Pull the Trigger!

There was a great 25/50 deep game going last night, with two really big fish sitting on $10,000+ each. I had to compete with three very good players for them, but it was still a great spot. Unfortunately, I missed a pretty important bluff against one of the sharks.

The less good of the two fish doubled up the other one and quit not long after. For some reason, one of the good players left as well- apparently one soft spot wasn't enough for him. The button in this hand is the fish, the SB a good player:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $50.00 BB (4 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($16848)
SB ($16386)
Foucault (BB) ($10799.80)
UTG ($11847)

Preflop: Foucault is BB with J, 10
1 fold, Button raises to $175, SB calls $150, Foucault calls $125

Flop: ($525) K, 2, Q (3 players)
SB bets $405, Foucault calls $405, 1 fold

Turn: ($1335) 8 (2 players)
SB bets $905, Foucault calls $905

River: ($3145) J (2 players)
SB checks, Foucault checks

Total pot: $3145 | Rake: $2

Results in white below:

SB had K, A (one pair, Kings).

Foucault had J, 10 (one pair, Jacks).

Outcome: SB won $3143
This isn't a standard call pre-flop but with a fish in the hand I'm trying to get into pots. While I suspect SB has something, there are very few strong hands I would expect him to play like this. Especially on the turn, I'm calling not just for my draw but because I think I can sometimes steal on the river. Basically I was thinking SB would sometimes have something like a flush draw.

When the flush came in on the river but he checked, it confused me. I didn't think he'd check a flush, and he probably would have bluffed if he had nothing, so I can concluded that my pair doesn't have much show down value. More importantly, the bet bet check line means he probably isn't calling. It was a great spot to turn my hand into a bluff but I just didn't pull the trigger. Granted AK was a little stronger than I expected from him but I still think there's a good chance he folds it.

Why no off-suit A on the river?!?!

Happy Thanksgiving!

I hope all the Americans and anyone else who celebrated Thanksgiving yesterday had a nice time. I'd like to express my gratitude to everyone who reads and/or comments here at thinkingpoker. It's enormously gratifying to know that there are people out there interested in what I have to say about this fascinating game. I'm particularly flattered by those of you who aren't serious poker players yourselves but nonetheless find something of interest here.

Lastly, I'm grateful for double floats that turn into runner-runner-nuts in 3-bet pots (played this hand yesterday but don't have HH from laptop):

5/10 NLHE with 2K stacks, I open to $35 with 43s on the CO, fish in SB calls, BB squeezes to $140, I call, fish folds. Flop K82 with one of my suit, BB bets $220, I call planning to take it away if he shows weakness or I turn a good draw. Turn is an A he bets $475 I ought to shove or fold here but for some reason I make a terrible call instead thinking I can shove river if he checks. River is a 5 to give me the nuts and he shoves into me for $1200 or so. I call and beat his AQ.

Tales From a 7-11: Gary

Gary was a tough guy to work with. He had some mental disabilities that prevented him from engaging fully in the idle banter that generally passed between co-workers. Most of the time he did his job just as well as if not better than the other employees, but his strength in this regard was also his weakness.

Gary was a real stickler for directions and procedure. As you might imagine, the operation of a 7-11 is designed to be pretty idiot-proof. There are simple instructions for operating everything and a checklist that every employee is supposed to follow on every shift. Of course, most employees neither used the checklist nor diligently completed all of their tasks, particularly the least popular ones. Gary, however, did everything just as it was supposed to be done every time.

That was all well and good when things were running smoothly. The problem was that Gary had no capacity for troubleshooting or adaptation. He was relieving me once at the end of a shift on the Fourth of July. When doing a shift change, each of the two registers needs to be closed down individually and its contents counted and verified by both employees. Generally this is to be done at a time where there is no line in the store.

That July Fourth was a hot, sunny summer holiday, and we were doing a booming business in ice, charcoal, ketchup, hot dog rolls, and other barbecue accouterments. A line of customers had wrapped halfway around the store since the beginning of my shift, and it was clear to me that there was never going to be a quiet moment for a shift change. We needed to just shut down one register and count the money as quickly as possible despite the line, but convincing Gary to cooperate with this was nearly impossible.

So here I am arguing with this guy who can barely express or comprehend a coherent thought while both of us are trying desperately to keep up with the burgeoning swarm of customers. A kid who looked to be about 15 asked for a pack of cigarettes. I was far from diligent about carding people, but in this case there was a store full of gossipy judgmental soccer moms and a co-worker who was somewhat likely to report me if he noticed, so I asked to see his ID. Plus, the kid looked like an asshole.

He handed me the license of a woman who was several years older than he and looked nothing like him. “Don't waste my time,” I told him, thrusting the license back at him and turning my attention to the next customer. “Next!”

“What? That's my license. Man, sell me some cigarettes.”

I didn't even look up from my next transaction. “That was a woman's license. Get out of here.”

“You better sell me some fucking cigarettes.” Now I looked up.

I didn't feel the least bit threatened in a store full of people, but I didn't want the kid to make a scene or waste any more time. “Do I need to call the police?” I asked, reaching for the phone.

“What the fuck?” he responded.

“Alright, that's enough,” boomed a voice from several spots back in the line. “There are kids in this store.” The voice belonged to a burly guy with a leather jacket and a bandanna wrapped around his head.

The kid headed for the door, but turned back and shouted, “Man, fuck you both.”

