Don't be afraid to look foolish.

A couple of times when I was just starting out I'd get very confused when I thought I had won a hand only to see the dealer shove the pot to an opponent. I'd say, "Wait! No! I won that pot!." only to have the dealer explain something like the river had counterfeited my two pair and gave my opponent the better hand. So then I felt foolish on top of the sting of losing.

I don't like looking foolish. Nobody does. But the fear of looking foolish can be detrimental to your game. For example if you believe an opponent does not have a great hand, then it is often the correct move to bluff him off the pot even if you don't have a particularly good had yourself. However many players won't bluff in a situation where a bluff is called for because they worry that they might get caught. The potential humiliation prevents them from doing the profitable thing.

A more obvious example for how fear of looking like a doofus can cost you happened to me the other day. I had raised in middle position with A Q and had one caller - the button - who happened to be holding A 10. The flop came A K 4 , a good flop for me. I bet and he called. The turn brought a 10, giving my opponent the better hand with two pair. I bet and he just called (sneaky devil!). The river brought another king, making the board:

 A K 4 10 K

This made my hand better than his as the pair of kings counterfeited his pair of tens, and my queen out kicked his ten. I bet and he called. Now a situation like this one often confuses people, myself included. It is not obvious that AQ beats A 10 because, well golly there is a 10 on the board so that has to be good, right? The brain wants to believe that three pair beats a lowly two pair, but the rules of poker don't recognize three pair. It's the best five card hand that wins, and AAKKQ beats AAKK10. 

We showed our cards and immediately I felt sorry for the guy - what a bad break! "Wow, what an unlucky river." I said out of sympathy for the bad beat he had just suffered. But the dealer wasn't paying proper attention, and thought that I was bemoaning my own bad luck. Jumping to this conclusion, the dealer assumed I had the losing hand and pushed the pot towards my opponent. My opponent reached out and started to gather them in....say what? For a second I wondered, I am I wrong? I must be wrong. Nobody said anything...I quickly shook off the feeling. Not giving a hoot if I looked foolish, I cried out "Wait! No! I won that pot!"...and the dealer meekly explained he thought the other guy had the AQ. And the other guy said he didn't notice he had been counterfeited. Yeah, sure. Whatever. I stacked my chips and made a note to myself to write this post.

The point is to never be afraid of  looking dumb. Speak out when you think something is wrong. You can't count on anyone else to speak out for you.

Poker City Canada

Calgary is the city I call my home, as do about 1.2 million other people. Nestled in the foothills of the Canadian Rocky Mountains, as the tourist bureau would have you believe - in truth we lie a little east of the foothills and unless you happen to be facing west the vista is of flat prairie farm and ranchlands. Perfect for a   booming city to just sprawl out in. And Calgary definitely sprawls. It takes up more space than Toronto or Chicago and more than half as much land as London, England - a city with eight times the population. We do like our space here.

There are six casinos in Calgary (seven if you count the one on the Indian reservation that borders the west side of town) and each of them has a poker room. Most poker rooms are open twenty four hours a day. I can only guess how many people are employed by the poker rooms, but the total must be a couple hundred. Dealers mostly, many working as few as twenty hours a week, maybe less, and a few working full time. Aside from those with "real" jobs there are a surprising number of  people in Calgary who have made playing  the game of poker their primary source of income. Dozens of people, certainly. Maybe even a hundred.

Who are these people who make a living playing a game while the rest of us have are salary slaves in the gleaming downtown skyscrapers? The majority are older, retirees who supplement their income by grinding it out at the tables. They have low overhead. The house is paid for and kids are done university. They have lots of time and are more than happy playing cards six days a week. They come early, and usually leave by suppertime - just when the real fish and the real sharks start showing up. They play the low limit games, because that's where the softest competition is. Of course there are plenty of retirees who lose money playing poker. They are in it for the social aspects and just are having fun. Sometimes it is hard to tell one from another. There are some younger ones too - and again it is sometimes hard to tell the long term winners (real professionals) and the wannabe's who slowly drain their bank accounts. After all most of us have to lose money - the math demands it.

Chatting With a Pro

All the regular poker players were treating the guy sitting next to me with a good deal of respect. They all knew his name - Scott - and they were acting like he was some kind of big shot.

"Where are you going next on the tour, Scott?" asked a regular I'd played with many times.

"There is a tournament in Regina."

During a lull, when neither of us were in the hand, I asked him if he was a professional poker player.  He shrugged.

"If you could call it that..."

"I'll take that as a 'yes'."

Scott laughed. "Well, I don't do anything else, so you could say that."

I didn't want to  bother the man, but I was curious. How does one make a living playing cards? Particularly when one lives in a place like Calgary? How does he handle the variance? Does he play set hours? I had far too many questions to pester the man with.

The one thing I really wanted to know was if he ever wished - like Mike the Vegas pro - that he had a regular job with a regular pay cheque. So I asked him that.

"Well, my wife has a good job so that stability is there."

Okay. Fair enough. So "no".

A little while later I asked him if he usually played at the $1/$2 stakes.

"Well, no. I usually play $2/$5. Sometimes $5/$10. And Tournaments. But you can certainly make money at $1/$2. Look at this table - you can make more at a $1/$2 table like this than you could at an average $2/$5 table." Scott was up about $300 at this point - after playing for about three hours. Making $100/hour is definitely pulling down a good living but of course it doesn't always go that well.

I wish I had the nerve to ask him more questions, but to tell the truth I was more concerned with concentrating on the game. I will say that I didn't see him enter a lot of pots - he played tight, waiting for decent cards. And he played a lot of his hands "in position" - something I still need to understand how to do effectively.

Chop?

When I first started playing live poker I was quite confused when one time, while I was in the big blind, it folded to the guy in the small blind who turned to me and said "chop?" What he was asking was if instead of him completing the blind (for a dollar in this case)  and playing the hand, whether I'd prefer just to take my big blind back (and he'd get his small blind back) and we could move on to the next hand - a practice commonly known as chopping.

Chopping is usually seen as a good thing to do - it speeds the play up and it keeps things friendly. Other players don't have to wait while two guys contest a small pot. Once I got the concept, I usually chopped in this situation.

Some guys live by a "I never chop" creed. I guess the chop offends their uber-competitive nature.

I once witnessed a hand where it folded to the small blind, who then asked the big blind if he wanted to chop. "No way!" said the big blind, figuring the small blind was weak and just wanted to save a dollar.

"Okay, fine." said the small blind, who then raised it to $25!

The big blind did not know what to make of this move, but I think he was afraid he'd look foolish if he folded, so he called.

The flop came down king high. The small blind moved all in and the big blind called. The small blind turned over his cards - AA! He had offered a chop with pocket aces! The big blind had a king, of course, and the turn and river didn't save him. This was one of the strangest hands I have ever seen and since that day when ever anyone offers a chop, I take it.

The last time I chopped my opponent showed me that he had Qd 6d. I laughed and showed him my Jd 7d. Imagine the trouble I would have been in if diamonds hit the board. Of course what would have been bad for me would have been good for him - perhaps he is this very moment writing a blog about why one should never chop - but the main point is that chopping keeps the game friendly, and when your opponents are having a good time they are more likely to play looser.

It also saves you a blind.

Look Out for Split Pots

Sometimes it is difficult to spot a split pot and you have to pay close attention to make sure you aren't mucking a hand that chops.

Let me explain by relating the following hand that I observed at the poker room yesterday:

Player One limped in from early position with A6o.
Player Two raised to $10 from middle position with AQo
Player Three raised to $20 from the small blind with KK
Player One calls. (If you paying attention you will notice Player One will make several mistakes in this hand. Calling a bet that is ten times the big blind with a weak ace is certainly a questionable move.)
Player two calls.

The flop is:

Player Three (who has KK) bets $50. I guess he was hoping neither of the other guys had an ace and his kings were still good.
Player One (the guy with A6o) calls.
Player Two (AQo) raises to $150.
Player Three now knows his kings are no good, so he folds.
Player One calls. I could write a paragraph about why this is a terrible call but let's move along.

The turn:

Player Three, who just folded KK, looks like he wants to puke.

Player One (A6o) checks
Player Two might be worried that his AQ is not good, but he isn't. He is kind of a gambler and I think he knows that Player One isn't very good. He bets $100.
Player One calls.

The river:

Here is the point of this blog post: Player One does not realize it, but this river has just saved his ass. The 7 on the river has negated Player Two's kicker because now both players have the same hand: AA77K.

Player One checks.
Player Two bets $75
Player One calls.
Player Two shows AQ.
Player One: (Throws his cards in the muck) "Dammit! You have me out kicked!"
Player Two: "You had an ace?"
Player One: "Yeah, ace six."
Player Two: "Then it would have been a spit pot. The river counterfeited my kicker."
Player One: "Huh? Oh. Fuck."
Player Two: (Gleefully gathering in a $550 pot) "Too late now!"

Oh dear.

The sad truth, my dear readers, is that this kind of thing happens all too frequently. Please try to remember this warning and pay close attention so that it doesn't happen to you!

