Also my post repsonding to everyone's opinions does sound abrasive. I didn't mean it like that really. When you have contrasting POV then it will sound abrasive to anyone who doesn't agree with you 100 percent. Now to kick Andy down the stairs of knowledge.
"I don't think you have it" puts the man, your opponent to the test. It makes them think, "fuck...maybe he does have me beat" or "shit, I'm going to win this pot". It puts them in doubt and even if they fold then they will be questioning it for the next 20 minutes.
Andy, Andy, Andy. It's all part of the game. I can easily say that anyone with half a brain should have said, "wait a minute...I don't have the nuts...I can't re-raise him in this spot". Like I said...lying about one's hand is what poker is all about, especially in no limit.
NO LIMIT is a people game where the cards are insurance in case you read things wrong.
And I will lie straight to his face any day of the week to make sure he never knows what I am doing. Last I checked, lies = bluffs in poker and I'm pretty sure bluffing whether verbal or with chips is part of the game.
Again though, I was a punk. Just because it was a bitch thing to do does not mean that it is beneath me to do so since it is part of the game. Maybe it was overkill, but I needed to 100 percent guarantee that I got paid off for this hand because I NEED TO REPAIR MY XBOX AND I NEED CASH TO DO SO. So after hearing that you should say, "Anthony should play with you more often = Maybe we can finally get on Forza as a club." Hehe.
Now onto Derek's questions:
1.) Yes. But only if I haven't taken a doody earlier in the day.
2.) The only shoes on this planet are on the white man. Why can't a brother like Denzel get some shoes. (Glory reference for you ignants)
3.) YES. YES AND YES. I have grown up on 2 percent. I love the creaminess of it. That sounds nasty, but it is true. 1 percent feels a bit watered down. When I eat it with cereal I feel like the po' black child. And I want shoes on my feet.
4.) In my dreams once I slept with Pocahantas and she was shreiking like an animal. And yes my genitals look good as an animated caricature. Then I remember the motion got so repetitive that the animator must have just drawn two frames then told the film transfer guy to repeat it for the next 8 hours. You know your typical cartoon sex dream. =)
Jul 1, 2005
I wrote a post then I deleted it. If some of you saw it you might have agreed with me that the undertone of that post was a little harsh even though I didn't mean it to be. It is not that I am a censorship advocate, but rather I didn't want to come off harsh. So I will re-write this post while I'm waiting for my 78suited to raise with. Yeah, I'm not kidding.
Honesty
Thank you everyone for giving me some feedback on the situation. I don't have any sort of drama in my life so I need to take anything I can and change it to some sort of moral issue. After reading all of your posts and also dwelling on my own observations after replaying the hand in my head, I have come to terms with what I want to say and what to make of the situation which wasn't a big deal in the first place really.
To help illustrate the conclusions that I have come to, I have organized them into different sections and hopefully you will see how I see the situation. You might agree or not, but this is how it is for me.
How I View Poker
Obviously all of you know that I take the game very seriously. I think it is one of the most perfect games of all time. The reason is because you can win the pot without having the best hand. You have deception, strategy, math and people skills all at your disposal. Even if you aren't awesome at the math part like me, I can rely on my gut instinct which has saved me bets from time to time.
I realize that I play my most serious game whether I am at the card room, online or at home chilling with friends. I know sometimes I get caught up in the moment, but I think I am very good at keeping my play and the number one priority of having some time to chill with friends separate. If one of you were to put a bad beat on me I might be a little ticked at the poker gods, but not you personally since I understand that THE only thing that matters is us chilling.
Saying that, I think we all understand what I am about to say next. Whether or not someone like Anthony who doesn't play with us all the time understands this concept, it is not my place to teach him.
Sitting = Signing A Waiver That Your Money Is No Longer Your Money
If you sit down at ANY poker table and you buy chips then that money is GONE. It is no longer your money. You have chips. These represent markers. These markers represent who is "winning" in the game. Until you or I get up those markers do not have anyone's name on it.
