mid-range and low connecting cards are great. A hand like Q-J-T-9 is very strong. A hand with three connecting cards like Q-J-9-3 is also worth seeing the flop for a raise. Low connecting cards are also strong, like 6-5-4-2. These hands allow for significant decision-making on the flop, and become very easy hands to play if you miss the flop – you just fold. Higher connecting hands like A-K-J-9 are strong, but are not as strong as the mid-range and low connecting cards because you cannot hit wrap straight-draws. Example: the hand Q-J-T-7 on a board of K-T-8 is better than holding A-K-J-9 on a board of K-Q-T.

3. Bluffing – don’t do it except in very rare circumstances. All players call with all manner of draws. If the board is two suited or is connected in any way, do not bluff. The only situation that I have encountered where bluffing can work is in late position, everyone has checked to you, and the board is completely uncoordinated like K-7-2 rainbow. But even then, the pot will be small and relatively worthless compared to the pots that you will win in Omaha with good hands.

4. In any pot with 3 or more players (including you), if a flush is showing on board and you cannot beat the nut flush or another high flush, just fold. Do not play your straight, set or 2-pair hand against a flush board – it’s a loser 19 out of 20 times. I may be off on the frequency here, but with players betting into a flush board in a multi-way pot, someone has the flush.

5. Do not slow-play except in rare circumstances. If you hit your hand on the flop, just bet it. If someone else has a hand or a draw, you will get action. If no one else has a hand or a draw, you will take the pot with the bet. From my limited experience, check-raising in a multi-way pot, and usually even in a heads-up pot, will just result in getting all the chips in the middle before the river because everyone quickly becomes pot committed to the hand and is probably correct, or close to correct, to call all raises after the betting starts.

6. You cannot be scared of playing to your good draws because that is how everyone else is betting (but you should still apply the math and fold when not getting correct odds). In hold ‘em, draws lead to semi-bluffing opportunities. In Omaha, draws lead to everyone getting their entire stack in the middle on a regular basis.

7. I hit a lot more sets in this game than I would have guessed. Maybe I’m just getting lucky with hitting sets – I need to read up on this. But I seem to hit sets with startling frequency, and top set can lead to big winning pots against all the drawing hands that are willing to get their stack in the middle.

8. When you have middle or bottom set, do not be surprised when you are beat by a better set. It happens much more frequently in Omaha than in hold ‘em.

9. A-A-x-x hands must be played as fast as possible pre-flop. You absolutely have to jam for the max raise with this hand pre-flop, because its value decreases greatly when you get action on the flop. If your table has lots of pre-flop raises, this may be one of the slow-play exceptions – just call or make a modest raise in EP with A-A hands, with the intention of re-raising the max pre-flop if there is a raise behind you.

All opinions expressed herein are subject to revision as I continue to learn this game. I have a lot to learn.

On-Line Rebuilding Plan

1. Eliminate bluffing almost entirely. Everyone calls too much on-line. Like me, at my levels of play, no one believes that you have hand. Let my opponents' bad calls when I have a hand make up for the times that I could have won with a bluff but did not fire. This is completely different than my live play...

2. Stay tight. Resist the urge to LAG it up like everyone else. My best results come from when I play tight.

3. Leave the table when I am up. If I can win 20-30 BBs at any cash table, I will be perfectly satisfied to leave, bank the profit and start another table. Exception: a clear donk just waiting to give his chips away.

4. Stick mostly to SNGs, where I have my best returns.

5. Keep Omaha tables very low-limit, in my effort to learn this game.

6. Run the math of hands after sessions. I used to do this all the time, but stopped mainly because I don't feel that I need much practice at this any more. But, it wouldn't hurt to get back to the basics and review the math on a regular basis. Come to think of it, my downward slide on-line roughly corresponds to when I stopped doing my poker math homework away from the tables...

7. Stay away form heads-up play, both cash games and SNGs. The variance is too high when you are trying to rebuild.

8. Play at full 9-seat tables. My SNG and cash games results are the very best at 9-seat tables.

9. Read hand analysis on 2+2 more often, stay away from the junk posts.

10. Have fun, don't play scared.

What is going on?

