Episode 40: Bill Ordine

Bill Ordine is the editor of PhillyGambles.com, an editor and writer for PressBox, and a former reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Baltimore Sun. In his capacity as a sports writer, Bill pushed for greater poker coverage in the Baltimore Sun, and his current venture aims to provide more balanced coverage of gambling news than is found in mainstream newspapers. As a freelancer, he authored Poker Players Ante Up For Charity, a 2009 LA Times article in which he mentions Andrew! We talk to him about the state of poker media today and what may be in store for the future as well as what’s being lost with the decline of traditional journalism.

Timestamps

0:27 Hello and Welcome
15:43 Strategy Hands
52:36 Interview: Bill Ordine

Strategy

Hand 1

Blinds 800/1600/200. CO (50K) opens to 3500, SB (350K) calls, Hero (30K) calls with 9h 7h in the BB.

Flop (12K) Qh 8h 4c. Checks to CO, he bets 8K, SB calls, Hero calls.

Turn (36K) Ts. SB bets 25K, Hero folds, CO calls.

Hand 2

$2/$5 cash game in Las Vegas. Hero ($600) opens to $20 with Ac 4c on the button. SB ($575) raises to $55. BB folds. Hero raises to $150, SB calls.

Flop ($300) 5d 4d 2s. SB checks, Hero bets $225, SB calls.

Turn ($750) 7h SB shoves $275, Hero calls.

 

8 thoughts on “Episode 40: Bill Ordine

  1. Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

    57,420 games 0.001 secs 57,420,000 games/sec

    Board: Qh 8s 3h
    Dead:

    equity win tie pots won pots tied
    Hand 0: 35.143% 35.14% 00.01% 20176 3.00 { 9h7h }
    Hand 1: 64.857% 64.85% 00.01% 37238 3.00 { KK+, AhKh, AQs, AhJh, AhTh, Ah9h, Ah8h, Ah7h, Ah6h, Ah5h, Ac4c, Ah4h, Ah3h, Ah2h, KQs, QJs, JhTh, AQo, KQo, QJo }

    I just don’t see how hero in Hand 1 can have enough confidence in his sizing read given the equities involved and the money behind, to not shove.

    There is 28k in the pot and hero will be shoving about the same. Even if he gets 20% folds and gets called 80% of the time with 35% equity against a calling range, we are

    56(.20) and (.35)(76)(.80) = 33.5. So even if we are only getting 2 folds 20% of the time we are clearing a massive 5.5k profit shoving here.

    The read AB/NM make on villain’s size and SB’s call go both ways in that, if they can’t have sets, shoving can basically never be a disaster given the size of the pot, hero’s equity when called, and the amount he’ll have to risk with a shove. Also, Hero has to be so confident that his fold equity is low here, especially in the case of the SB folding. Like I just don’t see how, if it goes c-bet, SB folds, hero can’t shove. I like shoving in either case, but especially that case. I am just not going to say that I am confident to fold a 35% equity hand against the range I assign him.

    Fwiw in the above range we have more equity the fewer flush draws we include, which I’ve gone perhaps a bit heavy on.

    Sometimes I think AB/NM might reinforce each others read on the situation, given their mutual persuasiveness, when they agree. This seems like a classic case of overvaluing a skill like reading bet sizes at the expense of the nuts and bolts of the situation.

    • Gareth–

      Very nice post. I’m planning to give a mathier response later.

      I do disagree about a couple things: first, I think 20% is high for an estimate of how often you win without showdown after this action. Second, the WSOP ME is extreme even among tournaments for situations where the marginal utility of chips is nonlinear. U(56K) is much less than 2*U(28K).

      Whether this is enough to make folding OK, I’m not sure. I do agree that precision preflop handreading can be taken too far (this year I made a choice to try a little less of that and a little more sticking close to read-blind fundamentals).

    • I agree with Gareth. With my limited experience, I would almost always get it in on this flop. It was very interesting to hear arguments against doing so. I like these more common spots much better than the rare spots.

  2. Looking at the annual financial statements for Caesars Entertainment Corp (CZR) the company had negative taxable income for 2010, 2011, and 2012. So they owed no income taxes because they lost money. So, the statement was technically true: they would receive no immediate income tax deduction for their charitable donations. However, they do receive a deferred tax asset, which means they’ll get to take their deductions in the future, whenever they report net taxable income.

  3. Another great, great podcast. You guys are killing it every week.
    But….you nit on a Subway combo but will 4 bet A rag suited???
    Something is wrong with me. Im just the opposite. I hit the combo plus just to get the toy that comes with it and flat the raise.
    Is there any hope for me?
    I guess I am just not thinking poker.

  4. LOL Keone. Well played.

    Keep the 2/5 cash game hands coming–I love them. Andrew, Nate and others–is everyone in agreement that KQs is an auto 3-bet for the SB here. If the question is 3-bet or fold, I am clearly 3-betting, so the question really comes down to if it’s worth it to attempt to balance both 3-betting and flatting ranges from either the sb or the bb in this situation.

  5. Caesars does not benefit by making the charitable donation to One Drop vs allowing the players to donate personally:
    –in the current approach, I think $111 of the $1,111 entry fee for One Drop is donated. Caesars books revenue of $111 for that portion of the entry fee, then deducts $111 from revenue for the purposes of calculating taxable income (ie “profit”). However, the deductibility of charitable donations for C Corps is limited to 10% of taxable income. On its last 10k, Caesars reported negative net income, but taxable income is a different number, and not easy to determine from the 10k. So at best, Caesars is no better off using this method than if they didn’t collect the $111 in the first place, and at worst, the expense will be carried forward until Caesars is profitable (which, given their debt load, may be a long time).
    –if Caesars collected the $111 from players and donated it to One Drop on their behalf, then the player could deduct the donation on schedule A. However, that only benefits players who 1) file tax returns, 2) owe taxes, 3) itemize deductions, and 4) are not professional poker players. Pro players should be deducting all expenses (including the $111) from their poker winnings anyway; in fact, treating the $111 as part of the buy-in, instead of a charitable deductions is better for pro players, since as a buy-in, the $111 is deductible on schedule C, which isn’t subject to Pease reductions.

    So it isn’t clear to me why Caesars uses the first approach currently, but I don’t think there is any venality in it.

Comments are closed.