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.

End with a....

One final live poker session for 2007 at Ameristar. I started by winning about $200 in the NL cash games after floundering on the $15-$30 limit table for about a half hour while I waited for my NL seat.

I made to the fourth level of the tournament with a decent sized stack. I picked up AA UTG at the 100-200 level, raised to 500 and the SB called. The flop came K-Q-J with two hearts. SB immediately pushed and just had me covered. Two thoughts quickly went through my head: “There is absolutely no hand that he would push with on this flop that I could beat. I kinda don’t care because I think the cash games are going to be more lucrative for me tonight.” Just one of those feelings, but maybe it was my own way of rationalizing a martyr call with AA. So against my better judgment I called, and he tables T-9 for the lower straight.

Back to the NL game. First hand I get AA, raise to $20 UTG+1 and one guy calls to my immediate left. He is there just about every time that I’ve ever played at Ameristar. He’s the guy that’s always looking around the room, calling out loudly to other players across the room and talking with all the dealers like they’re best buds. There’s one of these guys (and usually more than one) in every poker room.

The flop is 9-8-6 rainbow. I lead out for $25 and he raises to $75. I ask him, “Really?” He kinda nods and shrugs, like “Yeah, I like that flop.” My instinct is to raise him, make it $200 total. But then I don’t like the idea of building a huge pot with one pair this early, so I just call. I’m having trouble putting him on a hand, and he’s an experienced and somewhat tricky player. The turn is (9-8-6)-3. I check with the intention of raising if he bets. But he checks.

The river is (9-8-6-3)-7. I bet $110, and he calls with A-5 for the straight that made it on the river. His raise on the flop was what, just goofing with me? And my instinct was dead on – I could have easily blasted him out of the hand. We discussed the hand as the play went on, and he admitted that even a min-raise back at him on the flop would have made him fold.

So, now I’ve had AA cracked in back-to-back hands, once in a tournament and once in a cash game. A new record for me, on two counts. I resolve to trust my instincts more, since my instinct in both AA hands was accurate.

The rest of the session went great. A few hands after the second AA hand, I was faced with an all in bet on the turn with AJ on a board of A-K-8-J. The pot was about $150 and the bet was about the same. I had tangled with this dude before several times. I could not put him on AK or 88 based on the way he played the hand, so I called. I heard the always wonderful “Good call” as I slid my chips forward, and he mucked before the river and before I even showed my hand.

I won a few more very large pots and built up a nice stack:

I always laugh inside when I can build up a $1500 stack in a $1-2-5 NL game ($1-2 blinds, $5 to call). I can play this game completely wide open, and bully the $200-$300 stacks, while at the same time usually avoiding significant trouble because I know that plenty of opportunities will inevitably come along. They always do in this game.

A good way to end the year. I remain very confident in my live game, but I remain unable to make any headway with on-line play. I have become very reliant on my live reads, which I don’t think is a bad thing at all, but I have completely lost my feel for on-line play.

Poker Year in Review

I’ve been very busy with work and life, and I haven’t had as much time to play poker lately. Certainly not as much as in the past, or as much as I would like. But I do still think about the game all the time – strategy, hand analysis, branching out into other games.

Live Poker

Live poker has been great for me this year. I had some very successful Vegas trips, good results in local cash games, and a nice local tournament score. I have worked on and improved my player reading ability, and this is what I like the most about poker. I have a very good feel for the game when sitting with real players, and the math and strategy aspects of the game that I have learned over the last several years is now second nature in live play.

On-Line Poker

On-line poker has sucked this year. I cannot win the Chiptalk tournament. The fish have largely dried up due to legal restrictions on deposit. The games are tougher now, and even the low level games are populated by more skilled and tricky players. On-line play is becoming closer to my Clone Theory every day – the majority of the on-line players are closer in skill, and the results therefore reflect luck and variance rather than differences in skill.

In years past, it was fairly easy to win. I took a single $200 deposit and ran it up to several thousand dollars spread over several sites over a period of a few year. I played a slow, steady game and gradually built a bankroll at several sites. The Poker Horror Story took a nice bite out of my on-line bankroll, but I fully recovered.

