Here is a link to an article Don Gilmour wrote about poker and the life and death of Paul Quarrington. A very good piece of writing, I think.
I knew Paul in the same way that hundreds of us knew him; I didn't see him very often but somehow he made me feel like we were good friends. Our contact was limited to the number of times he visited Calgary on a book tour, or to work on a television show shooting here, or with his band.
I never played poker with Paul and I regret that - even though I suspect he would have taken a lot of money off me.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Money for Nothing
The old saying "It takes money to make money" is not exactly true when it comes to poker. Many online poker sites offer freerolls: tournaments where players do not have to pay anything to enter but will still pay out real money to the winners. Usually the payouts are pretty small and since it doesn't cost anything to enter, sometimes the number of competitors is enormous, but freerolls offer a very rare thing: the chance to win a little without risking anything.
One of the reasons I like playing on Full Tilt is that they offer a lot of freerolls. Pretty much every hour, a freeroll starts. Most of them will only (only!) take a maximum of 7,600 players and out of that massive field only the top 45 finishers will be in the money, with prizes ranging from about $14 for first down to about $1.50 for 45th place. With such a large field, you would have to finish in the top half of one percent of players to getting anything at all! Even if you don't put any money into them, these bigger freerolls still usually demand a large time investment; taking about five hours to play from start to final table.
With such slim odds and such a long time commitment to win such small amounts of money, it is not surprising that a lot of people regard freerolls as a waste of time. Are they? Anette Obrestad was a fifteen-year-old Norwegian girl who (it is claimed) never deposited any money into on-line poker, but with money she won in freerolls went on to win amass over $800,000 before she turned eighteen.
And not all freerolls have such big fields and slim odds as the hourly tournaments I mentioned earlier. Full tilt has a daily tournament where the entry free is $500,000 in play money, and $40 in real money is divided among the top 18 finishers ($5 for first, $3 for second and $2 for everyone who finishes 3rd to 18th). I played it the other day - guess how many players were in it? 32. That's right - more people finished in the money that not. (For the record, I came in 8th). While some might not say this is exactly a freeroll since I had to put up $500,000 in play money, in my mind $500,000 in play money is worth about, oh, I'd say $0 in real money. So yeah, I'd call this a freeroll.
One of the reasons I like playing on Full Tilt is that they offer a lot of freerolls. Pretty much every hour, a freeroll starts. Most of them will only (only!) take a maximum of 7,600 players and out of that massive field only the top 45 finishers will be in the money, with prizes ranging from about $14 for first down to about $1.50 for 45th place. With such a large field, you would have to finish in the top half of one percent of players to getting anything at all! Even if you don't put any money into them, these bigger freerolls still usually demand a large time investment; taking about five hours to play from start to final table.
With such slim odds and such a long time commitment to win such small amounts of money, it is not surprising that a lot of people regard freerolls as a waste of time. Are they? Anette Obrestad was a fifteen-year-old Norwegian girl who (it is claimed) never deposited any money into on-line poker, but with money she won in freerolls went on to win amass over $800,000 before she turned eighteen.
And not all freerolls have such big fields and slim odds as the hourly tournaments I mentioned earlier. Full tilt has a daily tournament where the entry free is $500,000 in play money, and $40 in real money is divided among the top 18 finishers ($5 for first, $3 for second and $2 for everyone who finishes 3rd to 18th). I played it the other day - guess how many players were in it? 32. That's right - more people finished in the money that not. (For the record, I came in 8th). While some might not say this is exactly a freeroll since I had to put up $500,000 in play money, in my mind $500,000 in play money is worth about, oh, I'd say $0 in real money. So yeah, I'd call this a freeroll.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Ball of Confusion
I'm almost half-way though The Elder Experiment and very little of the results make any sense so far. I should refrain from any comments until the experiment is over, but I assumed some kind of general pattern would be emergingby now. Instead it seems that the amount I am winning or losing from different positions is almost random.