“Fuck me? You meet me out in the parking lot, you little shit,” the guy boomed back. Needless to say, the little punk was not in the parking lot when the man left the store. And, I eventually got Gary to comply with the shift change, though he made clear that he was annoyed by it.

Boston Debate in the News

The Boston Herald ran an article this morning about the Boston Debate League and one of its member schools which was nearly closed by the school district:

The debate team at the Academy of Public Service sailed into the “elite eight” last year at the national championships in Chicago.

Now, thanks to that oratorical success, the debaters have talked their way into another year of funding as their school merges with the nearby Noonan Business Academy in Codman Square.

“The output of the debate team was a big part of the decision,” said team coach Locksley Bryan. “They saw these kids doing academic calisthenics at a very high level and it impressed them.”

The backstory, as I understand it, is that several years ago the Boston Public Schools received a multi-year, multi-million-dollar grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to support a transition to small schools. The grant funded the dissolution of Boston's large public high schools into multiple small schools sharing a single building. Thus, what was Dorchester High School became three schools within the renamed Dorchester Education Complex: Tech Boston, Noonan Business Academy, and the Academy of Public Service (APS).

Dorchester is one of the more troubled neighborhoods in Boston, and these schools had more than their share of problems. APS, however, was fortunate enough to have a wonderful headmaster and several great teachers who saw the value that a debate team could have for their students and their school. They got in touch with me, and I helped them start such a program three years ago.

Thanks to the efforts of the aforementioned faculty, APS quickly became one of the most successful schools in the League, putting up some of the best participation numbers and repeatedly taking top honors at citywide competitions. This was a big deal for a school that used to be known derogatorily among Boston's young people as "Dumbchester".

The Gates grant expires at the end of the current school year, and BPS seems to be reconsolidating some (though not nearly all) of the small schools it created. APS was slated to be absorbed by the more popular Tech Boston and its students dispersed. However, teachers, faculty, students, alumni, and community members rallied in support of their school. As the most eloquent orators, several of the debaters took leadership roles in this effort, speaking before the Boston Schools Committee about the value of the Academy of Public Service. The debate team was one of the flagship programs to which they pointed as evidence of the school's success.

As an organization, we've learned a lot from this event. We've come to appreciate more fully how much a debate team can transform a school culture, ultimately affecting even non-debaters in a positive way. When intellectual competition takes on the fun, excitement, credibility, and even popularity of a sports team at a school, that school is bound to improve. Joining the debate team becomes a cool, or at least socially acceptable, thing to do, and more kids get into it. These students, and the teachers who coach them, bring their newly acquired skills into their classrooms, raising the quality of the class for all its students.

An alumnus of the APS debate team who now volunteers as a judge at our competitions put it best when he told me, "If they had said three years ago that they wanted to close APS, I wouldn't have argued with them. It was a bad school. But it changed when the debate team came along. Debate turned around a lot of kids lives. Kids who were going to drop out started coming to school again so they could debate. It's a much better school now and I don't think they should close it."

Tales From a 7-11: Mark

Mark was our youngest employee. I knew him first as a customer who came in nearly every day and talked about how badly he wanted to work in the store. Sure enough, he started work on his sixteenth birthday.

The 7-11 was just a stepping stone for Mark, though. His real aspiration was to be a police officer. Even before he was working with us, he got to know all of the officers who frequented our store. Once he was working there, it was even worse. If there was a cop in the store, it was nearly impossible to get Mark to do any work. There could an empty cooler and a line a mile-long, and Mark would be over by the coffee counter hounding the officers.

Mark was generally pretty law-abiding himself, but I did once see him sell cigarettes to two girls who were no older than fourteen. After completing the sale, he stepped outside and returned a minute or two later. “Did you sell them cigarettes?" I asked, more surprised than scolding.

He grinned. “They showed me their boobies.”

Mark was working with me one day when a group of guys in their early twenties came into the store asking about Pokemon cards. This was at the height of the game's popularity, and even at $5 a pack we couldn't keep them in stock. We'd just gotten a shipment, though, so when the guys asked if we had any purple packs, I was able to tell them that we did.

It immediately struck me as strange that these young men were asking about the cards. They seemed to old to play but too young to have kids who played. More strangely, they didn't actually want to buy any of the cards. Instead, they asked for a carton of cigarettes, which required me to step away from the counter and dig around in a cabinet for their requested brand.

When I returned, the guys were gone. I quickly checked the box of Pokemon cards which was sitting out on the counter with the other impulse purchase items. I never would have known for sure that they'd taken anything, since I had no idea how many packs there were to begin with, except that there were now no more purple packs. Had the guys not specifically asked about them and had me verify just a minute ago that there had been some, I would have had no way of proving they'd stolen them.

Amazingly, they were still sitting out in the parking lot in their car. I jotted down the license, and more annoyed at the brazenness and stupidity of their crime than anything else, I called the manager.

“How many packs did they take?”

“I don't know.”

“Eight.”

“Huh?”

“They took eight packs. If you don't give the police an exact number, they won't do anything with the report.”

I called the police, and they said they'd send someone by eventually. There was less than an hour left in Mark's shift, but he stuck around for another hour waiting for the police to come. Finally he left but begged me to call him when the police did arrive, which I didn't.

Facelift

I thought this new layout would kill two birds with one stone, both giving the blog a fresh look and fixing the font issue I've had for the last few days. Apparently only the former was successful. Sorry, I'm still working on getting rid of this ugly font. In the meantime, let me know what you think about the new look. Is the old layout better? Should I keep experimenting?