Then the new laws went into effect. New deposits were restricted, so much less new money was coming into the game. Moving my funds between sites was cut off when NetTeller was shut down. As a result, all of my funds were pooled in my PokerStars and FullTilt accounts. Then the games went bad, and now I cannot win.

To compound problems, for the last half of this year I have been on the worst ice-cold streak of my poker playing history. I cannot count how many times I have put my money in as a 75%+ favorite and lost. I cannot cash in a freakin’ $10 SNG! Last night all the money went in and Villain had 6 outs on the river, making me about a 84% favorite. Exactly as expected, one of his outs hit. It happens so often that it is now routine. I expect to lose.

All this has combined to nearly eviscerate my on-line bankroll. This is so sad, because there was a time when winning on-line was routine. So I ask myself – have I lost my skills? Am I doing something wrong? How could I run $200 up to around $6000, and now I absolutely cannot win at anything? Why do I win in live play, but lose on-line?

I guess I have answered these questions for myself already – deposit restrictions dried up the fish, tougher players remain, games are harder, I have little or no edge over my opponents since they are all equal to or better than my skill level, and variance kicks into create losing streaks from which I cannot recover. In addition, from what I can pick up in my readings, there are more players using data mining tools, Poker Tracker and other statistical or tracking software, and there is obviously collusion and cheating. All of this has some negative effect on a casual player's overall results. How much, I am not sure.

Branching Out On-Line

But I love to play the game! What’s a hobby poker player to do? Well, I have dropped down in limits, but soon I will have no funds left if this trend continues. Also, I am looking into other games. Hold ‘em is fun and popular, but everyone had read the same books and everyone knows how to play like Harrington, Ferguson, Bruson, Negreanu, Sklansky, etc. I have the feeling that there are many games out there that play like PartyPoker NLHE circa 2005.

I cracked open the FullTilt Tournament book in the last few weeks and read the Matusow chapter on Omaha HL and the Ferguson chapter on PLO. Matusow really knows what he’s talking about with Omaha-8 The same with Ferguson’s chapter on PLO. Ferduson's chapter has completely re-aligned my approach to starting hand values in Omaha – it really is very different that hold ‘em. I expect that the edge right now in PLO is beating the legions of players that apply hold ‘em strategy and starting hand values to PLO.

I will have the opportunity to play the Ameristar this week, so there will be one more live session to round out the year.

New Chips

After purchasing nearly every sample set ever made, I finally made another purchase – a new 1400 set of the Dunes commemorative chips. Paid from my live poker bankroll. I believe the Dunes chips are, by far, the best looking chip available in the moderate to low price range. Actually, I think they look as good or better that the Pharaohs. The replica Dunes house mold is and inlay are classic. For a plastic chip, the sound is wonderful, almost exactly like clay.

Do I need another chip set? No, but collecting is an affliction, so I do not fight it. And, I will be giving away my original dice chip set, so I need something in replacement.

All Hallows Eve

For thousands of years people have been celebrating different holidays and festivals at the end of October. The Celts celebrated it as Samhain (pronounced "sow-in", with "sow" rhyming with cow). The Irish English dictionary published by the Irish Texts Society defines the word as follows:

"Samhain, All Hallowtide, the feast of the dead in Pagan and Christian times, signalizing the close of harvest and the initiation of the winter season, lasting till May, during which troops (esp. the Fiann) were quartered. Faeries were imagined as particularly active at this season. From it the half year is reckoned. also called Feile Moingfinne (Snow Goddess).(1) The Scottish Gaelis Dictionary defines it as "Hallowtide. The Feast of All Soula. Sam + Fuin = end of summer."(2) Contrary to the information published by many organizations, there is no archaeological or literary evidence to indicate that Samhain was a deity. The Celtic Gods of the dead were Gwynn ap Nudd for the British, and Arawn for the Welsh. The Irish did not have a "lord of death" as such.