Durn it all

I got busted out today, which always sucks, but sometimes that's just the way it goes. What makes it particularly bitter is that I had doubled up and then some before busting out on a somewhat questionable move.

Had AKs (spades) and got heads up against a ultra-aggressive player. We had $80 in the pot pre-flop, and the flop came Qs 9d 4s. I bet $100, figuring I could buy it with the tight image I had. But the baddie moved all in on me. With only another $60 to call and a whole lotta outs (nine spades, plus the over cards) I pretty much had to call, but I didn't hit a spade or an ace or a king...My opponent had Q 10, which felted me.

That's poker.

------JJJ99------

Two days later - I added the following:

Just before he busted me, the guy in the above hand made a comment to the effect that he was gunning for me because I had taken a big pot off him.

"What are you talking about? I've not even been in the same hand with you." I was really puzzled.

"No, not today," he replied, "this was a little while ago."

Huh? The guy looked vaguely familiar and I guess I may have played him before. But a big pot? I don't remember it.

It was just a few hands later that he busted me. I remember clearly that when I made my $100 bet he said "You have it again? You can't have it every time!" then he pushed all-in.

This "act weak when you are strong" bit is fairly typical of the sharkier guys. When a guy says something that sound like he is weak (aw shucks, do you really have a good hand?) then acts strong (I really shouldn't be doing this but....all-in) you should believe the action more than the words.

Two days after this hand, as I am lying in bed, it suddenly comes to me! This was indeed a guy I took a big pot off of - in fact I wrote about it in Winning is Wonderful (finis). He was the guy who flopped a nut flush on me and got me to raise him all in with my set of tens. Then, I sucked out a runner-runner full house on him.

On that occasion, just as I was about to make the raise that would put him all-in, he said something like "Aw, come on man! Be nice!" - the same kind of "I'm weak" talk he used on me two weeks later.

How could I have forgotten?

Ok. Next time we meet my friend, I won't fall for your trap again.

Busting the Lagtard

The names in this blog have not been changed to protect anyone. If Francis ever reads this (extremely unlikely!) I would hope that instead of being offended, he could learn something.

You will often hear of poker players being classified in four basic ways; tight-weak, tight-aggressive, loose-weak and loose-aggressive. "Tight" refers to a tendency to only play good hands, while a "loose" player will play more hands with a wider range of hole cards. An aggressive player bets often and bets heavy - thus always keeping pressure on their opponents.  A "weak" or "passive" player is cautious and will usually only bet when they are certain they are ahead. These are just generalizations, of course, and if you go out there thinking that there are only four types of players - and that a player can not switch styles in the middle of a game - then you are kidding yourself. Anyway, generalizations are helpful when trying to simplify things. So lets just play along for a minute.

It is widely believed that in no-limit hold'em, being aggressive is crucial. This is what attracts the macho men to the game - the idea that they can win with sheer balls and bullshit. The loose aggressive player (often denoted as LAG on poker blogs) is often the most successful model - but to be successful long term a LAG must be able to sense when they have run up against a player holding a hand they simply will not fold. If the LAG never learns to take his foot off the gas, eventually he will loose all his chips when his opponent flops the nuts and the LAG tries to bluff him. This is where aggression crosses the line into stupidity, and such players are sometimes referred to as Lagtards - guys who don't know when to stop.

Francis, is a lagtard.

Francis plays a lot of hands To be fair he doesn't always try to scoop every pot he plays, but he does bluff an awful lot. His worst problem is that when an opponent makes a big bet, Francis too often assumes it is a bluff - probably because he assumes the other guy is playing the way he himself plays - and so gets caught playing inferior hands against opponents he can't bluff. Still, his sheer aggression wins him a lot of pots. I have seen him build $200 into $1200 in about ninety minutes. I have seen him lose $1200 in about ten minutes.

In my post small stakes-big pots I related a hand in which Francis lost over $750 in a single hand, leaving him with only $350 in chips. When a lagtard looses a big pot, they often respond by stomping on the gas even harder, and that is exactly what Francis did on the very next hand. I was lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time to be the wall he would drive full speed into.

I was two off the button and had been dealt pocket queens. A ten dollar bet seemed appropriate, so threw out two $5 chips. The table was still buzzing about the massive pot we had all just witnessed, so little attention was being paid to the current hand. Tom folded and got back to stacking his chips. Francis, in the small blind, raised it to $30. Big blind folded and I called. The flop was something like J 9 4 rainbow - nothing scary. I bet $40 and Francis called. The turn was a Queen, giving me top set but also raising the possibility of a straight. I checked and Francis pushed all-in. Now could he have a straight? Maybe - but if he did, why would he bet so much? No, he'd bet a smaller amount with the straight. This all-in is a classic lagtard bluff. I call.

The river is a low card. I turn over my set and Francis starts cursing. He curses his bad luck. He leaves the table. Seat open.

Tom says "What is his problem? He was behind in that hand all the way - what is he so upset about?"

I think he is upset that he was so incredibly unlucky that he ran into a hand he could not bluff. This is the lament of the lagtard. They believe they are skillful when they just being reckless. They believe they can dance in a minefield and then they curse their bad luck when they step on a mine.

Poet at the Poker Table

Just a link to an interesting article:

Poet at the Poker Table

Small stakes - big pots.

There is an assumption that if you play poker at the lowest level you are not exposing yourself to serious losses or gains. After all $1/$2 no limit is such piddly stakes, right? This is the lowest level casinos in North America play at but it is plenty steep enough to lose outrageous amounts of money if you are reckless. Many times I have witnessed someone busting out and re-buying multiple times. I once saw a guy lose about $1,200 in two hours at a $1/$2 table. I have lost $600 myself in a single night.

Believe it or not, you can make a living playing $1/$2 no limit. I met a guy in Vegas who was doing just that. Mike was a laid-off construction worker who had just bought a house and had bills to pay. He turned to poker, playing an average of twelve hours a day, six days a week. With such a grueling schedule he was able to average about $1000 per week. Glamorous, huh? I asked if he ever considered going back to construction, and he told me he would quit poker the second a good construction job came along. Still, the point is that if you are serious and dedicated, it is possible to make a living at the $1/$2 table.

Last Friday the biggest pot I had ever witnessed at a $1/$2 table went down. Because the most you can bring to this level is $300, it is rare to see truly massive pots. But Tom (see previous post) and Francis (a young Filipino lagtard*) had very large stacks; about $750 and $1100 respectively. They had both been here all night (it was now about 1 p.m.) so those stacks presumably were the fruits of many hours labour. Another guy dressed in an Eberle jersey and matching Oilers cap had just joined the table about an hour earlier, but had quickly built his stack to about $700.

Tom raised to $15 on the button when it had folded to him and both Francis in the small blind and Eberle in the big blind called. There was $45 in the pot when the flop came As 10s 8d. Francis led out with a $20 bet which Eberle called before Tom raised to $50. Francis seemed genuinely excited that there was so much interest in the pot, and gleefully announced "Three-fifty!", pushing another $330 in chips forward.  Wow. To my surprise Eberle hardly even thought about it before calling, and then Tom pushed all in with his remaining $685. Holy crap. Francis need another $400 or so to call and he doesn't even give it much thought, pushing four stacks of $5 chips into the middle. Eberle only has about $300 left, but he puts it in.

Holy crap. With two guys all-in there can be no more betting. What is going on here? Tom says "If either of you guys have pocket aces, you are probably good." and he shows pocket tens. Francis lets out a soft curse and turns over A 10 - he needs to hit an ace to win. Eberle doesn't show, which makes me think he is on a flush draw, maybe a straight-flush draw. But when the four of spades comes on the turn he shows no reaction. The river is a blank and Eberle mucks. "Seat open," he says and walks away from the table.

Tom rakes in a pot of around $2,200. Not bad for "low stakes" poker.



*What is a lagtard? Stay tuned for my next post: Busting the Lagtard

Thinking through the hand

Here is an interesting hand I witnessed on my last trip to the casino - I am going to try to reconstruct it for you, because I believe it demonstrates how good poker players think.

The players involved are Tom and Robin. Both are very good players who play aggressively. Robin tends to bluff a lot, but because he bets the same whether he has a hand or not, it is difficult to tell when he is bluffing. Tom plays a tighter range of starting hands than Robin does and bluffs less frequently, but he times his moves well - bluffing only when he senses weakness.

The game is $1/$2 NLHE, and when the following hand occurred both players had about $500 in chips. A couple of players limped in when Robin, in late position, made his standard pre-flop raise of $20. We will find out later that Robin is holding K4 off - a pretty crappy hand. I would not suggest anyone do what Robin did here, but Robin is such a good post-flop player that he can often win on a later street with inferior cards.

It folds to Tom who is in the big blind. Tom knows Robin could have just about anything here, so he decides to call. Unfortunately we will never see what Tom's hole cards are. The flop is Ac Kc 8h. Tom checks. Robin has hit middle pair. He thinks that if Tom has an ace he would probably bet it to protect against the flush draw. So Robin thinks his King might be good, but he is worried Tom might also have a king with a better kicker. Robin decides to put out a "feeler bet" -in this case a $20 bet which is roughly half the pot. Robin thinks Tom will probably fold if he has nothing, and will probably raise with an ace. Tom, however, chooses to call. What does this mean? Robin suspects Tom either has two clubs or a king - so he really has no clue if he is ahead or behind. Of course Tom would also just call here if he had a monster hand like AA, KK or AK.