A Random Call, Part Two

Eugene asked a great question about my recent post, A Random Call, which reminded me that I'd meant to post this hand as well. It happened not long after I snapped off a 2x pot river bluff with top pair, weak kicker. This was against the same opponent but on a different table:

Full Tilt Poker, $10/$20 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

Hero (CO): $4,732.50
BTN: $4,231
SB: $4,144.50
BB: $5,019.50
UTG: $2,000
MP: $7,734.50

Pre-Flop: 9 9 dealt to Hero (CO)
2 folds, Hero raises to $70, BTN raises to $240, 2 folds, Hero calls $170

Flop: ($510) 4 2 2 (2 Players)
Hero bets $222, BTN raises to $700, Hero raises to $1,178, BTN calls $478

Turn: ($2,866) 7 (2 Players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $2,813 and is All-In, Hero calls $2,813

River: ($8,492) 6 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

Results: $8,492 Pot ($3 Rake)
Hero showed 9 9 (two pair, Nines and Twos) and LOST (-$4,231 NET)
BTN showed K K (two pair, Kings and Twos) and WON $8,489 (+$4,258 NET)


I chose this line to induce as many bluffs as possible, but in light of my recent call I think trying to play my hand as a bluff-catcher is a bad idea. Villain is probably not expecting me to make a big fold after he'd just shown down a big bluff, which means he's not going to try to bluff me off an overpair. Of course I could get into the whole, "but does he know that I don't expect him to bluff?" thing, but in this case I don't think he knows enough about me to expect that. He's probably just not going to bluff much in this spot, which means I ought to be playing the 99 with the intention of folding to heavy pressure.

In general, catching an opponent in a big bluff will induce one or both of the following dynamics for at least the near future:

1. Villain will stop bluffing in spots where he can only represent a narrow range or where you clearly have a relatively strong hand (ie better than top pair).

2. Villain will try to restore his ego and/or take advantage of the new table dynamic by running another big bluff.

These are not necessarily mutually exclusive, because the former only assumes he will stop bluffing in certain situations. When you appear to have a relatively weak hand, he may actually bluff with renewed vigor in order to reassert his castrated manhood.

River 3-Bet Bluff

I think the river 3-bet bluff is one of the sexiest plays in poker. Precisely because it's so hard to pull off, it's something I rarely attempt. But today I managed a good one:

Full Tilt Poker, $5/$10 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

SB: $2,829.95
BB: $2,542.50
UTG: $1,143.95
Hero (MP): $2,087
CO: $2,000
BTN: $1,032

Pre-Flop: A K dealt to Hero (MP)
UTG folds, Hero raises to $35, CO calls $35, 3 folds

Flop: ($85) 3 8 2 (2 Players)
Hero bets $66, CO raises to $150, Hero calls $84

Turn: ($385) 7 (2 Players)
Hero checks, CO checks

River: ($385) 5 (2 Players)
Hero bets $277, CO raises to $710, Hero raises to $1,902 and is All-In, CO folds

Results: $1,805 Pot ($3 Rake)
Hero mucked A K and WON $1,802 (+$907 NET)


Let's start with the flop. In a 100BB game, I'm happily 3-betting the flop and getting the money. But with these stacks, his flop raising range is different and when the money goes in I'm usually going to be facing a set, not one pair. AK-high beats most of his bluffs anyway, so I just called.

The turn puts a ton of draws on the board, so when my opponent doesn't bet it, I ruled strong hands out of his range. I'd expect him to check two pair or better almost never on the turn. When I bet the river, it's to represent an overpair and try to bluff him off of one pair.

Because I'd previously ruled out two pair or better on the turn, the river raise is more than a little suspicious. Could the 5 have improved his hand? I doubt he's playing 64 like this pre-flop or on the flop, and if he is, I'd expect him to bluff the turn. 96 seems pretty unlikely for the flop raise. So I conclude that he's almost certainly bluffing.

Frankly, calling with AK would not be bad here, even though initially I was bluffing. But I also think it's very likely that he may be turning a pair into a bluff to get me off of the overpair I'm representing. So I decided that I'd be better off shoving to knock him off better bluffs and maybe even a 53 or something that he was raising for thin value.

A Random Call

I am a strong advocate of exploitive poker strategy. That is, I believe that you ought to tailor your play to exploit specific mistakes that you believe your opponents will make, even if this means that you are yourself open to exploitation. By definition, the more skillful player will do a better job of exploiting his opponents than they will do of exploiting him.

However, should you find yourself in a sticky spot against a player whom you believe to be more skillful than you are, you may occasionally prefer to employ game theory to help you avoid getting exploited rather than focus on exploiting that opponent.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $20.00 BB (5 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP ($2087)
Button ($4197)
SB ($4659)
Hero (BB) ($8452)
UTG ($6115)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 7, A
2 folds, Button raises to $70, 1 fold, Hero calls $50

Flop: ($150) A, 3, 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $120, Hero calls $120

Turn: ($390) K (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $372, Hero calls $372

River: ($1134) 4 (2 players)

Hero checks, Button bets $2200


The way I've played my hand so far makes it pretty clear that I have a weak Ace. The question is what my opponent will do about that. I generally don't give my opponents credit for being able to overbet bluff the river, at least not with a good frequency. They might do it occasionally, but the vast majority of the time that they overbet the pot, they will have the nuts or very close to it. So in this spot, I would expect them to be overbetting for value, daring me to call with my weak top pair, but not to try to bluff me off of top pair, at least not with an overbet.