Anthony decided for himself that he felt he could lose 10.00. We told him that you can buy in for as little or as much as you want. He opted for 10.00. He also understood that he could get up whenever he liked especially since he saw Bryant get up after running all of us over.
Sitting = Understanding Poker Is NEVER Fair
This section is to argue Tony's point. If you play any game where money is involved as well as luck, things will never be fair. You said that my play was unneccesary. I don't think it was. The reason is (and I left this out by accident, but realized I left it out after everyone already blogged) Anthony said outloud that he thought I might have QJ even before I announced that he "couldn't have a seven". I was up and down all night and I wanted chips or markers. More markers mean you either had lots of luck on your side or you won with some skill. I'll take either...and I didn't have a lot of markers. I needed to prove to myself that I could be the threat at this table.
Unfortunately for Anthony he had lots of chips because he sucked out on my dad on the river looking for the only 4 cards that could help him. My dad lost about 8 dollars in that pot without Anthony realizing the miracle he recieved. I try not to make it personal, but the only thing I was thinking was, "man...that sucks. But it will be a lot easier getting those chips from Anthony than my dad."
A little off track there...basically I felt I needed to win to prove to myself that I could win over someone with less experience. Sure you can say i've proved it, but it is ONE LONG SESSION. You must always strive to prove to yourself that you are one step ahead of the game. I wanted full value for my hand and unfortunately for Anthony, he had all the chips on the table.
Was the acting unnecessary? Sure if maybe I played Anthony every day and knew that I didn't need to try to win chips that very night. Yet I hardly see Anthony at the poker table so that coupled with the fact that he was well aware of what the nuts were for this particular hand...I needed to extract coin now.
Sitting = Unfair Advantage Part DUEX
This also goes with Tony and Andy's opinions that what I did was questionable. The truth of the matter is that with Tony's soccer argument again, he talks about exploiting something even though he already has an added edge would be wrong. If I just played my cards for what they were with no deception on my part then the game would be the worst game I've ever played. You are at the mercy of the deck. In fact if you were to say that acting was questionable, then you might as well say that I cannot use my gut feeling because I called Tony's bottom pair and was off by one increment. The bottom line is that I will use whatever tools I need to win the chips in the middle. If you see that as exploitation...then at least you are seeing correctly. That is exactly what it is and table talk within the confines of the rules is one of THE pivitol weapons in my game.
Now onto Andy. Andy by me saying that he "cannot have a 7" does imply that my hand is weaker than his. Yet the rules say that I cannot say anything about my hand as long as there are no other players in the pot. I never did. And how can I be punished for guessing what his cards are outloud as long as we are heads up? If implying is the name of the game here, then CHECK RAISING should also be penalized. By check raising you are implying that your hand is shit...then BAMMO...you jump up and smile because you just trapped the fish. Isn't that talking about your hand in an indirect and implied way?
Playing soft even though someone doesn't know the rules ruins the integrity of the game. Yeah...that is how serious I take poker...I'm worried about it's own integrity. To play soft against someone is giving them a handicap. That's all fine and dandy, but I'm tired of not being able to park in the fucking handicap spaces. I see people exploiting that just as much as I exploit other people's weaknesses and lack of knowledge at the poker table.
No Limit Cash = Cruel
I agree with Jonathan on this one. NL will be restricted to tournamanets unless we all decide that we are going to play NL cash. And again, if you sit down at the table regardless who you are or who you bring, it is not my place to play soft in order to accomodate the other players. Bryant thought 5.00 was enough for him to risk and he walked away a winner. We tried our best to limit your losses in case you did lose, but ultimately it was up to the individual.
However, back to the conversation we had way long time ago about me being concerned with other people's enjoyment and time...whatever you guys want to play is fine with me. Shit, I'd rather play Razz than Hold'em. =)
Shearing Sheep
Anthony doesn't play enough with us to be qualified as a sheep. Also I'm not sure who is holding the fucking clippers because I don't think any of us are good enough to even hold those clippers and also Anthony lost 10 whole whopping dollars that was his before he bought in. Last I checked he won a tournament so he is still up on us. He's probably calling us fish.