The information on Samhain is from Rowan Moonstone's The Origins of Halloween.
For more info check out Halloween on Wikipedia(1) Rev. Patrick Dineen, "An Irish English Dictionary" (Dublin, 1927), p. 937(2) Malcolm MacLennan, "A Pronouncing and Etymological Dictionary of the Gaelic Language" (Aberdeen, 1979), p. 279

The Celts believed that every year on the last day of October, the souls of the dead visited the earth.

When the Romans conquered the Celts in the first century A.D., they added parts of their festivals, Feralia and Pomona to the tradition. Feralia was a festival to honor the dead and Pomona was a harvest festival named after the goddess of fruit (apples) and trees.

Around the eigth century, the Christian church made November 1 All Saints' Day to honor all of the saints that didn't have a special day of their own. Over the years these festivals combined, the mass held on All Saints' Day was called Allhallowmas (the mass of all Hallows - saintly people). The night before was known as All Hallows Eve. Eventually this name became Halloween.

In the 1800s, as a lot of people emigrated to the U.S., the holidays and traditions of different cultures merged. Halloween was not always a happy time. October 31, or the night before took on other names. Some called it Devil's or Hell night, to others it was mischief night. Here in Vermont, the night before is called cabbage night. To some people this became a time to play tricks on others. Some of these tricks were not fun at all. Luckily, community groups and individuals took action and started to change Halloween into a family event. Dressing up in costumes and going "trick or treating", costume parades, community parties and Fall festivals are some of the ways that Halloween is celebrated today.

Other countries have different Fall festivals to honor the deceased.

The Festival of the Dead is one of the most important happenings in both Palermo and the rest of Sicily. The second of November is a festival day for the children of Palermo as, according to tradition,they were made to believe that their dead relatives would return the night before and leave them traditional sweets and cakes on the table (Martorana fruit, which is almond paste made into the shape of different fruit). They would also receive puppets of boiled sugar and toys. It's one way of keeping the memory of their dead relatives and loved ones alive.

Rate

While driving home from work today, a system to rate my live poker sessions occurred to me. The primary skills for my play on a 1-10 scale are:

Energy: how much energy I bring to the game, measured by how awake I feel and how much I am "into the game" (high number = more energy)

Focus: self-explanatory -- how well I am paying attention and reading my opponents (high number = better focus)

Cards: how good the cards are to me, and a measurement of luck (high number = better cards)

Opponents: quality of my opponents (high number = better players)


Recent tournament win --
Energy: 8
Focus: 9
Cards: 6
Opponents: 4

Recent cash game session --
Energy: 6
Focus: 8
Cards: 6
Opponents: 5

Venetian cash game session --
Energy: 7
Focus: 9
Cards: 10
Opponents: 5

Play at Your Own Risk

The Absolute Poker cheating allegations are the hot topic. I can’t help but laugh at all the people writing about this topic – despite all the bitching, everyone will keep playing. And really, what are you, as a player, going to do about it?

My thoughts from a different angle. Imagine these scenarios and tell me what you would do:

-- You log onto your on-line account one evening and the cashier window says your account is $0. You send some e-mails. The response is “our records reflect that your account is $0.” You send more e-mails, make phone calls and repeatedly receive the same response – our records say that your account is $0.

-- You play in a cash game and its obvious that two or more players at your table are colluding. Several people lose money, including you. You send e-mails, and the response is “we have reviewed the history and our records indicate that there was no cheating.”

-- You try to log on to play and the site is no longer running. The company just closed up shop and ran with the money in all player accounts.

Seriously, what would you do? Send messages, make phone calls, post loud rants on chat boards, scream in your personal blog. What would this accomplish when someone else is holding your money? In the U.S., possession is 9/10 of the law. With off-shore internet poker sites, its probably 10/10 of the law (whatever the law may be that governs the situation).

Would you try to sue? Would you actually seek out an attorney and pay him/her money out of your own pocket to file a lawsuit? Who would you sue? How does US law apply in the jurisdiction in which the on-line company operates? The jurisdictional problems alone might be an insurmountable hurdle to anyone that does not have lots of money to pay attorneys. And what attorney would take this case on a contingency basis?

The point is, if any scenario happened where your money just disappears from an on-line poker account, there’s probably not a damn thing you could do about it. For this reason, I am amazing that people rely upon on-line poker as their primary (or only?) source of income. For anyone that actually relies upon this to feed their children -- absolutely irresponsible. I am not indicting poker as a profession, just the unreliable nature of on-line poker.