This is an easy strategy to exploit. With top pair weak kicker facing a bet like this from a standard opponent, I fold.

Notice how exploiting this tendency of my opponents leaves me open to exploitation as well. If my opponents were to stop overbetting their strong hands and overbet the river any time they don't have a strong hand, I would be in trouble. But for the most part I trust in my ability to adapt to my opponents more quickly than they adapt to me.

Against this particular opponent, however, I didn't feel so confident. I knew him to be smart, creative, and daring. I was sure he put me on exactly the kind of hand that I had, but I didn't know what he would try to do about it. Thus, I was lost as to what I ought to do on the river.

Because he's capable of betting for value or bluffing like this, my decision to call has to be based on what percentage of the time he will be bluffing. His bet lays me odds. If he will bluff here more than 33% of the time, I should call. Otherwise, I should fold.

The problem is that I don't know how often he is bluffing. The best that I can do, then, is choose a calling frequency that cannot be exploited. Since the pot is laying me 2:3, I should call 1/3 of the time.

No matter how often my opponent bluffs in this spot, then, he cannot exploit me. If he bluffs more than 1/3 of the time, he'll steal a few more pots but he'll lose too much on his bluffs. If he bluffs less than 1/3 of the time, he'll win more on his value bets but won't steal as many pots as he could.

If I knew that he was making one or the other of these mistakes, I could adapt my calling frequency to take advantage of them more fully. But then if he figured out what I was doing he could adapt his bluffing frequency to exploit me. Since I was not confident in my ability to win this battle of wits, I decided to default to an unexploitable calling strategy. I would look at the clock, and if the last digit was 7-9, I would call. If it was 1-6, I would fold. If it was 0, I would look at the next digit.

The time was 9:47. I called. He showed K8o, and I won the pot. But that's not the important part.

FTOPS Razz

Thought I'm not playing the FTOPS events as compulsively as I have in the past, I am playing my favorites. So far, though, it hasn't been too interesting and I decided to spare you the litany of bad beats. Last night I had my first cash, taking 40th in the $300 Razz. The only potentially interesting hand was the one where I lost my stack:

Tournament - *Razz* (2,500/5,000), Ante 400, Bring-In 800

Rosiepod (Seat 1): 31,063
Foucault (Seat 2): 26,248
bearw8 (Seat 3): 51,310
OnTheRail15 (Seat 4): 40,129
Crisp86 (Seat 5): 31,676
RSonkee (Seat 6): 124,685
Carmen35 (Seat 7): 38,570
DAT MOOSE (Seat 8): 67,590

*3rd Street* - (1.28 SB)

Rosiepod: xx xx 3c___folds
Foucault: 4c 6d 7h___calls
bearw8: xx xx 8d___folds
OnTheRail15: xx xx Th___*brings-in*___folds
Crisp86: xx xx 4d___folds
RSonkee: xx xx Ad___completes
Carmen35: xx xx 9h___folds
DAT MOOSE: xx xx 2c___calls

*4th Street* - (4.60 SB)

Foucault: 4c 6d 7h 2h___calls
RSonkee: xx xx Ad Qs___folds
DAT MOOSE: xx xx 2c 5c___*bets*

*5th Street* - (3.30 BB)

Foucault: 4c 6d 7h 2h 5d___*bets*___calls
DAT MOOSE: xx xx 2c 5c 7d___raises

*6th Street* - (7.30 BB)

Foucault: 4c 6d 7h 2h 5d 6s___*checks*___calls
DAT MOOSE: xx xx 2c 5c 7d Jd___bets

*River* - (9.30 BB)

Foucault: 4c 6d 7h 2h 5d 6s Td___*checks*___calls
DAT MOOSE: xx xx 2c 5c 7d Jd xx___bets

*Total pot:* (11.30 BB - 56,500)

Results:

Total pot 56,500 | Rake 0
DAT MOOSE showed [Kh 3h 2c 5c 7d Jd Ah] and won (56,500) with 7,5,3,2,A

Note: this site shuffles the hole cards.


Looking at it now this doesn't look so bad, but at the time I had an awful feeling about it. Possibly a better Razz player can escape at some point. It's hard to say, though- by the time he's raising fifth, the pot is quite big. I do have draws at a 6 occasionally people will overplay bad Razz hands, though I don't think that was happening here.

Implementing the UIGEA

It's been nearly two years since the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act snuck its way through Congress as a rider on a port security bill. The UIGEA criminalized not the gambling itself but the facilitation of financial transactions for the purpose of gambling online. In other words, you could play, but banks and other financial institutions were not supposed to help you put money online to play with.

The immediate consequences were disastrous: numerous poker sites, including industry giant Party Poker, stopped accepting American business and saw their stock prices plummet. Third party "e-wallets" also closed their doors to American customers, and in the case of Neteller huge sums of money were stuck in limbo for months. Games grew scarcer and tougher, though frankly not to the extent that I feared they would.

That was a dark time for internet poker, but not much has happened since. Federal agencies and US banks locked horns over who would bear the responsibility for identifying transactions intended for unlawful internet gaming. Though a shot over the bow that scared many major players out of the US market, the UIGEA has been without teeth or content since its passage. The games aren't as good as they were in the "Golden Age" but plenty of us are still making plenty of money.