Brendan Is A Bitchcock
Yes I am. I'll say it. I personally don't think exploiting people on the felt is wrong. I don't think it was questionable at all. But I will say that it was a dirty way to transfer Anthony's marks to my stack. I'll admit that any day of the week. So what is the conclusion here? Where is the Doogie Howswer all powerful diary entry? Right here.
The Line; Bottom Line
A.) I'm sorry to Anthony for taking your stacks in one hit.
B.) He was the one that said "all-in". What am I supposed to do with the nuts? Fold?
C.) Anthony, while not knowing the odds, is underrated I think by those who thought I hustled him. You forget that he has a superpower of knowing when his outs are coming. Give him some credit. Sure he takes a lot of risks, but they are his risks with his chips...and as with anything...big risk usually means big rewards.
D.) The acting was NOT illegal and it never will be no matter who you are or where you are at as long as you are as Jonthan said, headsup. I'm sorry to Anthony again if he or any of you thought it was unnecesary. But come close to the monitor...I'm going to say something...
E.) I'll fucking do it again without hesitation...why?
F.) Because that is the beauty of poker and yesterday I wasn't sure about this...but I am now after thinking it through...me feeling bad will be squashed by my respect for the game and every which way you play it.
Honesty
Thank you everyone for giving me some feedback on the situation. I don't have any sort of drama in my life so I need to take anything I can and change it to some sort of moral issue. After reading all of your posts and also dwelling on my own observations after replaying the hand in my head, I have come to terms with what I want to say and what to make of the situation which wasn't a big deal in the first place really.
To help illustrate the conclusions that I have come to, I have organized them into different sections and hopefully you will see how I see the situation. You might agree or not, but this is how it is for me.
How I View Poker
Obviously all of you know that I take the game very seriously. I think it is one of the most perfect games of all time. The reason is because you can win the pot without having the best hand. You have deception, strategy, math and people skills all at your disposal. Even if you aren't awesome at the math part like me, I can rely on my gut instinct which has saved me bets from time to time.
I realize that I play my most serious game whether I am at the card room, online or at home chilling with friends. I know sometimes I get caught up in the moment, but I think I am very good at keeping my play and the number one priority of having some time to chill with friends separate. If one of you were to put a bad beat on me I might be a little ticked at the poker gods, but not you personally since I understand that THE only thing that matters is us chilling.
Saying that, I think we all understand what I am about to say next. Whether or not someone like Anthony who doesn't play with us all the time understands this concept, it is not my place to teach him.
Sitting = Signing A Waiver That Your Money Is No Longer Your Money
If you sit down at ANY poker table and you buy chips then that money is GONE. It is no longer your money. You have chips. These represent markers. These markers represent who is "winning" in the game. Until you or I get up those markers do not have anyone's name on it.
Anthony decided for himself that he felt he could lose 10.00. We told him that you can buy in for as little or as much as you want. He opted for 10.00. He also understood that he could get up whenever he liked especially since he saw Bryant get up after running all of us over.
Sitting = Understanding Poker Is NEVER Fair
This section is to argue Tony's point. If you play any game where money is involved as well as luck, things will never be fair. You said that my play was unneccesary. I don't think it was. The reason is (and I left this out by accident, but realized I left it out after everyone already blogged) Anthony said outloud that he thought I might have QJ even before I announced that he "couldn't have a seven". I was up and down all night and I wanted chips or markers. More markers mean you either had lots of luck on your side or you won with some skill. I'll take either...and I didn't have a lot of markers. I needed to prove to myself that I could be the threat at this table.
Unfortunately for Anthony he had lots of chips because he sucked out on my dad on the river looking for the only 4 cards that could help him. My dad lost about 8 dollars in that pot without Anthony realizing the miracle he recieved. I try not to make it personal, but the only thing I was thinking was, "man...that sucks. But it will be a lot easier getting those chips from Anthony than my dad."