Play at your own risk.

Tick Tick Boom

The Game: Ameristar $120 buy-in NLHE Thursday night tournament, 49 entrants.

Result: 1st place, $1928 cash. My second biggest tournament cash to date.

I didn’t actually win 1st place outright, but there was a 4-way chop at the end and I got the full 1st place prize money because I had a crushing chip lead over the other three players. I held something like 70% of the chips in play when we were down to four.

How it went down: Nothing spectacular throughout the tournament. I did not deliver a single bad beat, and no one delivered a bad beat against me. I was all-in only twice, when I open-pushed at the 100-200 and 150-300 levels when he blinds were very high relative to all stack sizes. No callers both times, so my tournament life was never at risk in any hand. Every contested pot was for less than my entire stack.

Keys to this tournament: In live play, I play cash games much more than tournaments. The only time I play live tournaments is in Vegas and in the Ameristar tournament maybe 3-4 times per year. As a result, I feel that my read is best in live cash games. So, I went into this tournament with the intention of focusing on my reads, as I do in cash games, to improve this aspect of my game.

It was primarily due to a sensitivity of stack size compared to style of play. I focused on identifying players’ styles, and then balancing that against stack size. There were situations where I avoided confrontations with smaller stacks who were prone to be more aggressive and play back, and be more on the attack against bigger stacks who were generally weaker players.

I would fold some strong hands that I might normally raise with pre-flop, when I had the sense that someone was ready to call or re-raise. I focused on the “look to the left” skill – looking around left at the players remaining to act to get a sense of their strength before I looked at my cards. Most everyone else looked at their hands before it was their turn to act, and they were giving off tells, or at least some aura of strength or weakness that I could just feel. It sounds like New Age mumbo-jumbo, but it was really working – I was predicting (to myself) with amazing accuracy who was strong and ready to pounce. I avoided a lot of trouble and coasted through the mid-levels by doing this.

The Key Hand: When we collapsed to the final table with 9 players, the Villain was a 60-ish woman wearing a red leather cowboy hat. She had a dominant chip lead with maybe 14,000 and everyone else was somewhere between 3000 to 6000. But, she played a big stack horribly. Her problem was that she hardly played at all, and when she did play she was usually out of position and her hand values were relatively weak for all-in confrontations. She would occasionally raise in EP with a hand like KJ, and then call a small stack push who had AJ. Worse, she would fail to call with tremendous pot odds in multi-way pots (ex. 700 call with one teensy stack all in, when the pot was already 3000+), with the opportunity to check it down and knock out the small stack. She continually made bad plays out of position and I got the sense that she came to the final table with a big stack due to luck. So she was the target, if I got the chance.

Despite her weak plays, she managed to collect an even bigger stack after winning some races. I won a few decent hands as the players dwindled, and Villain and I each knocked out two players. Down to five players, she and I were close as the big stacks, but I had her covered, and the other three were short.

At the 700-1400 level, she opened UTG for 4500. I was next to act and had two red kings. The moment I had been waiting for. How to get her stack in the middle? I intentionally fumbled around with a raise, and made it look like I was weakly making a min-raise, but intentionally made it 1000 (two orange chips) short. The dealer called this out, and I tossed the other two chips in. She was watching this act. My read was that she had Ax. The plan was call a push, or push myself if she checked, on any flop that didn’t have an ace.

The flop was T-9-6 rainbow, and she quickly pushed. I called and she showed A8-hearts. Perfect. I held up, and had about 70% of the chips. The other players quickly worked out the deal and I took the full 1st place prize.

Question: When the initial deal idea was raised, the other players all quickly pointed out, “You get 1st place money. You can’t finish any better than that!” But could I have gotten more than 1st place money in a deal? Is this ever done? Do players ever use extreme big-stack deal leverage to squeeze better than 1st place money out of a deal – pay me better than 1st place money, or no deal? My equity in the remaining prize pool was about $2800 based on my stack size, but they were correct that I could not win more than $1928 if we played it out. They each got about $700 in the deal, but 3rd and 4th place money was somewhere around $600 and $400, respectively, so my leverage would have been their individual risk of losing about $300 by playing on. I would have looked like a greedy hog for even trying, but I’m still curious if this would have worked.