Although we never learn what Tom has, we do know that he has neither a king or an ace - because if he had he would have won the hand. So why did he call the flop? Tom knows Robin could have anything - and he also knows (like I know) that Robin tends to give up on his bluffs if his opponent shows no sign of backing down. Tom, I think, is getting ready to scoop the pot with a bluff of his own.

The turn is 8d. Tom checks. Robin checks. Why? I don't know! Tom, I have noticed, likes to take down pots on the turn. I believe he was hoping to check-raise. Robin has no idea where he is, so he checks.

There is about $85 in the pot when the river comes, making the board Ac Kc 8h 8d 9s. Tom checks. Robin bets $50 and Tom re-raises to $200. Wow!

So what do you think Tom has? What do you think Robin will do?

Think about it for a second. Robin thinks about it for quite a while. He decides Tom does not have an ace. For whatever reason he has concluded that this big bet on the river is either a stone cold bluff, or a sign that this is going to be a split pot. The pair of eights and the ace on the board has made Robins' weak kicker irrelevant. Robin decides to call. It seems an amazing call to make, but if you think through the hand the way Robin did it makes sense.

Robin shows his hand and Tom is astounded. "How can you call with just a king?" he asks andd luckily for me and you, Robin tells everyone exactly what he was thinking. Which I just re-wrote for you here.

Tom disgustedly throws his cards in the muck and Robin rakes in a big pot.

The most important piece of poker advice ever

I am a good poker player but I am not a great poker player. Luckily for me, just being good is often all it takes to win money. How do mediocre guys like me win? The answer happens to be the greatest piece of poker wisdom ever. Now pay attention. This is important. Are you ready? Here it is:

Play against people that are worse than you are.

That's right. If you go into a card room with the goal of taking on the best poker sharks you can find just to prove how good you are, well then you are asking for trouble. Sure, playing against top rate opponents is a great way to make you a better player - if you are smart enough to learn from the experience - but you should make your bread and butter against schmucks who bluff too much and chase draws at bad odds.

So if your goal is to prove yourself to be a badass by beating all the other badasses, well have fun and good luck. 

Even if you are just mediocre - like me - you should also keep trying to improve. Remember, the better you get, the easier it will be to find people that are worse than you. Logging the hours in the poker room will also help you identify the players who are better than you. It is fine to sit at a table that has one or two guys that are better than you, you can learn from them without losing money to them. Just make sure that most of the guys at the table are worse than you. Often it takes a while, maybe an hour or two, to really figure out who is good and who is bad, so be very cautious at first. If you discover that there are three or four guys better than you, switch tables or go home. The longer you stay the more likely it is you will lose money. 

Now here is the hard part - do you have the ability to admit that there are better players out there than you? Can you identify them? Can you say to yourself, "Tom is better than me because he mixes up his game better than I do. He switches styles very well and I have trouble guessing what he is doing. I am not going to try to impress all these other guys by standing up to Tom and beating him - screw that. I am going to avoid Tom unless I have the nuts." Can you swallow your ego and do that? If so then you might avoid losing all your chips to Tom, and then when those fish Dick and Harry donk off all their chips you won't be there to collect some of them.

Poker and Existentialism

I recently reread Waiting for Godot. To me the main message is how most of us, maybe all of us, live each day doing pretty much the same things and thinking the same thoughts as all the rest of our days. We remember so little and so learn very little from our experiences. We do not progress, we repeat. Habit is the great deadener.

I believe that the poker rooms of the world are filled with Vladimirs, Estragons, Pozzos and Luckys. They repeat and repeat and repeat. They play the same style, makes the same great plays and the same dumb plays. Make the same jokes. They win and they lose, but they don't change and they don't learn.

I started writing this blog in an attempt to remember, and by remembering hopefully learning something.

After all, I am just a Vladimir too.

The Winning Attitude

Fear and greed are two sides of the same coin - the coin of self-doubt. Fear is born out of the suspicion that the universe has it in for you - that the gods see through your shammy pretense and are going to hit ya with that big ol' mallet. Greed is thinking those gods are looking the other way and that now you can steal something you really don't deserve - and that the possessing will be proof of your worth.

Fear and greed have the same root - a lack of self confidence, or being comfortable with your role in the universe.

Embrace your true nature.

Let the chips flow to you.

Nothing to do with poker (part 1)

BEST BAND EVER

Winning is Wonderful...(finis)

Up to around $900, I was determined not to make the mistake I have often made when I have a big stack in front of me - I get too loose, play too many marginal hands and donk off a bunch of chips. So I went into super-tight mode.

Fold fold fold.

While I was folding three other guys at the table were trying to out-crazy each other. Finally they decided to "roll" for a $100 each - each guy put up $100 in chips and agreed not to bet the hand after the flop - in essence they wanted to just let luck decide the winner, which is kinda dumb because the casino would take a rake. Why not just flip coins for it in the parking lot?

Fold, fold, fold.

Finally I was dealt pocket 10's in late position. A double-straddle was on and there were a few callers before me. I just called and six players saw the following flop Ac 6c 10c. The small blind checked and the guy in the big blind raised it to $55. This dude was one of the maniacs - he was the one who had instigated the $100 roll. He had been losing pretty heavily and had just re-bought for $300. What to make of his bet here? It could be a "steam raise" - an overly aggressive move from a guy who has been losing, It folded to me. I decided my opponent was semi-bluffing - that he had something like Kc Qd. I dismissed the idea that he might have the flush already. I was sure my set was ahead. He had just under $200 left so I raised it to $255. He snapped called.

"You have a set, huh?" he asked and I nodded. With no more betting to be done, he flipped his cards over - Kc 9c. The nut flush. How could I have walked right into that?

"Nice hand," I said, turning over my tens.

The dealer flipped over a Jack on the turn and then another Jack on the river, giving me a full house.

To his credit he only let out a soft mutter of "Unbelievable" instead of the usual loud profanity that follows a bad beat. As the dealer pushed the chips my way I offered an apology. My opponent was very gracious and I distinctly got the feeling he was hoping I would stick around so he could get his chips back.

Even though I won another big hand, I was unsettled. I had badly mis-read an opponent - a sign I was not on top of the game anymore.

About a half hour later I lost a pot when I chased a flush draw with bad pot odds. I was very lucky that I missed the draw because another big stack was drawing to a higher flush - if we both hit I could have been wiped out.

Even after that modest loss I had well over a thousand dollars in front of me. I realized I was no longer playing well and it was time for me to leave - but it is just so hard to leave! I stuck around for another dozen hands, folding them all, until at last the voice of reason won over and I left.

The October Nine

The October Nine.

It doesen't quite have the same alliterative ring as the November Nine does it? But in a year when the players making up the final table at poker's biggest tournament are, shall we say, less than a dream team, perhaps it is fitting. This year, as we got down to thirty or so players, all the big names had gone but there was still plenty of excitement as it looked certain that one - and quite possibly two - women would be making the final table. Norway's Elisabeht Hille looked very strong but a bad run of luck put her out in 11th place - two spots from glory. One of the hands that sealed Hille'd fate was when she doubled up Frenchwoman Gaelle Baumann. Baumann made an impressive charge but also fell just short, finishing in 10th. So instead of a final table with two European ladies, we once again get an all-male group. And if that were not bad enough, all but one of the fellows is American. Just when it looked like poker was becoming a truly international game, we get a final table that has little appeal to viewers outside of the USA.

 So who are the October Nine?

Jeremy Ausmus, a 32-year-old Vegas poker pro, will be the short stack with 9,805,000 in chips. A native of Colorado, where he earned an economics degree, he has been making his living playing poker for the last six years.

Jacob Balsinger, a 21-year-old political science student at Arizona State, is the youngest and least experienced player at the final table, and with 13,115,000 in chips he is not seen as a threat to win the whole shebang. But stranger things have happened.

Although only 27, Robert Salaburu has been playing since he was 16. He has 15,155,000 in chips going into the final table. "It's awesome to have a chance to win a shit-ton of money," he says.

At 58, Michael Esposito is an old-school grinder. He doesn't play on-line. He doesn't tweet. He's a commodities broker from Seaford New York. For an older amateur to make it in the day of young pros is a story-line that will probably be pushed for want of other story lines. He has 16,260,000

Stephen Gee, 56, won a WSOP gold bracelet two years ago in a smaller NLHE event, so he is definitely one of the sharks. With only 16,860,000 going into the final table, his experience still makes him a very legitimate threat. verbose (at least away from the table) he is a likable guy who would make a good champion.

Russell Thomas, 24, is a part-time pro who is now, probably going to be a full time pro. With a healthy 24,800,00 he can push the smaller stacks around.

Also 24, Greg Merson is an on line player who has moved to Canada to be able to keep playing on line. He has already won a bracelet at this years' 10K six-handed NLHE event, so he is running hot. But will he still be hot a few months from now? 28,725,000 in chips will help.