A little off track there...basically I felt I needed to win to prove to myself that I could win over someone with less experience. Sure you can say i've proved it, but it is ONE LONG SESSION. You must always strive to prove to yourself that you are one step ahead of the game. I wanted full value for my hand and unfortunately for Anthony, he had all the chips on the table.
Was the acting unnecessary? Sure if maybe I played Anthony every day and knew that I didn't need to try to win chips that very night. Yet I hardly see Anthony at the poker table so that coupled with the fact that he was well aware of what the nuts were for this particular hand...I needed to extract coin now.
Sitting = Unfair Advantage Part DUEX
This also goes with Tony and Andy's opinions that what I did was questionable. The truth of the matter is that with Tony's soccer argument again, he talks about exploiting something even though he already has an added edge would be wrong. If I just played my cards for what they were with no deception on my part then the game would be the worst game I've ever played. You are at the mercy of the deck. In fact if you were to say that acting was questionable, then you might as well say that I cannot use my gut feeling because I called Tony's bottom pair and was off by one increment. The bottom line is that I will use whatever tools I need to win the chips in the middle. If you see that as exploitation...then at least you are seeing correctly. That is exactly what it is and table talk within the confines of the rules is one of THE pivitol weapons in my game.
Now onto Andy. Andy by me saying that he "cannot have a 7" does imply that my hand is weaker than his. Yet the rules say that I cannot say anything about my hand as long as there are no other players in the pot. I never did. And how can I be punished for guessing what his cards are outloud as long as we are heads up? If implying is the name of the game here, then CHECK RAISING should also be penalized. By check raising you are implying that your hand is shit...then BAMMO...you jump up and smile because you just trapped the fish. Isn't that talking about your hand in an indirect and implied way?
Playing soft even though someone doesn't know the rules ruins the integrity of the game. Yeah...that is how serious I take poker...I'm worried about it's own integrity. To play soft against someone is giving them a handicap. That's all fine and dandy, but I'm tired of not being able to park in the fucking handicap spaces. I see people exploiting that just as much as I exploit other people's weaknesses and lack of knowledge at the poker table.
No Limit Cash = Cruel
I agree with Jonathan on this one. NL will be restricted to tournamanets unless we all decide that we are going to play NL cash. And again, if you sit down at the table regardless who you are or who you bring, it is not my place to play soft in order to accomodate the other players. Bryant thought 5.00 was enough for him to risk and he walked away a winner. We tried our best to limit your losses in case you did lose, but ultimately it was up to the individual.
However, back to the conversation we had way long time ago about me being concerned with other people's enjoyment and time...whatever you guys want to play is fine with me. Shit, I'd rather play Razz than Hold'em. =)
Shearing Sheep
Anthony doesn't play enough with us to be qualified as a sheep. Also I'm not sure who is holding the fucking clippers because I don't think any of us are good enough to even hold those clippers and also Anthony lost 10 whole whopping dollars that was his before he bought in. Last I checked he won a tournament so he is still up on us. He's probably calling us fish.
Brendan Is A Bitchcock
Yes I am. I'll say it. I personally don't think exploiting people on the felt is wrong. I don't think it was questionable at all. But I will say that it was a dirty way to transfer Anthony's marks to my stack. I'll admit that any day of the week. So what is the conclusion here? Where is the Doogie Howswer all powerful diary entry? Right here.
The Line; Bottom Line
A.) I'm sorry to Anthony for taking your stacks in one hit.
B.) He was the one that said "all-in". What am I supposed to do with the nuts? Fold?
C.) Anthony, while not knowing the odds, is underrated I think by those who thought I hustled him. You forget that he has a superpower of knowing when his outs are coming. Give him some credit. Sure he takes a lot of risks, but they are his risks with his chips...and as with anything...big risk usually means big rewards.
D.) The acting was NOT illegal and it never will be no matter who you are or where you are at as long as you are as Jonthan said, headsup. I'm sorry to Anthony again if he or any of you thought it was unnecesary. But come close to the monitor...I'm going to say something...
E.) I'll fucking do it again without hesitation...why?