The only thing that makes sense is that after 450 hands from every position, I have lost a lot of play money from the blinds. With $2000/$1000 blinds, I lose an average of $702 each time I am in the big blind and $582 from the small. These numbers make sense to me. One should, over time, lose money in the blinds.
The button - the position which is supposed to be the most profitable- is the only position outside of the blinds in which I am currently losing money! How does that make sense? The only answer I can come up with is that fault is with me and not with the stars; that I am over playing my hands from the button or that I am calling too much with weak cards. That is one good result of such pseudo-scientific experiments - they might expose weakness in your game that you can try to remedy.
Still, I can't see much in the results so far to convince me that position is as important as everyone says it is. I think I will make as much with AA from under-the-gun as I will from the button.
I remain a cynic.
The only thing that makes sense is that after 450 hands from every position, I have lost a lot of play money from the blinds. With $2000/$1000 blinds, I lose an average of $702 each time I am in the big blind and $582 from the small. These numbers make sense to me. One should, over time, lose money in the blinds.
The button - the position which is supposed to be the most profitable- is the only position outside of the blinds in which I am currently losing money! How does that make sense? The only answer I can come up with is that fault is with me and not with the stars; that I am over playing my hands from the button or that I am calling too much with weak cards. That is one good result of such pseudo-scientific experiments - they might expose weakness in your game that you can try to remedy.
Still, I can't see much in the results so far to convince me that position is as important as everyone says it is. I think I will make as much with AA from under-the-gun as I will from the button.
I remain a cynic.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
A Better Poker Blog Than Mine
I used to make fun of poets who never read poetry. I found it hilarious that so many people thought you could just sit down and start writing poetry without ever bothering to read poetry yourself. Yet here I am, writing a poker blog and I don't even read other poker blogs - does this make me a hypocrite?
I guess I am afraid of becoming a poker-zombie. I do NOT want to live and breathe poker, because I think doing so will make me a predictable player as well as an unbalanced person. Still, I think it is wise to see what other people think of the game. I hope some of you are learning something from reading my blog, and I certainly know I can learn from the blogs of others.
The first blog I have stumbled upon that seems pretty good is http://www.taopoker.blogspot.com/ . I hesitate to tell you about it because many of you will read this blog instead of mine, because it is a whole lot better. Oh, well. The blog is put out for over eight years by Paul McGuire a guy who writes regularly for Bluff Magazine and the Poker Player Newspaper. As a full-time writer he puts out a lot of posts, so you can pretty much stay up to date on what all the poker-geeks are buzzing about. Just be careful not to become a geek yourself!
I guess I am afraid of becoming a poker-zombie. I do NOT want to live and breathe poker, because I think doing so will make me a predictable player as well as an unbalanced person. Still, I think it is wise to see what other people think of the game. I hope some of you are learning something from reading my blog, and I certainly know I can learn from the blogs of others.
The first blog I have stumbled upon that seems pretty good is http://www.taopoker.blogspot.com/ . I hesitate to tell you about it because many of you will read this blog instead of mine, because it is a whole lot better. Oh, well. The blog is put out for over eight years by Paul McGuire a guy who writes regularly for Bluff Magazine and the Poker Player Newspaper. As a full-time writer he puts out a lot of posts, so you can pretty much stay up to date on what all the poker-geeks are buzzing about. Just be careful not to become a geek yourself!
Thursday, May 19, 2011
All In
Book Review:
All In, by Jerry Yang
2011, Medallion Press
If there is one adjective that makes me not want to read a book, it is "inspirational". I do not seek out stories of an individual overcoming incredible odds to succeed as way of motivating myself. Not that I have anything against such books, but they are just not my thing.