Andras Koroknai, from Hungary, is the lone non-American at the final table. He is no stranger to big tournaments, having won the 2010 WPT LA Classic event - a win worth 1.7 million. He has 29,375,000. 

The big chip leader is Jesse Sylvia with 43,875,000. A 26-year-old pro currently living in Vegas.

So, one of these nine will be the next champion. Let's go, Stephen Gee!

While Winning is Wonderful...(Part 2)

Things, as I said, were getting loose.

At a standard poker table, the dealer sits in the middle of one of the long sides of the oval. In order to allow the dealer to reach as far across the table as possible (to gather chips and cards) a notch is cut into the table in front of the dealer, resulting in the dealer sitting a few inches forward of the players in the #1 seat (on the dealer's left) and the #9 or #10 seat (on the dealers right). As a result players on either side of the dealer can't see each other very well at all.

All this is to explain a strange hand I witnessed at the time the table was loosening up. A new player joined our table at seat 1, bringing the maximum buy in of $300 with him. After a couple of hands the player in the seat to the right of dealer (a guy I call Dr.Detroit) opened the betting with $10 and newbie raised it to $20. It folded all the way back to Dr.Detroit, who announced all in. Just saying "all in" is enough - you don't have to push all your chips forward. This speeds things up, as moving big stacks back and forth takes up valuable time. Still a player needs to put some chips forward so that the security cameras can see a bet was indeed made. After announcing all-in, the dealer then asked Dr.Detroit to move some chips forward. Dr.Detroit had about $800, but he just moved one stack of $100 over the betting line. The Newbie, who could not see Dr.Detroit's chips, assumed this $100 was the remainder of the stack and he called, turning over JJ. Detroit had AK, flopped a king, and won the hand. Only when the dealer asked the newbie to put forward all of his chips did the Newbie realize what had happened - he had called a $300 bet when he thought he was calling only $100. He went ballistic, blaming the dealer for not making it clear to him the size of the bet. But I think Newbie had no one to blame but himself. I hoped if I was ever in the same position as the newbie, that I would not make that same mistake.

I had just over $500 in front of me when I was dealt pocket aces in middle position. There was a double-straddle on and two players made the $10 limp-in when it got to me. I almost always raise in this position, but this table had become so aggressive I thought it was likely someone behind me would raise, so I limped in for $10. Two more guys called and then the guy in the big blind raised it to $55. Hallelujah! One guy called (thank you!) and I thought it over for five seconds before announcing all-in. It folded back to the big blind, who anguished over his decision (or pretended to) before folding. The remaining player had only $200 left. "I shouldn't make this call," he said - and then he made the call. With no more action the dealer quickly dealt the flop, turn and river. My opponent didn't show any reaction to any of the cards, and when I showed my aces he just nodded like that was what he expected and threw his hand in the muck.

I had about $900 now.

While Winning is Wonderful...

... alliteration is fun!

In my last post I wrote that I wished I could be more emotionally detached - that while I no longer got too depressed after a loss, I still got very elated after wins. The truth is that it had been so long since I had a decent size win that I really didn't know if I'd be elated or not. Well, yesterday was my best day ever at a brick and mortar card room and while I was very pleased with the day, the manic elation I have felt in the past was missing. This is a good thing. I don't want to be a poker player that is motivated by chasing adrenalin rushes - that will usually end in tears.

My poker bankroll had dropped to a pitiful $300 and was in danger of evaporating entirely. I briefly considered ignoring the advice of my bankroll manager (wife) and taking the whole amount to the casino, but then I thought the better of it. The best plan was to just take $100 to limit my downside and give myself two more sessions should this trip end as badly as my other recent sessions. And it very nearly did.

Early on I got myself pot-committed with AJo (garlic!) and the flop came Ah 5d 2h. One fellow made a half-pot bet and there was one caller before me. This was a tricky spot because with so many draws on the board I wanted to bet big to protect my hand but I was not at all sure my garlic was the best hand. What to do? I decided to raise it to $40. One guy called and the other re-raised to $100, which made my heart sink. I was pot-committed now, so with a doomed feeling in the pit of my stomach I pushed the remainder of my stack in.

There was further betting between the other two players on the turn and the river, which further convinced me that my hand was no good, however when the dust cleared I saw that player A was chasing a nut flush draw and missed, while player B was holding A4 - top pair with a gut-shot straight draw, which also missed. So my jack kicker held up and I went from $100 to $300 in a heart beat.

Then an hour later lightning struck when I was dealt 33. I really like playing any pocket pair at a loose table, because when players are willing to go all in with hands like two pair or an over-pair, holding a set can win you a monster pot. The trick is you have to flop a set - otherwise you fold. Well on this occasion I flopped quads and what made it even better was that the other card on the flop was a beautiful ace. Sure enough, another fellow had AQ and I just called his two $25 bets on the flop and the turn. He fired another $25 after the river and I re-raised it to $75. He called and I made a tidy profit. Plus the casino paid me $40 for hitting quad 3's. I think I had close to $500 at that point.

Things were getting very loose. Two new guys had joined the table and it seemed they both wanted to become the "table captain", resulting in the game going from $1/$2 NLHE to essentially a $1/$2/$15 game.

(to be continued)

Poker and Politics

Hey there. How's it going? Sorry I haven't written in so long. You know how it is. Time just flies by. I've been busier at my real job and it is summer so we have been going out a lot more. Time gets away from me and I've hardly even played much poker lately, let alone write about it. And the olympics are on...

I played yesterday and got crushed again. I lost a big hand early on, then spent four hours slowly rebuilding until I was almost unstuck. Then I was felted when my pocket kings got ambushed.

 I used to take losing at poker very personally. I would feel sick after a big loss, and I would berate myself for ever thinking I could play this game. Thoughts like you are not good enough to be a winning poker player would loop in my head and I would feel like I deserved to lose because I was so stupid. Lately, however, I find it easier to shrug off the losses. I don't get that I deservered to lose because I suck thought anymore and this, I think, is a good thing. I think it would also be a good thing if I reacted to my winning sessions with a similar emotional detachment, but I still feel elated after a win. I think my problem is that I still attach a sense of self worth to how I do at the poker table. There is a feeling that if I win big, it is because I deserved to win big and if I busted out it is my own damn fault and I am therefor an idiot. Such thinking is, I think, pretty common. It feeds addiction in gamblers - winners keep chasing that feeling that they deserve to win because God loves them and losers keep punishing themselves because they feel they deserve to be punished. Hmmm...

After my bust-out I met my friend from Nashville at the bar. We talked about various things, including politics, and I quickly forgot about what an idiot I was. While we talked about the U.S.A. it struck me that the "you deserve what you get" mentality that I feel so strongly (although lately less so) at the poker table, is similar to what the right wing in States believe - the myth of the meritocracy; that if you are a good, hard working person you will succeed. And if you don't succeed it is probably because you are not good enough or lazy. It is easy to see why rich people believe this - even those who basically inherited their wealth - because it blames poor people for their own poverty. And poor people are like the losing gamblers who believe they deserve to keep on losing. They become addicted to punishing themselves because they believe they must be flawed in some way.

Let me take the analogy to another level; in America the rich and the poor are not equels competing fairly at the same poker table; no the rich people own the casino. They can not lose. And the reason they can not lose has nothing to do with merit, or hard work, or that Jesus loves them. The reason they can not lose is that they are the house. They have the edge and over time they will always win. So of course they vote to keep the system in place. I have heard a lot of people wonder out loud - why do so many poor and working class people vote Republican? It doesn't make sense! I think they do so for much the same reasons the losers keep going back to the casino - they are dreaming that maybe they will win this time. That maybe they can show that they are good enough too. And when they lose they will not blame the casino, they will blame themselves.

Tales of Cowboy Poker Madness: Part 5

Things started well, but it only takes one stupid moment to blow everything.

I started with $100 in chips and won a $40 pot simply by betting after it was checked to me post-flop.

Then I got real lucky. I had the red kings under the gun and limped in, expecting a raise from someone down the line. Instead it looked like it was going to be a family pot with everyone throwing in two blue $1 chips into the middle. Then the big blind raised it to $40. I glanced at his stack - with only another $100 or so behind him I was pretty sure he was going to call whatever I choose to bet here. I wanted to make a bet big enough that no one else would call - I didn't want a mutiway pot that increased my chances of losing - so I made it $100 total. It folded back to the big blind who went all in and I snap called. The flop came Qd 5d 8h. The turn brought Ad, and my heart sank a bit, but the river was 9d, giving me the nut flush. I showed my cards and my opponent flashed the 10c.

Ten of clubs? What was he thinking? The other card had to be another 10, I guess. Still, it seemed pretty loose of him to push all in with pocket tens.

How could he be so dumb?