Save the Chipleader, Save the World

The Game: $1/2 NLHE with a $5 bring-in. It costs at least $5 to limp in, including the BB. You can sit down with a max of $500 or 75% of the biggest stack at the table. I have no idea why the blinds are only $1/2, when the stacks are so big. Standard PF raise is $15 or $20.

My image: Loose PF, fairly tight after the flop. I’ve been playing a lot of hands, open raising or calling standard PF raises with anything playable, including everything down to single and double-gapped suited connectors. Important for this hand: I have not lost a single showdown all night. I’ve either won before showdown, won at showdown, or bailed out before the showdown. I started with $500 and I’m the big stack at the table with around $900.

The Villain: Sunburnt 40-ish Kansas State fan who watched Kansas whip K-State earlier in the day. He’s the luckbox of the evening – he keeps stumbling into lucky coolers that no one can fold. He has AA when someone else has KK, all in PF. He flops top set when someone else flops middle set, all in on the flop. He turns a straight when someone else flops 2-pair. He sat down with about $250 and ran it up to nearly $800 through dumb luck. He’s playing somewhat loose PF, but he sticks to the big cards and doesn’t seem to play the lower cards. Most importantly, Villain has the shakes when he has a big hand, and its very obvious to the whole table. Its been a 100% reliable tell.

The Hand: UTG+1, I raise to $15 PF with AT-clubs. Four callers, including Villain in the BB.

Flop is 4-A-4, rainbow. Villain checks. I bet $45. Everyone folds to Villain, who just calls.

Turn is 4-A-4-2, two spades. Villain bets $100, and he’s shaking horribly. I openly called attention to his shaking by saying “The Shake-O-Meter is pretty high. That really scares me.” Some laughs at the table. Villain looks kind of scared. Then I call.

River is 4-A-4-2-2. Villain bets $200, and he’s shaking even more as he struggles to push forward two stacks of red without causing a minor earthquake. He has $405 left. I say “Wow” when he is done, to point out that I am very aware of how badly he is shaking and aware of his strength. Then I calmly push.

Villain thinks about folding for a long time, then calls and shows J4-hearts. I muck and go home.

Analysis: I was attempting to use his tell against him, but my play failed miserably. I was trying to tell him, “I know how strong you think your hand is, but I am still pushing in the face of such an obvious tell. I have you beat.” Maybe I should have been more blunt and just said, “I know you have a four, but you should still fold and save your chips. I’m all in.”

His pause after my push on the river meant that he at least gave serious consideration to the fact that I could have AA, or maybe A4. I played this hand exactly as I would with AA – just calling his strong bet on the turn, and then pushing on the river even though it was almost 100% obvious he had a four.

(As a side note, I could not figure out his other card during the hand. I really didn’t think he had A4, so that left something like 54 or maybe 64. So, his actual hand of J4 was very unexpected and out of character with his prior play, but also completely irrelevant.)

What I learned from this hand: Don’t try a big bluff against a mediocre player that is incapable of folding in this situation. Be less likely to bluff against someone that has had a really good night and 75% of his stack came from other players. Don’t bluff K-State donkeys.

The Clone Table Theory

Imagine that you are playing at a deep-stack, 9-player NLHE cash game table. Your 8 opponents are clones of you. They are not simply like you, they are you – exact clones of you today. Consequently, each player has exactly the same skill level and playing style.

How could you win in this game?
1. Avoid mistakes.
2. Randomize your play.
3. Have a bigger bankroll.
4. Get lucky.

If you are playing at a table against equally-skilled opponents, the best way to win is to reduce your mistakes and randomize your play. Even if your opponents understand your playing style perfectly (i.e. they are a clone of you), you can still be unpredictable by randomizing your play. Open with a wide range of starting hands. Play recurring hand types (i.e. draws) in different ways (sometimes call, sometimes raise). Respond to aggression in different ways. Make your opening raise constant (3xBB, as Mr. Ferguson teaches), but vary your post-flop bet or raise amounts.