F.) Because that is the beauty of poker and yesterday I wasn't sure about this...but I am now after thinking it through...me feeling bad will be squashed by my respect for the game and every which way you play it.
Jun 30, 2005
The hand at hand
"You can shear a sheep many times, but skin it only once." Brendan's never bothered to learn that. If he scared off dead money I will be very disappointed.
Now THAT would be messed up... so I'm half joking.
Obviously the situation can be argued either way, and you other guys have already made good points. Brendan did what was strategically effective and chose to take advantage of Anthony's lack of experience with poker and our game in particular. Certainly questionable and unnecessary, but not a right-wrong situation, especially since it's poker. Someone should get Anthony's honest opinion.
Etiquette
As I see it, there is one simple rule: Do not discuss anyone's cards unless YOU are heads up.
Examples:
If you folded and the hand is still going, don't say...
- "I keep getting seven two offsuit."
- "Shucks, I woulda hit my gutshot."
- "This pot would've been mine."
- "Fooey."
If you're still in the hand and you are not heads up, don't say...
- "Tony's obviously bluffing, but what do you have?"
- "Jon has top pair but I'm gonna draw out on him."
- "Derek I saw your eights, just fold 'em."
Discussing the cards when you are not involved, or before it is heads up, gives undue information to the players and may affect the play of the hand.
However, once the hand is heads up, I see nothing wrong with the players involved in the hand saying whatever they please. It's all part of the mind game.
Still, it is simpler to have an all-encompassing rule against discussion of cards before the hand is over: Do not discuss anyone's cards until the hand is over. That would avoid any such moral ambiguity.
A "friendly" game
The concept of "friendly" simply does not fit with poker. It's like we've heard before, "There are no friends at the poker table," and "You've gotta think of it as a war." Poker is about taking as much as you can from your opponents, by whatever means necessary (within the confines of the rules and table etiquette). Deception is an important tool and without it the game would be much less interesting.
There are two extremes:
(1) Totally serious: Play your best with any strategies you know, at stakes to make your spouse cry, without apology. Try to gut your friends like the fish they are.
(2) Totally friendly: Goof around, play soft, and give all the money back when it's over. Hugs and s'mores before we tuck each other in.
To me, a real-world friendly game of poker means a compromise between the two:
- Serious strategy and the best play we are capable of
- Lighthearted tone and fun conversation
- Stakes low enough that no one really cares about losing their buy-in
The effects of no-limit
This is part of the reason I like the no-limit limit to be limited to no-limit tournaments. Limit. NO. In a tournament you can lose all your chips in one hand, but your buy-in (plus, occasionally, rebuys) is the most money you can lose. When this is no more than $5 or $10, no one has financial reason to get upset. If you can't afford to lose $5, dinner is on me.
When you get busted out of a tournament you probably think back to how much you put in: "Well, $5 gone." But when you play a cash game, buy in $5, win for a while, then lose $20, that last amount sticks with you. "I can't believe I just lost $20 in one hand." Each chip has real money value, which is not the case in tournaments. There was a point you could have stood up, claimed sleepiness, and gone home a big winner. I've had this feeling many times, just with way more money lost.
On the other hand, only in cash games can everyone stay involved all night long. That's fun.
Back on the first hand, only in tournaments is there a set number of people guaranteed to get some money back. It is possible in any cash game for one player to win all the chips and be despised for weeks.
So I would suggest no-limit for tournaments (for excitement with controlled cash risk), and low limit for cash games (for variety and practice, and so no one gets crazy screwed).
Legitimate words & phrases
Always
Almost always
Usually
Sometimes/Occasionally
Rarely
Almost Never
Never
"You can shear a sheep many times, but skin it only once." Brendan's never bothered to learn that. If he scared off dead money I will be very disappointed.
Now THAT would be messed up... so I'm half joking.
Obviously the situation can be argued either way, and you other guys have already made good points. Brendan did what was strategically effective and chose to take advantage of Anthony's lack of experience with poker and our game in particular. Certainly questionable and unnecessary, but not a right-wrong situation, especially since it's poker. Someone should get Anthony's honest opinion.