I now had almost $300, but I went card dead for an hour or so. I started losing my patience, playing hands I shouldn't have played and chasing. I was soon under $200 and found myself in middle position with KQo - not a great hand but certainly playable. I raised to $5.  There was one caller and then the big blind raised to $25. At least I thought the dealer said "twenty-five". I was getting very tired and could not concentrate. I knew I should just fold, but decided to gamble and threw another $20 into the middle. That is when the dealer informed me that the bet wasn't $25 but $45 - I had misheard and was not paying close enough attention. Damn. My $25 was committed, so if I folded it would be lost. I quickly decided the best course of action would be to put the $20 balance in.

What am I doing in this hand?


The flop was Kd 4h 6h. My opponent checked. With top pair, queen kicker I thought it was likely I was ahead here, and with two hearts on board I thought it unlikely that my opponent was slow playing as he should be defending against the flush draw. I didn't want to give him a free card, so I bet $100 - most of my remaining stack. He instantly went all in for about another $25. Shit. Damn. I called and he showed pocket aces. Of course. How obvious. The turn and river brought no miracle saves for me. I was down to $27.

How could I be so dumb?


It is very rare to see a player who has been crippled like I have been leave the table with his pathetic little stack. Pride makes him stick around until he gets a hand to shove with. Usually the short stack will bust out, but can sometimes make a comeback with a little luck.

But I have no pride. I don't care what people think of me. I'd rather save that $27. I think if I cash out all these little small amounts then, over the course of years, I will save myself a large amount. So I left. Which is probably the smartest thing I could have done.

Tales of Cowboy Poker Madness: Part 4

Saturday night during Stampede. Players were coming and going so fast that it seemed like every time I looked up there was a new face at the table. At one point Bob the Hippy sat down. I had played Bob before; he hardly ever says a word (I call him Bob after Silent Bob) but plays very well. He looks like an organic zucchini farmer in his floppy hat, jeans and sandals. He sports a full beard and has calm icy blue eyes. Not the type you'd suspect was a poker shark, which probably has helped win him a lot of pots. Sitting down at around the same time as Bob is a guy who is dressed like Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier; some kind of blingy designer t-shirt, Sophia Loren aviator shades and Guy Fieri hair.

A few hands in, Bob opens the betting with $20 and gets called by ElkY-Guy. The flop is Ah 7d 4c. Bob shoots out a another $20, ElkY-Guy re-raises to $60 and Bob calls. the turn is Qh. Bob bets $100 and ElkY just calls. The river brings 9h and Bob puts his last $120 in, and ElkY-Guy calls. Bob flips over Ad Ac for a set of aces. ElkY-Guy turns over 10h 7h and wins with the flush. The table is stunned that ElkY-Guy has played so bad...and won. But nobody says anything until, of all people, Bob speaks in a mild voice; "Nice hand." Bob calmly takes three crisp $100 bills out of his pocket and re-buys.

Un. Real.

That night I was using a Professor Chaos action figure as my card protector. As ElkY-Guy is raking in his chips he tells me that it is the coolest card protector he has ever seen. I say something like it was a gift from a friend.

"How much do you want for it?" he asks me.

"I can't sell it," I reply. "It was a gift."

"I'll give you $50 for it." he says.

"Naw. I can't."

He just shrugs and we get back to the next hand.

And I suddenly realize he is not the biggest idiot at the table after all.

How Much Do I Buy in For?: Part 3

Another good day yesterday when I took $100, played for four hours, and left with $120. I only played one big hand - I was dealt pocket aces and someone bet $40 ahead of me. I moved all-in, thinking a call was likely, and sure enough I was called and doubled up. Now I wonder, if I had $300 in front of me, would my opponent have been so quick to call? Would he have been able to bluff me off a board full of straight draws and flush draws?

Playing small-buy-in poker suits my conservative style, but it might not work for your style. If you are a more aggressive player, a big stack allows you to contest a lot of pots and get action when you do catch a hand.

What works for one person may not work for another - which is why poker is so great. There is no right and wrong, just what works and what doesn't work.

Tales of Cowboy Poker Madness: Part 3

Usually there are two or three poker tables going and a dozen others sitting empty, but on a Saturday during Stampede that is reversed - all but two tables were full and I expect that those two would soon be used as well.

I didn't recognize half of the dealers. Obviously Calgary casinos have to bring in extra staff during Stampede, but where do the dealers come from? It takes a while to learn how to deal poker - they must come in from out of town during Stampede.

Anyway it was a zoo.

At one point a Jonathan Franzen look-alike gets up to stretch between hands. He takes a few steps away from the table and a small Asian man sits down in his chair and picks up the cards that have just been dealt. The dealer, in the mildest tone, says "Sir, this is not your table." The Asian man looks at the rest of us in surprise. "Oh, sorry" he mutters and puts the hand down. Nobody says anything as the Asian man meekly leaves us and the original player sits back down - like this happens all the time. When Franzen sits down, looks at his cards and folds them, the Asian guy, who was still nearby, says "You folded that!? You are crazy!" and of course everyone laughs.

I wonder what would have happened if no one had noticed and the Asian guy had played the hand out?

How Much Do I Buy in For? Part 2

In my last post I described a hand where a maniac called an all-in bet without even looking at his hole cards. This seems a very stupid thing to do, but there were some mitigating circumstances which led him to do what he did. For one thing the all-in was for only $85 or so. The Maniac had been winning a lot, so it didn't seem like that much money to take a chance on, and not looking at his hole cards just means he was here to gamble. He was there to have fun - not to be smart!

The lesson we can learn here is that if you are short stacked (or if you just bring a smaller stack to the table to begin with) you are more likely to get called when you go all-in because the bigger stacks don't care as much about losing $85 as they might care about losing $300. People are willing to treat money they have won very recklessly - but when you place a bet big enough that they would be behind for the session if they lost, they tend to tighten up.

If you are a tight player, after awhile it become obvious to the other players and thus it is difficult to get callers when you do have good hands. However, if you have a smaller stack then you can maybe get called by bigger stacks willing to gamble.

Just another argument for taking a small stack (say, fifty times the big blind) to a ring game.

Tales of Cowboy Poker Madness: Part 2

An older gentleman brought $100 to the table. To say he seemed disinterested in the game would be putting it mildly - he took a book out and began reading. He only ever looked away from the book (which I think was a Bruce Springstein biography) when it was his turn to act.

After maybe twenty minutes he goes all-in with about $85 from middle position and is called by a maniac in the small blind who hasn't even looked at his hole cards! Obviously the maniac, who has a big stack, likes to gamble - but why not look at your cards? If you are that much of an adrenaline junkie that you need to do things like this to enjoy yourself, then my friend you have a problem.

Anyway. The older guy flips over 77 and the maniac flips over K8. The pocket sevens hold up until Maniac spikes an eight on the river. Maniac scoops up the chips while the older fellow re-buys for another $100.

And the party just keeps going.

Tales of Cowboy Poker Madness: Part 1

Both Ugly Joe and the Aussie had been running hot. Each had over $600 in chips in front of them. Ugly was under the gun and raised it to $15. It folded to the Aussie on the button who called, as did Bling Girl in the big blind.

The flop came Jd Qd 9h. Ugly checks and Aussie fires $40 into the pot. Bling girl folds and Ugly calls.

The turn is 10d, so the board is Jd Qd 9h 10d Ugly bets $60 and Aussie calls.

The river is 9d making the board Jd Qd 9h 10d 9d. An unbelievable board! Straights, flushes, full-houses, straight-flushes and even quads are possible! Ugly bets $50 and Aussie immediately re-raises to $150 and Ugly instantly moves all-in with his remaining $500. Aussie thinks four a minute and calls. The players flip their cards over. Aussie had Qc 10h for just two pair while Ugly had Ad 5d for the flush.

In an essay of 2,000 words or much less please explain why both these guys played extremely poorly.

How Much Do I Buy in For?

 People who are losing tend to continue to lose while people who are winning tend to continue to win.

STUCK: In poker to be stuck is to have lost money over the course of a session.

One piece of advice my father gave me about the stock market was to "cut your losses short and let your profits run." This advice has been echoed by many people when it comes to poker - that if you are winning you should stay at the table for as long as you continue to keep winning, but if you are losing you should leave. This seems fairly straight forward but it is actually counter to what most people believe - that one should quit when one is ahead. "Quit while you're ahead" thinking means you leave profitable tables with small gains when you should be leaving them with  large gains. It also makes people stay at tables where they have been losing money because they are trying to get "unstuck," which often leads to greater losses.

One way to cut your losses short is to buy in for smaller amounts than the maximum. At the $1/$2 level I play, the minimum buy in is $50 and the maximum is $300. I used to always buy in for between $200 to $300 - thinking I could maximize my profit should I get all-in with the nuts against another big stack. However a string of losing sessions had so depleted my bankroll that it seemed prudent to take smaller amounts. Taking only $100 has the effect of "cutting my losses short" but, should the table turn in my favor, I can still make a decent profit.

Friday I made a decent profit. Taking only $100 forced me to play very disciplined - you can not afford  crazy bluffs or calling with mediocre holdings when you are short stacked - and after five hours of poker I left with exactly $500. Now, would I have made more with a larger buy in? Possibly. But it is erroneous to think that because I left up $400, I would therefore have made $1,200 if I had bought in for $300. It doesn't work that way in the real world.