There is also a key external factor – bankroll size. A bigger bankroll will allow you to better withstand bankroll fluctuations, and a bigger bankroll should provide more confidence, thereby reducing mistakes (or at least the fear of making mistakes) and enhancing aggression.

As players move up in playing levels, they get closer to the theoretical Clone Table. Over time, the natural selection process that occurs by winning at lower levels and moving up to higher levels brings together players that are more closely matched in style and ability. Picture the table in Bobby’s Room populated by Brunson, Ivey, Chan, Reese, Hanson, etc. – they all have large bankrolls, play aggressive, randomize their play, play with confidence, and avoid obvious mistakes. They aren’t clones of one another, and certainly have different playing styles, but in theory their skills are the most closely matched because they have risen through the ranks of weaker players and reached the poker pinnacle where the most highly skilled players compete.

These suggestions aren’t anything new, but imagining a Clone Table helps to emphasize the key attributes that would allow you to compete and win against equally-matched opponents, as well as lesser-skilled opponents.

I ♥ Live Poker

My hot streak in live play continues, and my on-line game flounders.

Due to rare scheduling of family events, I was able to play on the last two Friday nights in the Ameristar NLHE cash games. Two weeks ago, I won $1040, and last Friday I won just over $200.

Two weeks ago was a spectacular session. I actually started at the $1/2 NL game because that's the biggest game they had running. A single $2/5 NL table finally opened around 9pm. For some reason they let players sit down with $1000, so I was instantly in deep-stack play. My favorite. Most other players only bought in for around $300.

By 1am, my stack was over $2000 and the table closed. Between myself and the guy next to me, the only other decent player at the table, we literally cleaned everyone else out except for two poor souls with $200 stacks. So the table closed.

Last Friday, I was running really cold, and nothing connected early on. I made a heroic comeback for a positive night. I had lots of interesting confrontations, which I'd like to write about if I have time.

I'm 100% confident in my reads in live deep-stack cash play. Its not that I can read my opponents 100% of the time, but I can tell when my read is accurate, and when my read is uncertain. I can tell when I can't tell what my opponent holds. That make sense? I can feel when I can successfully push back, and I can feel when I don't have a good read and need to back off. I can play a wide range of hands and show down some goofy hands that connect, scaring the table and giving me an unpredictable style.

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

My on-line game continues to suffer as I play more live games. I am dependent on a read of my opponents. So, I am floundering on-line. I'm not losing, I'm just not gaining ground anymore. I really think that the games are tougher now on-line. An on-line $1/2 NL is easily more difficult than a live $2/5 NL game.

I'm sticking to the $50 SNGs and the $1/2 and $2/4 NL games. Up $200, down $200. Up $300, down $300. There are no soft games that I can find. Plus, I've become more dependent on my live reads, which is just absent with on-line play. I'm liking the heads-up play even more because its the best way I can get a read on-line.

I'm going to try to get back to a more math-based game on-line, since I can't read there as well as live.

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

The weather is getting cooler, football season is here, and Halloween is coming. I love this time of the year.

Testing the FullTilt Bankroll

The Disney Cruise was great fun for all. As soon as we got off the ship, both of my kids asked when we can go on another cruise. Like we can just book one for next month…

Many, many weeks ago, I cashed in some of my 40,000+ FullTilt points for two books – “The Poker Mindset” and the FullTilt tournament strategy compendium with chapters written by all the famous poker immortals associated with FullTilt. I ordered these specifically with the thought that I would read these on the cruise.

The books did not arrive before we left for vacation. I said, “Dammit, these are the two books that I want to read on the vacation. Is that too much to ask?” So, I went and bought the FullTilt tournament book. I was able to read parts of a few chapters on the trip. Kids are time eaters, even on vacations. The Post-Flop NL chapter by Ted Forrest was great, and reinforces much of what I have written in this blog about feel for the game and the Zen mindset that can set in with deep concentration at the table.