Yesterday, however, the Treasury Department finally announced its rules for implementing the UIGEA. Like the bill's original passage, the rules come into being via a relatively underhanded political maneuver. They are among the many "midnight" regulations that the Bush administration will sneak under the wire before Obama takes office on January 20, 2009.

The new president will of course be free to reverse Bush's last-ditch orders and regulations, and I certainly hope that Obama will do so in this case, but inertia is a powerful force in US politics. Bush has the tremendous advantage of no longer facing re-election and thus accountability for his actions and decisions. What really needs to happen is for some enterprising politician to discover how much money could be made in tough economic times by legalizing, regulating, and taxing internet gaming. Howard Lederer is optimistic about the prospects for this in an Obama administration, but I'm not holding my breath.

Still, I was glad to come across a very reassuring analysis from prominent gaming law scholar I. Nelson Rose, who concludes that

the federal regulators charged with making regulations to enforce the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (“UIGEA”) simply gave up. They were supposed to make rules forcing financial institutions to identify and block money transfers for unlawful Internet gambling transactions. But they were defeated by the difficulty of defining what was unlawful and the impossibility of tracking individual transactions. So they told credit card companies to come up with some additional code numbers for gambling transactions and everyone else can basically continue to do what they are now doing – oh, and financial institutions have to send a notice to all their clients telling them not to be involved in illegal gambling.

If he's right, it sounds like this new pronouncement should have very little effect on the current state of internet poker. In any event, financial institutions will still have until December 2009 to put their procedures into place. So I will postpone panicking for a while at least.

Deep Sunday Million Run

I put in one of my longest online poker sessions ever yesterday, starting at 2PM to play the $256 FTOPS 6-max knockout event (ran like ass but as you'll see I've got no room to complain), then making a deep run in the Stars Sunday Million that kept me up until 12:30 AM. I finished a disappointing 30th after losing AKs < KQ, 66 < AQ, and KT < 44. But again, I've got no room to complain. Here's a little taste of how I made it so far:

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $200+$15 Tournament, 4000/8000 Blinds 800 Ante (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

SB (t336390)
BB (t147060)
UTG (t377187)
UTG+1 (t251925)
MP1 (t104582)
Hero (MP2) (t97048)
MP3 (t131592)
CO (t389095)
Button (t35424)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with 8, 8

UTG raises to t21600, 2 folds, Hero raises to t96248 (All-In), 4 folds, BB raises to t146260 (All-In), UTG calls t124660

Flop: (t399968) Q, 2, 5 (3 players, 2 all-in)

Turn: (t399968) 5 (3 players, 2 all-in)

River: (t399968) 8 (3 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: t399968



Results in white below:

BB had 10, 10 (two pair, tens and fives).

UTG had J, J (two pair, Jacks and fives).

Hero had 8, 8 (full house, eights over fives).

Outcome: UTG won t100024, Hero won t299944



Poker Tracker missed one of the dirtier ones because I was moved immediately afterwards, but I made a small raise UTG+1 with Jh 9h and was called by a guy in late position. The flop came QJ7 with one heart. I checked, he min-bet, and I called. The turn was the Th, giving me an open-ender and a flush draw. I checked, he bet small again, and I shoved. I was thinking he wouldn't have AK, QQ, JJ, or TT, or K9, but he snapped me off with QQ. No sweat though- the river was an 8 to give me the straight.

This tournament has a really shallow structure, so while there were interesting spots, they had more to do with blind stealing than anything that would translate to a good blog hand. But here's a big laydown I made with like 75 remaining:

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $200+$15 Tournament, 30000/60000 Blinds 6000 Ante (7 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP2 (t1380264)
Hero (CO) (t1552219)
Button (t494600)
SB (t571314)
BB (t985490)
UTG (t923860)
MP1 (t2234517)

Preflop: Hero is CO with Q, Q
1 fold, MP1 raises to t133000, 1 fold, Hero calls t133000, 2 folds, BB calls t73000

Flop: (t471000) 8, J, 6 (3 players)
BB checks, MP1 bets t271000, Hero folds, 1 fold

Total pot: t471000

Results in white below:

MP1 didn't show

Outcome: MP1 won t471000

This player had been quite snug. Pre-flop, I felt I was only going to get it in with AK and JJ+, so I elected to call for less than 10% of the effective stacks. If a short stack shoved, I was going to call unless the raiser came in as well, in which case I'd probably have folded.

As it stands, I just couldn't see this player betting into two people on this flop, especially given my very strong call, with less than AJ or maybe TT. But I'm crushed by AA, KK, and JJ. Guess I'll never know if this was correct, but it felt right at the time.

After playing this tournament for 8 hours (and overall, putting in a 10.5 hour session) I finished 30th and won like 13 buyins. Meh.

ur running so hot dude

I was feeling so on top of my game the other day. I was just really alert and creative, picking up on a ton of spots where I could steal pots if I applied enough pressure in the right way. This was the best one. Unless they have exactly Khxh, most people aren't going to check call a flush draw on the flop. I bet the flop just to set up an opportunity to steal the pot later. When the flush came in, it was just a matter of pouring on the pressure:

Full Tilt Poker, $3/$6 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 5 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

Hero (UTG): $2,697.85
CO: $937
BTN: $2,296.05
SB: $2,240.30
BB: $344.80

Pre-Flop: 7 9 dealt to Hero (UTG)
Hero raises to $21, 2 folds, SB raises to $72, BB folds, Hero calls $51