Yesterday I returned to the poker room with $100, but this time things did not go well and after only two hours I left with the $20 I had remaining. When I got to $20 I realized that the chances of me getting unstuck were so slim that I might as well save the $20 and go home. If I had started with $300 and had lost $80, I almost certainly would have played on in the hopes of getting unstuck. And maybe I would have. But it is more likely I would have continued to lose. This is because people who are losing tend to continue to lose while people who are winning tend to continue to win. Or as my stockbroker father would say, "The trend is your friend."

So here we have the tale of two poker sessions, one winning session where I let my profits run and a losing session where I cut my loses short (although I should have cut them much shorter!). I am up $320 for the two sessions.

Many people think that being a great poker player means turning a profit in the majority of sessions you play, but you can be a winning player even if only half, or even less than half, of your sessions are positive - as long as your positive sessions are very positive and your negative sessions are only mildly negative. Again this is counter to what most people, even a lot of experienced poker players, believe. They eke out a lot of small gains and a few terrible losses, but since they have more winning sessions than losing sessions and they believe they are better than average players when they have been losing money over time.

Stampede on down to the poker room!

I happen to live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. If you do too, I would highly recommend visiting the poker room at Cowboys Casino (formerly Stampede Casino) right now. You don't live in Calgary? Too bad. Perhaps you should think about grabbing the next flight here. Why? Because the action is stupidly loose right now and will most likely continue to be stupidly loose for nine more days.

You see we have this little thing here called "The Calgary Stampede" - in which normally sane people suddenly dress like cowboys and get bombed out of their tree by the middle of the afternoon. Some of these people are tourists, some are locals who feel that for these ten days in July it is their civic duty to make total asses of themselves.

Yaaahhooo! Yeee haw!

Whatever.

Cowboys casino is right next to the actual stampede grounds - where over a million people are going to congregate over the course of the Stampede. Some will grow tired of the tilt-a-whirl and chuckwagon races and, fortified by too many over-priced beers, decide to give poker a try. At least this is what I was hoping as I made my way to the poker room. The reality exceeded my wildest dreams - the room was hopping with fish, donkeys, drunks and maniacs. I had a great session by just waiting for monster hands. Normally if I only bet great hands people catch on and I don't get any action, but today the fish were coming and going so fast they never had a chance to figure it out. I never had to bluff because there wasn't a point in bluffing - why bluff when you know you will get callers? And with action this stupidly loose there are always plenty of callers.

So. 
Go to Cowboys Casino! Right now! Hurry!

What did John Morgan have?

Yesterday saw the start of the richest poker tournament in history; The Big One for One Drop. The cost to enter the tournament was a cool one million dollars. A few got in cheaper than that - both Gus Hansen and Phil Hellmuth won their seats in tournaments run a day earlier. As you might expect, the field of forty eight players features a mix of both famous and not-quite famous poker pros along with a handful of rich business men. The winner will take home over $18,000,000 dollars - the largest prize in poker tournament history. By far.

It is not surprising that in such an incredible tournament, one of the most amazing hands in WSOP history went down. Here is what happened: It was halfway though the first day. Tom Dwan had made a opening bet of 32K and Russian poker pro Mikhail Smirnov called with the red eights in the small blind. American businessman John Morgan also called from the big blind.

The flop came Js 8c 7s. Flopping a set of eights, Smirnov led out with a 50K bet - about half the pot. Morgan called quickly and Dwan folded. The turn brought an 8s - giving Smirnov the nearly unbeatable quad eights. Smirinov made a pot-sized 200k bet and Morgan called almost instantly.

The river was the Ks, making the board Js 8c 7s 8s Ks. The only hand Morgan could possibly have that could beat Smirnov was 9s 10s - giving him a straight flush. Smirnov bet 600k - again a roughly pot-sized bet, and Morgan thought it over quickly and pushed all-in for a total of 3.4 million - just slightly less than Smirnov's entire stack.

Smirnov pondered his decision for about five minutes, then folded his quad eights face up for everyone to see. Immediately the poker-world was abuzz - had Mikhail Smirnov just made the greatest fold in the history of the WSOP, or had he made one of the worst fold ever? How could anybody fold quad eights?!

Smirnov explained that he didn't think Morgan had KK or he would have re-raised Dwan pre-flop. He also felt JJ was unlikely. "A bluff is impossible because he is not a professional and he likes to play in the tournament," said Smirnov later. That pretty much left 10s 9s as the only hand Morgan could have that he would shove with.  "For me it was an easy fold," said Smirnov.

So what did Morgan have? We will never know for sure because he didn't show and so far he has refused to say. "I will never tell," said Morgan, "out of respect for my opponent."

At first I thought Smirnov made a terrible fold, but the more I think about it the more plausible 10s 9s seems. With those pocket cards, Morgan was ahead of Smirnov after the flop with the nut-straight over Smirnov's set of eights. The turn would have given Morgan the straight-flush while giving Smirnov the quads.

We will never know for sure.

Meanwhile day two of the tournament has begun with thirty seven of the original forty eight still competing. Just twenty six are left as I write this, including Mikhail Smirnov in 16th place. Smirnov won a brilliant hand today in which he knocked out both Tom Dwan and Daniel  Negreanu.

John Morgan has been knocked out.

The Secret to Split-Games

I have written all my posts under the assumption that the form of poker under discussion is No Limit Hold 'Em. This form of poker has gotten so popular that when you say poker most people assume you mean NLHE. But there are many other variants and some of the other games, such as Omaha or Seven Card Stud can also be played as "high-low" or "split", which means half of every pot goes to the player with the best hand (the "high") and half goes to the player with the worst hand, usually with the qualification that this "low" hand can not be better than 8-high - hence games such as "Seven Card Stud High-Low Spilt 8 or Better".

In split games, it is not uncommon for their to be no qualifying low hand, and so the high hand frequently wins the whole pot. However a "low" hand can also be a "high" hand (this sounds confusing, but stick with me!) and thus "scoop" the whole pot as well. This can happen when you have something like a Ah 2h 4h 5h 7h - you could win the "low" with your 7-high and also win the "high" with your ace-high flush.

The key to winning split games is to focus on winning the "low" part and then "freeroll" for the "scoop." If you lock up the low part you are guaranteed to get at least half the pot back, and you still have a shot at the high with things like flushes and straights.

This is considered basic knowledge, yet a surprising number of brilliant poker minds fall victim to being "scooped". During the Seven Card Stud High-Low Split 8 or Better at this years WSOP of poker, just such an amateurish mistake was made by none other than Phil Hellmuth. After sixth street Phil was holding a set of sevens, with no hope of hitting the low, he figured he was ahead on the high side, and there was a chance that seventh street would bring him a full house and a lock on the high. But his opponent in the hand, Adam Freidman, had already made a very good low hand - a fact that must have been known to Phil by the four face-up cards in front of Adam, and Adam also had the chance to hit a straight to make the high as well. Phil checked (as he should have) and Adam raised (as he should have) and then Phil said some thing dumb like "I should check-raise you here" to which Adam truthfully replied something along the lines of "Phil, I pray you are stupid enough to do that." Which caused the poker brat to loose his cool and go on some kind of verbal tirade.

I'm not sure, having not witnessed it, if Phil did re-raise or merely called, but I do know that Adam did indeed hit his straight and scooped the whole pot. Phil Hellmuth would eventually finish in 15th place for $11,637 while Freidman would win the event and take down $269,037.

The point of this post was to show how even a great player can make a donkey play. And Hellmuth is a great player. Yesterday he won his 12th WSOP bracelet - more than anyone else has won.

A Nice Story

When you lose $240 playing poker, like I did today, it's nice to hear a good story to lift the spirits. Today that story comes from Dr. David Arsht, a 66 year-old semi-retired urologist from Philadelphia who won the $1,500 buy in Limit Hold'Em event at the WSOP. As poker seems to be increasingly dominated by young pros, how great is it to see a mature amateur take down a bracelet? Good for you doctor!

I'm not sure Nolan Dalla, who writes the news releases for the WSOP, really needed to write "The semi-retired urologist emptied a poker bladder of 730 entrants." But then again, I guess I really didn't need to repeat that. 

I see in his post-victory interview Arsht thanks his wife who let them alter their original holiday plans so that the good doctor could play in the tournament. I'm sure my wonderful wife would do the same for me...someday...but I guess I'll have to start winning again before that even becomes an issue.

Punch the Clock

I knew by the lack of cars in the underground parking lot that there would not be a game going in the poker room yet. As is my ritual, I park in a remote spot. The long walk across the dank concrete and then up the two flights of stairs gives me a chance to burn off some of the nervous energy I always have when I go to the casino. There is an electric tingle in my chest - anticipation, excitement - you could definitely call it a thrill. This rush is a dangerous thing and I want to get it out of my system, yet at the same time it serves the useful purpose of putting all my senses on high alert. I see it as a performance enhancing drug once you get it down to the point where it doesn't over rule the better judgement of the brain. It's all about balance. I try to monitor my inner-thrill level during the course of the day. Too much buzz and I make loose decisions. No buzz at all means I'm not paying close enough attention.