Of course, when I got back from vacation, the two books that I had ordered from FullTilt had arrived. Some poker friend will be the recipient of a shiny copy of the FullTilt tournament book in the hear future…

*********

I can’t bring myself to spend 25,000 points and order a FullTilt jersey. But the football jersey would be cool. I would just feel like a complete geek wearing that in public, even thought I am, in all honesty, a complete poker and chip-collecting geek. It would be cool to have my name on the back, but it’s the logo thing on the front that would make me feel embarrassed. Unless I was playing at a final table at the WSOP and FullTilt was paying me to wear their logo. Maybe some day.

**********

I emptied my FullTilt account of everything but $2000 (voluntarily). Then I went on a bad streak and ran it down to around $700. Exactly $800 of the losses were due to two bad beats at the $2/4 NL tables. Upon further review, my official definition of a “bad beat” is when I lose a hand after getting all the chips in the pot as a 75% or greater favorite. I guess I should not be playing $2/4 NL when I only have 5 buy-ins, but I play better at a level that at least feels slightly meaningful.

So after I hit the $700 mark, I decided to play only $100 buy-in or higher SNGs. Again, not optimal bankroll management (for just my FullTilt bankroll), but what the hell. I play better when there is more at stake. I concentrate more carefully on each decision when I reach a certain cash threshold. As for SNGs, that threshold seems to be $100 for me.

I was playing well and got an average run of cards, and the FullTilt account is back to around $1400. Full recovery to $2000 is the goal, and then I’m going to try the Bad Bankroll Management Challenge.

***********

I really like the heads-up SNGs. I am involved in every hand and constantly make decisions. I like reading my opponents patterns. It’s the best way that I have found, on-line, to replicate what I like about live play – reading the opponent. At a full on-line table, the other players are just so many avatars. But heads-up, I can focus exclusively on one opponent and his patterns. I’ve had good success in heads-up play, and its more fun for me.

I like playing a single-table SNG and a heads-up SNG at the same time. The heads-up table takes enough of my concentration to ensure that I don’t get bored with the full table and play too many hands, or over play medium-strength hands. The heads-up table essentially provides more patience to wait for the best hands at the full table.

Even at the $100 SNG level, its amazing how many players still make huge mistakes. Like pushing 44 after an EP raise at the third level with an average-sized stack. Or pushing middle pair on the flop during the third level when the stack sizes still allow plenty of room to play.

A New Challenge

I think I need a new poker challenge. With much of my on-line play, I kind of just sputter along. Over the several years that I’ve played, I am slowly, ever so slowly, building up a bankroll. But on-line is much harder than live play for me.

On three occasions in the past I’ve “taken a shot” at higher on-line limits -- $5/10 and $10/20NL. All three times, I had initial success and then dropped it all back. When giving it back, I’d fairly say that 50% was due to variance and 50% was due to bad play brought on by the variance.

I’m thinking of an accelerated “shot taking” chance. For example, start with a decent amount, like $500 (the “Starting Stake”), and put it all in play. Then, with each win, immediately put the Starting Stake plus all the Winnings from the Starting Stake in play. Instead of using good bankroll management with the Winnings, continue to push by putting the whole Starting Stake and all the Winnings in play. But never put in play more than the Starting Stake plus all Winnings. I will play mostly cash games, with some SNGs thrown in for variety.

If I crash, it would be like one losing session and I’m just out the Starting Stake. With solid play, I should be able to avoid a crash with anything but a bad beat. At least that’s the theory. I have the feeling that a lot of high stakes on-line players quickly built up this way.

I’ll set the goal at $10,000 -- if I can parlay the Starting Stake into $10,000, I will stop and go back to good bankroll management. (I might change my tune if this actually works and I hit something like the $5000 or $8000 mark. It would be difficult to set down at an on-line table with $5000+, but we’ll see what happens.)

I’d like to eventually be playing on-line for the same stakes as I do live, so there’s not so much disparity for me between on-line and live games. I pay more attention and play better when there is more at stake, which might explain why I often sputter along at the lower on-line stakes. Sitting down with $400 at a $2/4NL game and cashing out after an hour with $500 just doesn’t seem to have much pop when there is so much money in play on-line.