Flop: ($150) T K 6 (2 Players)
SB checks, Hero bets $88, SB calls $88

Turn: ($326) 2 (2 Players)
SB checks, Hero bets $377, SB calls $377

River: ($1,080) J (2 Players)
SB checks, Hero bets $2,160.85 and is All-In, SB folds

Results: $1,080 Pot ($3 Rake)
Hero mucked 7 9 and WON $1,077 (+$540 NET)


The best part of the hand was what my opponent said after he folded:

Villain: aa ur running so hot dude

Poker Vortices

I spent the better part of last week in Sedona, Arizona, which is a beautiful part of the American Southwest featuring tremendous red rock structures. Unfortunately, someone decided that these red rock formations have somehow created spiritual vortexes (and yes that is the correct pluralization, not vortices, I checked):

"In Sedona vortexes are created, not by wind or water, but from spiraling spiritual energy. The vortexes of Sedona are named because they are believed to be spiritual locations where the energy is right to facilitate prayer, mediation and healing. Vortex sites are believed to be locations having energy flow that exists on multiple dimensions. The energy of the vortexes interacts with a person’s inner self."

Consequently, Sedona is a hotbed of new age spiritualism, home to dozens of fortune tellers, spirit healers, mystical book stores, and all-around crazy people. I'm mad that I lost the exact language, but the visitor's guide provided by the National Parks Service specifically prohibits the rearranging of sticks and stones to create "medicine wheels" in the park and asks guests to "pray, chant, sign, drum, or meditate quietly" so as not to disturb others.

I spent about an hour playing poker and watching the sun rise from the porch of our hotel room while waiting for my girlfriend to wake up one day, though, and I must admit that maybe there is something to those vortexes after all (ugh apparently I don't FTP set to save hand histories on my laptop- sorry for botching the hell out of this post).

I was playing 10/20 heads up with a relatively weak regular. She was ridiculously over-aggressive, and I didn't respond to it quite as well as I should have. Still, I four-bet bluffed her twice pre-flop and flopped huge both times.

The first time, I had 54o, put $440 in pre-flop, and flopped the nuts on a 236 board. Since I knew my opponent could have a wide range pre-flop and it was my first time four-betting, I checked it back. The turn brought a J, she potted, and I shoved. She tanked and called with 95o for a gutshot which did not get there.

The second time, I 4-bet with Q7 and flopped Q77 for the second nuts. This time we were 4K deep, so I bet like 1/3 pot on the flop. In retrospect I probably should have just checked but I feared it would look too strong given how I played last time and the fact that my opponent knew I knew she could have almost anything.

The best one was when I called one of her 3-bets with T9o (again, 4K stacks) and flopped Q83. She bet, and I called. The turn brought another Q, and she bet smallish. I was pretty sure she didn't have a Queen, so decided to execute one of my new favorite moves where I make a raise I know my opponent will call and set myself up to bluff shove a future street when I am almost sure she will fold. I raised like 2.5x, enough to leave slightly less than a pot-sized bet in the effective stacks. Sure enough, she called and check-folded to a shove on a river 8. Sadly, she also quit after that.

Tales From a 7-11: Norman

Norman was in his early thirties when I worked with him, and in retrospect a giant fuck-up. He was a lot of fun to work with, though. When we were bored, which of course was quite often, Norman would sporadically break into a verse or two of a self-invented ditty. His most commonly repeated riff was “Noooooooobody loooooooooves old Normannnnnnn,” though he'd sometimes substitute my name or that of another employee. I called him “Stormin' Norman” because he was the kind of guy who needed a nickname.

I don't know the full story of how he ended up working at a 7-11, but over time I learned a few tidbits about him that suggest a more thorough explanation. He'd lost his driver's license to multiple DWI's, for instance, and had to take the bus to work. I lived just across the street from the store, so generally I walked to work, but once I had a car with me for some reason and offered him a ride, which he declined.

From time to time he would recount a ribald tale from one of his recent exploits. Being a teenage boy, I was usually eager to hear more. I asked him if he'd ever been with two women at once. He sighed. “Yeah. Couple of times. It's not all it's cracked up to be, believe me. It's very difficult to attend to two at once. A lot of pressure. I couldn't keep up with them.”

Norm's aspiration, which was common among those for whom 7-11 was part of a career path, was to get a job with one of the many companies that supplied ours and other convenience stores. He always chatted with the vendors who delivered to our store and frequently asked about opportunities. Norm left without any fanfare, which I've always hoped was because he got his dream job wheeling crates of soda or ice cream bars in and out of big white trucks and glass storefronts on a dolly.

America's Black Precedent

I wrote this yesterday, about 12 hours after McCain's concession, but didn't get a chance to post it until today.

I can't bring myself to get as excited as I feel I should be about Obama's victory. I was pulling for him- he was in fact the first major party candidate for whom I voted in a presidential election- but neither his victory nor the historic election of America's first black president excites me the way they have others.

It's nothing personal about Obama. He seems to be a smart and capable candidate and who may well prove a good president. But I just can't imagine him deserving or living up to the incredible expectations that seem to be invested in him.

His victory is being celebrated as a mandate for change, a watershed moment for liberalism in America, and a civil rights milestone. I believe it is all of these things, but not to the extent so many people seem to think.

Not in the case of the latter two, anyway. With regard to the mandate for change, I think that expectations are hopelessly high. Much was made, in the days before the election, of the hope that voters, particularly black ones, had invested in Obama. There was talk of unprecedented engagement with the political process among African-Americans and speculation about the sense of disenfranchisement that might ensue if Obama were somehow to lose.