As I suspected there is no one in the poker room except for one dealer and the two managers, who are playing pot-limit omaha to see who buys coffee. When I recently posted on how difficult it is to be a poker dealer, I was writing about the simple game of hold 'em - dealing omaha is much more difficult, so it is not uncommon to see dealers practicing when they have nothing else to do. I asked if I could sit at the table to watch and they seem genuinely fine with that.

This is a great opportunity to learn something and I don't mean omaha. These people spend the working lives observing poker players. I start by expressing my genuine amazement that anyone can keep track of everything a omaha dealer has to keep track of. As I hoped, this flattery gets me on their good side. One of the managers (I think his name is Mike) tells me that a lot of people think dealing is easy. "I have had a lot of poker players tell me they would like to become dealers, but almost none of them make it. I start training them and most of the quit before they are even half-way ready to deal." Everything looks easy from the outside doesn't it?

"Does it work better the other way around?" I ask Mike. "Do dealers turn into great poker players?"

"Not really. The problem is that the dealers usually pick up the bad habits of the players. They see guys winning with garbage hands and they will start playing garbage hands too. They forget about all the garbage hands that lose."

Mike (if that's his name) is a big red headed man. At a little over six foot, he has the build of a linebacker, and a manly sort of easy going nature. A highly likable guy who seems to have found his calling. I'm sitting with Mike on my right and I ask him questions when he's not in a hand. I learn that compared to other cities, Calgary is notorious for the loose action at the poker tables. "A $1/$2 game in Calgary plays like a $2/$5 game anywhere else. A $2/$5 game here is like playing $5/$10. This is why omaha isn't really catching on - a beginner will lose too much money. You will go broke before you learn the game."

This seems to make a lot of sense to me. I remember the $1/$2 no-limit games I played in Vegas as being incredibly tight affairs. There was virtually no bluffing and hands very rarely went to a showdown. Here, you always see the flop, almost always see the turn, and more often than not the hand goes all the way to the river.

Also at the table is the "Lady of the House", Bernice. Bernie is a slim lady in her fifties. She wears dark framed glasses and has spiky bleach-blond hair. She is a total professional. She remembered my name the second time I came here, and even when I didn't come here once over a five month stretch still remembered my name when I came again. The first thing she said to me today was "You aren't playing in the World Series this year, Tyler?".  If anyone else has said that, it would have sounded fawning or mocking but Bernie really treats you like a star. How can you not love her? Most players that come here, even the most curmudgeonly, like her so much that whenever she is called to a table to settle a dispute most of the players will respect her decisions and criticize those who don't.

The dealer is named Joe. I don't remember seeing him before. Joe looks like the chubby kid that got picked on in school. An interesting hand develops between Joe and Bernie. Joe raised pre-flop, Mike folded and Bernie called. The flop came down something like: Kd 4c 9d. Bernie checks and Joe checks. The turn is 4h, so the board is Kd 4c 9d 4h -very scary! Bernie checks and Joe checks. The river is the 2d making the board Kd 4c 9d 4h 2d. Bernie pushes almost all her chips forward and I think she must have a flush in diamonds or has been slow playing a full house. Joe thinks for maybe five seconds and then says "I only have two pair but I'm going to call you anyway." He shows a king and an ace.

Bernie is flabbergasted. "How can you call!" She show that she has diddly squat. "How can you possibly call with a paired board and three diamonds!"

"Well, I figured if you had the flush you would have bet less to entice a call. Ditto for a full house."

So there you go. Sometimes a big bet is a sign of weakness.

And you can always learn something just by watching others play.

WSOP 2012 Underway

The annual circus that is the World Series of Poker has started up again and those who are interested can follow the action at http://www.wsop.com/2012/ . Over sixty events will make up this years WSOP, and two bracelets have already been awarded.

As always the first event is a No Limit Hold 'Em tournament restricted to Casino employees. This years winner is Chip Saechao, a blackjack dealer from Vasalia, California.

The other bracelet has gone to Brent Hanks, a 29 year old Vegas pro, who took down the $1,500 buy-in NLHE event and earned himself $517,725. Not bad for a former fifth grade school teacher.

Event #3 is a heads-up tournament - players compete one-on-one, with the victor advancing to the next round. The game itself switches back and forth between No Limit Hold 'Em and Pot Limit Omaha. Over 300 players began this tournament and only eight remain to duke it out. What makes it interesting is that one of those eight is 23 year old poker phenom Annette Obrestad, the youngest person to win a World Series of Poker Europe bracelet who is looking for her first victory in the WSOP proper.

This year the $10,000 buy-in Main Event may actually not be the event that gets the most attention as on July 1 a three day tournament will begin with a buy-in of $1,000,000. The Big One for One Drop cost a cool million bucks just to enter - with $111,111 of each entry going to the One Drop charity to help develop water management in Africa. Who would pay a million just to enter a poker tournament? According to Poker News, over thirty seats are filled.

In Praise of Dealers

Poker is a business. In Alberta, where I live, legal poker is played in card rooms attached to casinos which operate under the watchful eye of the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission. I don't know the percentages, but my understanding is that a certain percentage goes to charities - so don't imagine that these places are making the same profits that the places in Vegas make. Poker, unlike slot machines, requires a fairly high level of staffing. Dealers, floor managers, cashiers, waitresses, and cleaning staff all have to be paid. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to try to schedule staff for a poker room. I have walked into a card room at 10:00 am and found two full tables playing with two or three other guys waiting to get in the game. I have walked into this same room at the same time one week later and found nobody at all. How can you schedule staff for a business like this?

Dealing poker must be a very tough way to make a living. You would have to work weird hours as most rooms are (I am guessing) busiest between 8:00 pm and midnight. You would have to have an absolutely amazing short term memory and math skills. The rake is calculated based on the size of the pot so dealers must have a piece of their brain constantly adding up individual bets to know the pot size. Another part of their brain has to remember which players need to have change returned to them. For example in $1/$2 NLHE, the most common game in my part of the world, players are issued stacks of red $5 chips but bets can be any size, so several players can call a $12 bet with three red chips and the dealer has to constantly be making change - in this case giving back three white $1 chips. The dealer also has to keep track of the button - not as easy as it sounds when lots of players "help" the dealer by moving the button themselves.

Most difficult of all, I think, is when a player losses all his chips and rebuys at the table. When this happens a runner comes over to the table and collects money from the player, tells the dealer the amount, and goes to fetch the chips. Even though the player doesn't have chips yet, he or she is still able to play in the next hand. It sometimes can take a minute or two for the chip to arrive and until they do the dealer has to remember the all the bets the player has made and take the total into the pot when his chips come.

They have to deal with multi-way pots - keeping everything straight when there are side pots on top of the main pot.

A dealer has to do all of these things at top speed - the poker room makes its living on the rake, so they want as many hands as possible to be dealt.

On top of everything else a dealer has to be polite to the customers, even though quite a few are just plain assholes, border-line racists and sexist pigs. Fun!

I have no idea how tough their job is. I have only listed a few of the things that I have observed, but I imagine that they are are under a whole lot of other stresses I don't know about. Working in a high stress environment, being surrounded by gambling and booze must tempt quite a few of them to enter into a very destructive lifestyle. A year or so back a dealer at my favourite casino died of a drug overdose.

Be kind to your dealer.

Call Me Fishboy

I wasn't planning on playing poker today but at around 11 am I had run my errands, got my hair cut and was heading home when the Talking Heads song Take Me to the River came on. I took it as a sign, gave in to the impulse and dropped in at my favourite casino and bought in for $260.

It was a very aggressive table with lots of pre-flop raises and re-raises. On my fifth hand I was dealt pocket tens under the gun, raised it to $15 and found myself re-raised to $45. I called, which was probably a mistake. This seems to be a "fold or re-raise" situation, but I lacked the discipline to the former and the balls to do the latter. No surprise then when a ace came on the flop and I kissed my $45 goodbye.

Weak.

I lasted only another three hands. I was dealt Kd 10h, not a particularly good hand, but with three guys limping ahead of me I figured it was worth a $2 bet. The player on my left, a black guy who had just won a big pot with a bluff (he showed), also calls. To BG's left sits an action kid, who I've seen try to buy a few pots already. Action Kid raises to $15 and it folds back to me. I call and BG calls. The flop comes Ks Kc 4d, nice!

I check. BG checks.  Action Kid bets $35. I hollywooded for about for about eight seconds and call. BG calls as well.

The turn is a 3h. I bet $40,  hoping for a caller and BG goes all in. The Action Kid folds and I have a decision to make. I have no idea what to do. BG could be bluffing. He could have a king with a worse kicker than mine. He could have a king with a better kicker than mine. He could have a pocket pair, in which case I'm ahead of AA, QQ, JJ, 10 10, 99, 88, 77, 66, 55, and 22. I'm behind 44 and 33. Shit. My gut says fold - so what if I'm folding best hand? I can wait to win when I know I'm ahead rather than take a chance here.

But I don't fold. I call.