If you don't want to read about another poker player whining about his results, then skip this and move on. I write this for myself, anyway, and not possible readers.

I cannot win anything on-line. I used to win at on-line poker on a regular basis. I still win at live poker. I am fairly certain that my poker skills have not dropped that noticeably, but now I am questioning things.

I cannot cash in a SNG of any type at any level. I cannot post a winning session in an on-line cash game. No, I do not think on-line poker is rigged.

Its a neverending series of bad beats which defies all odds. Nothing like this happens with my live play. So now I am questioning myself. Am I playing too aggressively? Too tight? Can players read me too well? Are players using stat tracking tools that peg me?

I really don't think my game has changed that much. I still play roughly the same style that has worked very well in the past. I change my game up based on the complezion of the table. I calculate the math of every hand and incorporate that into my play on a constant basis.

But I continue to lose at a steady clip. Can't win a race. Fantastic second-best hands. Regular runs of completely unplayable junk that drops me to <10 BBs in SNGs. Someone calls raises, I flop nothing, I cannot bet, because I will get called if they flop anything.

I'm playing more Omaha hi. (I will post my personal Omaha rules at some point -- already written up.) I flop the nut straight. I play it as fast as possible with successive pot-sized bets on the flop and turn, and get called by unplayable hands that run me down. Yes I want players to make these bad, unprofitable calls, but I want to win a fucking hand once in a while! Its devastating my on-line backroll and my confidence.

I love this game, but I cannot keep playing when I absolutely cannot win. I am doubting my abilities as a result of this run, but keep reminding myself that its the long run that counts. And, nothing like this happens with my live play.

I don't think that the skills I use in live play can make that much difference with my on-line game, but I have no other explanation for what is happening besides this or just amazing horrible luck. I've won a good deal at on-line play before, and I keep telling myself that it can happen again, But I am seriously starting to wonder if that is true anymore.

NOTE: For any Team Hephastus players that may read this, I have had a never-ending series of work-related Thursday night meetings since the second week in December. I work with a lot of cities, and city councils hold most meetings at night. I am attending more of these meetings than ever before, with lots of travel. If I had known this would be the case, I would not have signed up for the team again. Even if I could make it, I am sure that my on-line performance would not change on Thursday nights...

Three Live Hands

The Game: Live NLHE, $1/2 blinds, $5 to call. Typical PF raise is to $15 or $20

The Villain: Wildly loose and aggressive player, but also very friendly. He’s the kind of guy you want at the table because he looses everyone up, but also puts them at ease with friendly chatter. Since I had the identical playing style as him (except for all his talking), we locked horns at every possible opportunity including these three big hands in one Friday evening session. I’m in seat 2, he’s in seat 7.

Hand #1: After 2 folds, he raises in MP to $20. After one caller, I raise on the button to $60 with AK-hearts. He raises to $120 total. Guy in between folds, and I call $60 more and we’re heads up. I’m thinking he either has AA, KK, or re-raised with just about anything to squeeze out the other guy and get HU with me. Pot is about $220.

Flop is 8-6-3, two spades. He bets $120 and I call. Now I’m putting him on a continuation bet, and I plan to take the hand away later. Pot is about $440.

Turn is (8-6-3)-4, did not complete a spade flush. This appears to change nothing. He counts out chips as if he has every intention of betting, but then looks at me and checks. In his split second glance, I read strength and that he was going to CR me if I bet. So, I check.

River is (8-6-3-4)-7, did not complete the spade flush. He bets $200. I make like I’m thinking long and hard about the call, but what I’m really thinking about is how badly I fucked this hand up. I fold.

Analysis: Except for maybe my PF call of his raise, I think I played every street poorly. If I call on the flop with the intention to take it away later, I need to follow though. But, my read on the turn may have saved me chips, because Hand #2 below was very similar and confirmed 100% that he hs the ability to slow play a monster all the way to the end. At the end of Hand #1, I really thought I misplayed it, but after Hand #2 I think my only mistake was the flop call.