My worry is that a similar disappointment may be experienced not only despite but because of his victory. Obama will inherit a plummeting economy, an endless war, and spiraling debt. Whether his fault or not, things are likely to get worse before they get better, especially for the least advantaged Americans. If the poor still struggle to make rent, if black Americans remain over-incarcerated and under-educated by the machinery of government, in four years, will there not be an even greater sense of disenfranchisement? Will there not be a temptation, among the many who are not living the American dream, to conclude that if not even this president can advance their interests, then they are truly and irrevocably disenfranchised by the American political process?

There is also the danger that white America will rest on its laurels as it has after every major advance in civil rights. Reconstruction amendments called for equal rights and suffrage for former slaves, yet many remained disenfranchised and in a state of near-enslavement. The Brown decision declared segregation unconstitutional, yet public schools across America remain blatantly segregated. A black man has been elected president, yet he did so at a time when there was only one black Senator (Obama himself) and two black governors (Deval Patrick of Massachusetts and David Paterson of New York, though only the former was elected to the office).

The presidency is an historic landmark in the slow march towards equality, but it is hardly the final hurdle. Black representation in the highest political offices in America mirrors that in the executive offices of corporate America or on the campuses of elite educational institutions. It is far easier to promote a few exceptional candidates (and this son of a black African father and a white woman from Kansas, raised in Hawaii and Indonesia, is nothing if not exceptional) than to extend the fruits of opportunity, wealth, and success to the millions of Americans who need and deserve them.

I am probably being too hard on America. During the primary, I expressed deep skepticism about America's ability to elect a black president. Even when victory seemed inevitable, I continued to reserve doubts. “I don't bet against racism in America,” I told friends. I am tremendously glad to be proven wrong. Truthfully, I am more genuinely proud of my country today than I have ever been.

Yet soaring speeches and tearful faces on television failed to resonate with me. I wandered the streets of Boston, feeling lost in a sea of honking horns, cheering college students, and strangers embracing. The most incredible displays of raw emotion stirred envy in me but not excitement or joy. I fear that so much of this enthusiasm will prove misguided.

The only sentiment expressed last night to which I could relate came from a long-time civil rights activist commenting briefly on NBC. This black woman had marched with Martin Luther King and been beaten half to death for the cause. Choked with emotion, she proclaimed this an historic day for America.

The anchor, who was also black, asked if she would agree that this demonstrated that the US really was an exceptional country because of its ability to change and overcome the mistakes of its past. It was exactly the sort of hyperbole that worried me.

The woman's demeanor changed quickly and dramatically, and she seemed almost hostile as she answered, “It proves that change is possible when people work for it. It doesn't just happen automatically, by magic. People have to work, fight, struggle, and die to make this country change.”

The anchor turned to pose the same question to a white man, who eagerly agreed. “This proves that anything is possible in America,” he declared, voice heavy with self-satisfaction. There was nothing contradictory about their statements, but when it came to subtext the two interviewees were miles apart. He almost made it sound as though the work were finished. She insisted that it was only just beginning.

Obama's victory does demonstrate America's extraordinary potential. Hopefully it will revive the sense of boundless possibility that has been this country's strength and which is sorely needed now. But, as his acceptance speech made clear, it demonstrates only potential. There is a tremendous amount of work and sacrifice ahead of us before we can even begin to realize that potential. I sincerely hope that our new president proves capable not only of inspiring but of leading, and that my countrymen prove willing to follow. I am certainly more hopeful about our prospects than I have been in a long time, and for that I offer my thanks and congratulations to Barack Obama.

Tales From a 7-11: Bear

Bear wasn't an employee, but he was one of our most colorful regular customers. I mean that both figuratively and literally: he was a hulking biker dude covered in ink from head to toe. Rose bushes entangled themselves with naked women on his arms, and his shiny bald head was decorated with the snearing face of a bear. Bear was a tattoo artist himself and the proprietor of a tattoo parlor called The Bear's Den.

Bear was easily 6'6, rippling with muscles, and as I've said, covered in tattoos. Under no circumstances would I have gotten on his bad side, and it's a testament to human stupidity that anyone ever did. He told me a story once about a customer of his who requested a custom-designed tattoo. They negotiated a price, and Bear spent a couple of hours tattooing him. When he was finished, the guy reached into his pocket and said, “Oh, shit, I've only got eighty-seven bucks.”

They went back and forth for a bit, but the guy insisted he couldn't get his hands on any more money and pleaded with Bear to accept much less than the price they'd agreed upon. Bear finally relented and told the guy to leave a warm, wet compress on the ink for 24 hours.

“Thing is,” Bear growled to me, “you're only supposed to leave it on for an hour. When he took the compress off, the ink would have run everywhere and left a giant brown smear permanently engraved on his arm.”

4 High is Good

Sorry at the airport on laptop so no easy access to HH but playing 10/20 HU guy opens for 60 on the button, I make it 211 with AKo, he makes it 533, I shove for a little over 2K, he CALLS with 42s. Naturally I am drawing dead when the flop comes 653.

The guy's definitely on the LAG side but not awful or a maniac, so I think it was probably a mis-click or an image play.

Really regretting the $7.95 I forked over for internet access....