So I picked up the advance edition of 2007 World Series of Poker Champion Jerry Yang's biography looking forward to reading about his poker experience and was surprised to find myself engrossed in his tale of growing up in Laos during the Vietnam war. I had no idea of how the conflict played out in the countries surrounding Vietnam, and was fascinated by Yang's first hand account of how the North Vietnamese Army and Pathet Lao virtually wiped out his people - the hill dwelling Hmong. Although still a child at the time, Yang gives an impressively detailed account of growing up in the mountainous northern region of Laos, as well as the harrowing journey to Thailand when the communist forces over-ran his homeland. Until reading All In I had no real understanding of the refugee experience, but Yang did a splendid job in making his past come alive - partially because he very rarely over sentimentalized the experience.
In the end I was far more interested in what happened to twelve-year-old Yang Xao in Laos than the forty-something Jerry Yang in Las Vegas. The book instructs the read on what is truly important. We grant fame and fortune to someone who wins a card game, but the important things we do in our lives are not done for money or adoration.
All In, by Jerry Yang
2011, Medallion Press
If there is one adjective that makes me not want to read a book, it is "inspirational". I do not seek out stories of an individual overcoming incredible odds to succeed as way of motivating myself. Not that I have anything against such books, but they are just not my thing.
So I picked up the advance edition of 2007 World Series of Poker Champion Jerry Yang's biography looking forward to reading about his poker experience and was surprised to find myself engrossed in his tale of growing up in Laos during the Vietnam war. I had no idea of how the conflict played out in the countries surrounding Vietnam, and was fascinated by Yang's first hand account of how the North Vietnamese Army and Pathet Lao virtually wiped out his people - the hill dwelling Hmong. Although still a child at the time, Yang gives an impressively detailed account of growing up in the mountainous northern region of Laos, as well as the harrowing journey to Thailand when the communist forces over-ran his homeland. Until reading All In I had no real understanding of the refugee experience, but Yang did a splendid job in making his past come alive - partially because he very rarely over sentimentalized the experience.
In the end I was far more interested in what happened to twelve-year-old Yang Xao in Laos than the forty-something Jerry Yang in Las Vegas. The book instructs the read on what is truly important. We grant fame and fortune to someone who wins a card game, but the important things we do in our lives are not done for money or adoration.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Every Hand Revealed
Every Hand Revealed,
by Gus Hansen
2008, Lyle Stuart Books
I vaguely recall a story about a general who the night before a huge battle was approached by his second-in-command. Since it was possible that the General might fall in battle, the Second wanted to know his battle strategy so that he could carry on in this case. The general asked his second if he knew what the enemy's plans were for the battle and when the second said that he had no idea the general replied that he could not say what his strategy was until he saw what the enemies strategy was. Or something like that.
During the 2007 Aussie Millions tournament, Gus Hansen used a small hand held recording device to record every single hand he was involved in, and then he later fleshed out the book by describing the thinking behind every decision he made. The result is an amazing glimpse into the thinking of one of the games most innovative and successful players.
I have read a few books about poker tournament strategy and while I have learned some valuable things, I knew that the generalities would only get me so far - that in specific situations I would be on my own. What I like about Every Hand Revealed is that it is entirely situational, giving the reader a real hand-by-hand example of how a great player navigates a tournament. While the reader will never be in exactly the same position against the same players as Hansen - it is a much more instructive book than most because it teaches a thought process rather than a specific strategy. This is, I think, revelatory. Up until now I thought that to be a great tournament player I needed to memorize a number of different strategies and know when to apply them - but Hansen has opened my eyes to the importance of understanding the reasoning behind the strategy - the proper thinking that lies behind the proper action.
Gus Hansen is by most standards an extremely aggressive player. I have always been a proponent of tight-conservative tournament play (at least in the early stages) and have dismissed play like Hansen's as too reckless. But Hansen has shown me that there is a method to his madness, that the aggression is not applied indiscriminately. Hansen more than most players has a great understanding of the mathematics of the game, and most of his aggressive moves make sense when he breaks down the math behind them. But what I like most is that Hansen is also a great reader of his opponents. He often makes statements such as "nobody seemed very interested in the flop" before he decides a continuation bet is in order.