Hand #2: This hand is only relevant for one purpose. After no PF raise and smallish bets on all streets, including his check-call on the turn, the river is Ac-Kc-Qc-Tc-6h. He checked on the river, and I bet $60 on a pure bluff (I had no club). He checked-raised to $160 total. I folded, and he showed Jc-9s for the royal flush. He check-called and checked the river with a Royal Flush, setting me up to make my river bluff! Very well played by him. He also collected the $950 club-Royal Flush jackpot.

This hand confirmed that I believe he was slow-playing me on Hand #1, because I saw him play strong hands like this against two other players. Note to self: this slow-playing mofo is dangerous.

Hand #3: Mind games from past hands came into play on this hand. Villain and I have built up the biggest stacks at the table over several hours of play, and I have around $1300. He has me covered by a bit.

Lots of limpers to a flop of A-Q-Q, rainbow. Villain bets $20 in EP, and after one caller I raise to $80 total on the button with Q6. Villain raises to $200. I put him on an ace, and I think that he thinks that I’m either on a draw or stealing -- I don’t think that he thinks I have a Q. Other guy folds what I assume to be some sort of straight draw, and ducked out of what would likely become a very expensive pot. I call, thinking that I have the best hand. Pot is about $440

Turn is (A-Q-Q)-K. Villain ponders a bet, but checks. I think he may have AJ, AT, Ax, maybe a Qx hand. I do not think that Villain has JT, and my read of the guy that got squeezed out on the flop was that he had JT based on his reaction on the turn. (Yes, reading players that folded already in a hand can come into play at times.) I do not think that Villain has AQ or KQ, or even QJ or QT, or he probably would have raised PF. I bet $300. Villain thinks for a long time, then calls. I get the strong sense that he does not really like his hand here, that I am ahead or at least we’re tied because we both have a Q, and his hesitation is true and not a slow-play (all past history to the contrary). Pot is over $1000 now, and I have about $800 left.

River is (A-Q-Q-K)-T. He looks genuinely scared and checks. I quickly push, with the intention of signaling, “Well, I have a boat, so there’s no way I can just check here. That should be very obvious.” Villain goes into the tank for an extremely long time. This is the longest that I have ever seen anyone take to make a decision in a cash game. He counts it out, and he has only a few chips more than me. He groans. “Why are you doing this to me?” He clearly is in a bind about this decision.

I sit motionless, and as things drag on I am 95% certain that he has a J for the straight and has me beat. JT? J9? AJ? I’m giving off full-house vibes with my body language: Call if you have the jack, because I obviously have the boat. What else would I have here? I have to have a boat to make this play! Fold, and save your money, or you are an idiot! You don’t want to blow that whole stack that you worked all night to build up with just a straight on that board, now do you? Fold, fold, fold! You are beat!

He calls with extreme reluctance. I flip over my Q6 and he flips over – Q5.

Villain explodes with great relief and comes around the table for a fist pump and a hand shake. “Shit, man, what a hand!! Wow, you had me scared there!” We exchanged a friendly “What are you doin’ playing a hand like Q6/Q5?” But we both knew the answer – we play these hands to catch flops and win big pots. And we both thought that this was the one – the winner sits with $2500+ in a freakin’ $1/2/5 NL game!. I asked him if he thought I had a boat, maybe KQ? Or QT that got there on the river?

His response was somewhat incoherent, and I think the tension and release of the hand prevented him from speaking. The only thing that he said which made any sense was, “I just didn’t think that you had AQ, man, or you would have raised pre-flop.” Yeah, but what about KQ or QT? Or even QJ?! Any reasonable Q-hand beats you. You really thought you were making a good call? I didn’t say any of this, of course.

Oh well, chop it up and play on. But we were both extremely cautious of each other after that. I ended the night around $1500, and he was very congratulatory as I left.

I generally like playing against weaker players, but I also genuinely appreciate these mind games at the table once in a while against someone who shows good sportsmanship and is not afraid to win or lose. It makes for some very fun poker.