Eight High is Good

OK I paired the river but 8-high would have been good anyway:

Full Tilt Poker, $3/$6 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

MP: $600
CO: $1,712.40
Hero (BTN): $1,495
SB: $1,992.90
BB: $318
UTG: $1,206

Pre-Flop: 7 8 dealt to Hero (BTN)
UTG folds, MP raises to $21, CO folds, Hero calls $21, SB folds, BB calls $15

Flop: ($66) 6 Q 5 (3 Players)
BB checks, MP checks, Hero bets $44, BB calls $44, MP folds

Turn: ($154) K (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $1,430 and is All-In, BB calls $253 and is All-In

River: ($660) 8 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

Results: $660 Pot ($3 Rake)
Hero showed 7 8 (a pair of Eights) and WON $657 (+$339 NET)
BB showed 3 4 (King Queen high) and LOST (-$318 NET)

Congratulations Diego

Poker buddy, former student, and regular reader Diego (rvrmonkey ronfezbuddy for those who have been owned by him at the tables) welcomed his second child, Dahlia, into the world yesterday. She's cute and all, but this pretty much dooms any chance of getting Diego into an NYC home game any time soon. But hey, congratulations anyway!


Edit: Confused Diego's screenname with that of another friend.

50K Day Ship It!

Had a decent morning at the tables but the real brag is for the Boston Debate League, which was awarded today a $50,000 grant from the Carl and Ruth Shapiro Foundation. The grant will support the BDL's work with debate programs in the Boston Public Schools over the next two years, most especially that of the League's new director (who's probably reading this- congratulations, Steve!).

Here's another random brag, this one from the Stars weekly $500. Sorry was having trouble with the converter, basically I had an open-ended draw on the turn and overbet shoved when a flush card came on the river:

PokerStars Game #21709641365: Tournament #116152197, $500+$30 Hold'em No Limit - Level III (100/200) - 2008/11/02 18:23:05 ET
Table '116152197 23' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: nofingclue11 (11900 in chips)
Seat 2: tiger76 (9370 in chips)
Seat 3: jesseluke82 (5480 in chips)
Seat 4: berra86 (13699 in chips)
Seat 5: lowlife039 (13250 in chips)
Seat 6: Mia_121 (9276 in chips)
Seat 7: Joao M. (10835 in chips)
Seat 8: foucault82 (8390 in chips)
Seat 9: Psychout (8600 in chips)

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to foucault82 [Tc 9s]
nofingclue11: folds
tiger76: folds
jesseluke82: folds
berra86: folds
lowlife039: folds
Mia_121: folds
Joao M.: folds
foucault82: calls 100
Psychout: checks

*** FLOP *** [Qc 8s 7c]
foucault82: bets 299
Psychout: calls 299

*** TURN *** [Qc 8s 7c] [5d]
foucault82: bets 666
Psychout: raises 666 to 1332
foucault82: calls 666

*** RIVER *** [Qc 8s 7c 5d] [2c]
foucault82: bets 6559 and is all-in
Psychout: folds
Uncalled bet (6559) returned to foucault82
foucault82 collected 3662 from pot
foucault82: doesn't show hand


He pretty much can't have a flush because he's not min-raising a flush draw on the turn. It just doesn't make sense to minimize his fold equity and re-open the betting, giving me the opportunity to blow him off his draw. So it's a great bluffing opportunity when the flush comes in. The only problem is that people are stubborn, especially when they have pretty hands (which the min-raise suggests he does), so I made the only bet that I thought I could force a tough lay down. I expected it to work damn near 100% of the time, though, which is why I found it interesting.

Knowing is (Only) Half the Battle

My latest poker article, Knowing is (Only) Half the Battle, is now appearing in the November issue of the Two Plus Two Internet Magazine. The article focuses on the way different betting lines taken in an otherwise identical hand can change which player has the edge:

"In other words, in two nearly identical situations, featuring two players in the same positions with the same pre-flop ranges and the same community cards and the same number of bets going into the pot, one of those situations is +EV for the Hero and one for the Villain depending on how the betting goes. If Hero bets flop, checks turn, and bets river, he is in a profitable situation. His opponent has given him information and also given up control over when and how money goes into the pot.

However, if Hero checks flop, calls turn, and finds himself facing a bet on the river, then he is the one who has given up information and control and now faces an unprofitable situation. This is a choice not about how to play top pair with a medium kicker but about how Hero ought to play most of his range most of the time."

Enjoy!

Tales From a 7-11: Hatty

Hatty was about my age, maybe a year older, but very much a teenager. The 7-11 where we worked was in Baltimore County, but it was just over the city line on Edmondson Avenue. Thus, it was quite accessible by public bus, which was how Hatty got there for her shifts.

She was the first person from a vastly different racial and socio-economic background with whom I'd had to interact regularly, but we actually hit it off quite well. She was fun to talk to and laughed at my jokes. Sometimes we played little tricks on each other

When her pregnancy started to show, we talked about the child's father. He was a few years older, but still in the picture. Her man wasn't working at the moment, which was why Hatty carried her unborn child thirty minutes each way on the bus five days a week to a 7-11 out in the county. He was looking for work, though, and she was sure they would get married one day.

Hatty asked if I had a girlfriend, and I fabricated a long story about how I was dating a divorced forty-year old mother of two. I let it slip that my little lady was currently locked up at Jessup but confessed that we had great sex during the bi-weekly conjugal visits she was permitted. I had Hatty going until I tried to tell her that this woman was black. She scoffed and replied, “Pfft, you couldn't get no black girl.”

Hatty left the store when she entered her third trimester, and I never saw her again.