BG flips over AK. Oh crap. The river doesn't help me and I'm busted after less than thirty minutes at the table.

Where did I go wrong? I made so many mistakes it's hard to count them all:

My first mistake was playing in the first place. By giving into the whim to play, I was already showing a lack of discipline. If I can't control my impulses I am at a disadvantage before the cards are dealt.

My second mistake was buying in for $260 rather than the $200 I'd had success with lately. Again, a lack of discipline.

Now we come to the mistakes I made in the hand itself. The $2 call pre-flop was fine, but calling the $15 bet was stupid. K 10 off is a drawing hand and at an aggressive table like this you will not get pot odds to chase with drawing hands. What was I hoping would flop? I should never have been in this hand in the first place.

My next mistake was focusing too much on Action Kid and not thinking about BG enough.

The great big mistake, of course, was calling BG's all in. These are the possible hands he could have had that I would beat:  AA, QQ, JJ - that's it.  I don't think a good player would make this all in against two guys with 10 10 or lower, and a good player would not have called that $15 with a king with a worse kicker than mine. There is a possibility he is bluffing again, but I think it is less likely a guy will bluff so soon after showing a bluff. I was hoping he was bluffing - engaging in wishful thinking. Much more likely he had 44 and had flopped a full house.

I played badly and got what I deserved. However I did not compound my mistakes by re-buying. I stood up, wished everyone a good day and went home to write a blog post and walk the dogs.

A Cautionary Tale of Woe

The story you are about to read is true. It just reads like bad fiction. The name (Stephen Green) has been changed to protect the innocent and to cover for my bad memory.

I had been at the poker room for over and hour and was yet to win a hand. I was playing my usual tight game but the table was very aggressive and it was costing me to see the flop when I got decent cards. I could not hit a flop to save my life and was considering just cashing out. I didn't seem like it was going to be my day. I could go home and write a nice little blog about why  it is wise to cash out when things are not clicking.

Then Fish Boy sat down at the table with about $250 in chips. Fish Boy was kid in a crisp white dress shirt - a good looking kid with a model's complexion and perfectly gelled hair. While he didn't give off a nervous vibe he seemed unsure of how the mechanics of the game worked- I suspected he had success on-line and had come to test his skills in the real world. He posted right away and called a $20 pre-flop bet. He was heads up to see the flop and checked after the flop. His opponent bet $40 and Fish Boy called. Fish Boy checked after the turn. His opponent bet $65 and Fish Boy called. The pot was now around $250, which was pretty big even for this loose table. The river came and Fish Boy checked. His opponent bet $125, which was all Fish Boy had left in front of him. Fish Boy didn't even hesitate before calling. The board was something like Kd 4c 2h Qh 8s. Fish Boy's opponent turned his hand over-Ah 8h - just a pair of eights- a very weak hand. Obviously he was trying to bluff Fish Boy, but just as obviously Fish Boy has, at minimum, a King, otherwise he would not have called down the line. Right? Amazingly, Fish Boy looks crushed at the pair of eights his opponent has and says "nice hand" and mucks his cards.

Oh. My. God.

Fish Boy pulls out his wallet and fishes out two crisp $100 bills. Any thought I had of leaving this table has disappeared.

The dealer calls out,"Chips on table one, seat three!"

Fish Boy doesn't even seem aware of how incredibly badly he played that hand. He just smiles and says "That sure went fast" as a runner takes his money and goes to get him more chips. This second buy in lasts him about twenty minutes. He busts out again when he flops two pair but doesn't bet it aggressively, giving his opponent pot odds to chase a flush draw that he hits on the river. Only when the flush draw hits does Fish Boy bet, and when he is re-raised Fish Boy calls with second best hand. Classic fish poker.

"I need to go to an ATM. I'll be right back." says Fish Boy. The moment he is out of earshot the table erupts in a discussion of how bad he is. Fifteen minutes later he is back, with only about $120 in chips. before he even sits down he dials a number on his cell phone.

"Hello, my name is Stephen Green, I was in earlier talking to Darlene about my overdraft. If she could call me at 403-249-......."

Seriously? Are we on candid camera? Part of me wants to pull this kid aside and try to convince him that he should leave, but I know I probably couldn't make him see that he has no hope of winning.

It was then that I was dealt Ah 10d. I raised to $15 and was called by Dan,  a tough, aggressive player. Fish Boy also called. The thee of us see the flop: Ac 5h 4s. I bet $35 and both Dan and Fish Boy call me. I figure I am probably ahead of Dan, who I put on a draw of some kind or possibly a weaker ace than mine - he has shown a willingness to call with a very large range. Fish Boy could have any two cards.

The turn makes the board look like this: Ac 5h 4s 9h.  I bet $20 and Dan re-raises me to $40. FishBoy calls of course. What to do, what to do? I have seen Dan bluff and semi-bluff a lot and I feel he his semi-bluffing here.  He seemed pleased with the heart on the turn, which probably means pocket hearts. I only have $110 left, so an all-in push by me might get him off his draw. But then there is is Fish Boy, who could be way ahead of me or way behind me. In the end I decide that the all-in makes the most sense, so I shove all my chips in. Dan starts to mull his decision over when he notices that Fish Boy is getting ready to push his chips forward too - giving him better pot odds. So Dan calls and Fish Boy puts the last of his chips in. I really should be mad at Fish Boy - I would have been happy to have Dan fold rather than risk a heart on the river, but Fish Boy influenced Dan's decision. While I'm not mad, I definitely don't feel sorry for the Fish Boy anymore - he deserves what he gets.

The river is a blank. I show my hand and Dan throws is cards in the muck. Fish Boy says something like "Darn it" and shows that he has pocket kings. Busted again, he leaves for good.

Calling with nothing; giving your opponents the chance to suck out on you; not being able to fold a pocket pair when there is an over card on board and people are betting heavy - these are the things losing players do. Even winning players do them from time to time when they go on tilt.

Don't be a Fish Boy or Fish Girl!

Give a Little Bit

I heard on the news this morning that the Alberta Institute for Wildlife Conservation is on the brink of closing up. This organization has been important to my wife and I in recent years as many of our close friends have volunteered for this group which helps to rehabilitate injured wildlife. We will send a cheque to AIWC in the hopes that they can continue to do their good work.

I do believe that to be a successful poker player you need to have balance in your life. The ruthlessness you need to succeed  while playing should be balanced by generosity away from the table. Here then is a great opportunity to be generous and put a deposit in your own karma bank account - you may need to draw on that account when you are all in on a stone cold bluff next week.

To donate:
phone 403-946-2361
mail:  Box 68
         Madden, AB
         Canada
         T0M 1L0
website: www.aiwc.ca

Sunday Morning Prayer Meeting: Final Sermon

Why do I come to this church of chips and check raises? What sins do I think will be forgiven here?

At first - years ago - I came here looking for forgiveness for what I considered my greatest sin; my own ordinariness. I wanted to show myself to be lady luck's favourite, just as when I was a child I had delusions that I would change the world someday. The god-complex I had as a kid never really died - it just went underground and resurfaced as the delusion that the laws of chance applied to others, not me. I could have become addicted to slot machines or roulette but my pride was to great for games of pure chance - I wanted to be able to claim some credit for my own outrageous success. Poker, a mix of luck and skill, was the perfect game for me. I could pretend I deserved to win because of my skill, while secretly I knew it was because God loves me best.

So, in the beginning I played poker as if it was roulette - never considering what the moves my opponents made  revealed about the my chances of winning a hand. I never considered that I actually needed to study the game. I passed all my classes without studying, so why study poker? Worst of all, I never considered my opponents as thinking beings at all. This is particularly easy to do when playing on-line - easy to believe that avatar is just an avatar, and not a human being.

So I lost.

I was too stubborn to quit playing poker, but not so stubborn as to realize I had to start playing differently. I had to start trying to figure out why my opponents made the moves they made. This is what I am trying to do now.

Is this a church at all? I'm not sure. The belief in a higher power -be it God or Chance- drives people here. If they win they feel loved by the higher power. But how big a win -how much love- is enough? For some of us there is never enough love of money to fill the holes in our hearts. No matter how much we win we spend it all in the hope for more.

So.

In the end, poker is just a game. When you project meaning on it beyond that you are setting up psychological traps for yourself. One psychological trap, maybe the hardest on to avoid, is the idea that you can play winning poker even when you are not at the top of your game. You can't play winning poker when you are tired, or drunk, or on tilt, or when an opponent has a read on you. You can win (anyone can get lucky) but you can't play winning poker and there is a big difference. Which just brings my mind back full circle. This maybe this is a church after all, teaching us that pride goes before a fall. But don't come to this church to be absolved of sin - come here to learn something about yourself.

I had been at the poker table for about five hours. I had brought $200 and now had slightly more than $800. The thought crossed my mind that if I left now, I could go home and give the dogs a walk around the park before I'd have to go pick up my wife from work. We could spend some of my winnings on a nice meal somewhere. Or I could stay here. After all I was dominating the table; who knows how much more I would make? How much love is enough? 

The small voice in my head said it was time to go. I racked up my chips and cashed out. It was the best move I made all day.