And he is human. He makes a bone-headed move now and again. I particularly enjoy the occasions when he spends a page describing how he spent five minutes figuring out what the proper action is before doing the wrong thing. "Why did I do that?" he writes, "I have absolutely no idea."
I highly recommend Every Hand Revealed. It won't give you any magic formulas that will work every time but it might help you learn to think your way through a tournament.
by Gus Hansen
2008, Lyle Stuart Books
I vaguely recall a story about a general who the night before a huge battle was approached by his second-in-command. Since it was possible that the General might fall in battle, the Second wanted to know his battle strategy so that he could carry on in this case. The general asked his second if he knew what the enemy's plans were for the battle and when the second said that he had no idea the general replied that he could not say what his strategy was until he saw what the enemies strategy was. Or something like that.
During the 2007 Aussie Millions tournament, Gus Hansen used a small hand held recording device to record every single hand he was involved in, and then he later fleshed out the book by describing the thinking behind every decision he made. The result is an amazing glimpse into the thinking of one of the games most innovative and successful players.
I have read a few books about poker tournament strategy and while I have learned some valuable things, I knew that the generalities would only get me so far - that in specific situations I would be on my own. What I like about Every Hand Revealed is that it is entirely situational, giving the reader a real hand-by-hand example of how a great player navigates a tournament. While the reader will never be in exactly the same position against the same players as Hansen - it is a much more instructive book than most because it teaches a thought process rather than a specific strategy. This is, I think, revelatory. Up until now I thought that to be a great tournament player I needed to memorize a number of different strategies and know when to apply them - but Hansen has opened my eyes to the importance of understanding the reasoning behind the strategy - the proper thinking that lies behind the proper action.
Gus Hansen is by most standards an extremely aggressive player. I have always been a proponent of tight-conservative tournament play (at least in the early stages) and have dismissed play like Hansen's as too reckless. But Hansen has shown me that there is a method to his madness, that the aggression is not applied indiscriminately. Hansen more than most players has a great understanding of the mathematics of the game, and most of his aggressive moves make sense when he breaks down the math behind them. But what I like most is that Hansen is also a great reader of his opponents. He often makes statements such as "nobody seemed very interested in the flop" before he decides a continuation bet is in order.
And he is human. He makes a bone-headed move now and again. I particularly enjoy the occasions when he spends a page describing how he spent five minutes figuring out what the proper action is before doing the wrong thing. "Why did I do that?" he writes, "I have absolutely no idea."
I highly recommend Every Hand Revealed. It won't give you any magic formulas that will work every time but it might help you learn to think your way through a tournament.
Monday, May 9, 2011
A Measuring Worm
Has it really bean eleven days since my last post? I’m sorry to have neglected you for so long, but every spare moment seems to have been spoken for as of late. The Elder Experiment in particular is proving to be a major consumer of free time. I have played 2,655 hands so far, which has taken me over forty hours.
I have also been reading a lot lately - both about poker (Gus Hansen’s Every Hand Revealed - which I will review in my next post) and poetry. Yes, poetry. What’s up with that? A poem by Richard Wilbur keeps coming back to me as I tally up my results from the hours at the virtual felt:
A Measuring Worm
This yellow-stripped green
Caterpillar, climbing up
The steep window screen,
Constantly (for lack
Of a full set of legs) keeps
Humping up his back.
It’s as if he sent
By a sort of semaphore
Dark omegas meant
To warn of Last Things.
Although he doesn’t know it,
He soon will have wings,
And I too don’t know
Toward what undreamt condition
Inch by inch I go.
That pretty much sums up how I feel about the Elder Experiment and about poker in general or life in general for that matter. I find it helps to keep this in mind when I feel like saying to hell with it and quitting. It would be pretty to stupid to fall off the window screen now, when someday you might have wings to fly away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)