Etiquette
As I see it, there is one simple rule: Do not discuss anyone's cards unless YOU are heads up.
Examples:
If you folded and the hand is still going, don't say...
- "I keep getting seven two offsuit."
- "Shucks, I woulda hit my gutshot."
- "This pot would've been mine."
- "Fooey."
If you're still in the hand and you are not heads up, don't say...
- "Tony's obviously bluffing, but what do you have?"
- "Jon has top pair but I'm gonna draw out on him."
- "Derek I saw your eights, just fold 'em."
Discussing the cards when you are not involved, or before it is heads up, gives undue information to the players and may affect the play of the hand.
However, once the hand is heads up, I see nothing wrong with the players involved in the hand saying whatever they please. It's all part of the mind game.
Still, it is simpler to have an all-encompassing rule against discussion of cards before the hand is over: Do not discuss anyone's cards until the hand is over. That would avoid any such moral ambiguity.
A "friendly" game
The concept of "friendly" simply does not fit with poker. It's like we've heard before, "There are no friends at the poker table," and "You've gotta think of it as a war." Poker is about taking as much as you can from your opponents, by whatever means necessary (within the confines of the rules and table etiquette). Deception is an important tool and without it the game would be much less interesting.
There are two extremes:
(1) Totally serious: Play your best with any strategies you know, at stakes to make your spouse cry, without apology. Try to gut your friends like the fish they are.
(2) Totally friendly: Goof around, play soft, and give all the money back when it's over. Hugs and s'mores before we tuck each other in.
To me, a real-world friendly game of poker means a compromise between the two:
- Serious strategy and the best play we are capable of
- Lighthearted tone and fun conversation
- Stakes low enough that no one really cares about losing their buy-in
The effects of no-limit
This is part of the reason I like the no-limit limit to be limited to no-limit tournaments. Limit. NO. In a tournament you can lose all your chips in one hand, but your buy-in (plus, occasionally, rebuys) is the most money you can lose. When this is no more than $5 or $10, no one has financial reason to get upset. If you can't afford to lose $5, dinner is on me.
When you get busted out of a tournament you probably think back to how much you put in: "Well, $5 gone." But when you play a cash game, buy in $5, win for a while, then lose $20, that last amount sticks with you. "I can't believe I just lost $20 in one hand." Each chip has real money value, which is not the case in tournaments. There was a point you could have stood up, claimed sleepiness, and gone home a big winner. I've had this feeling many times, just with way more money lost.
On the other hand, only in cash games can everyone stay involved all night long. That's fun.
Back on the first hand, only in tournaments is there a set number of people guaranteed to get some money back. It is possible in any cash game for one player to win all the chips and be despised for weeks.
So I would suggest no-limit for tournaments (for excitement with controlled cash risk), and low limit for cash games (for variety and practice, and so no one gets crazy screwed).
Legitimate words & phrases
Always
Almost always
Usually
Sometimes/Occasionally
Rarely
Almost Never
Never
Wow, from a learning stand-point it is very interesting to read the thought process one goes through. I have a ways to go before I can even do that.
Reading your entry, I didn't think it was a dick move. If you were going to say that kind of stuff with regulars, I don't think it's bad that you said it to someone newer to our table. And I don't know if this ever came to mind, but I think as a long term strategy is that it's a good one. You get directly into a players head (assuming he buys in again or plays with you again) and if you play with someone who doesn't have a short memory, you have a total advantage on him. I find it more interesting when you talk aloud on what you think your opponent has. Though if I were in Anthony's position I would be pissed hahaha, but you know me. It would be because of the competitiveness vs. what you said.
I think also that this could have a benefit on Anthony to try and figure out more what you had to raise him that high. I got the feeling after playing with him is that he's definitely a risk taker, but isn't taking them for the right reason. When you're wreckless on every hand, playing every hand, it takes away from the player. To see someone winning in that capacity gets to me at times because when I'm at the table I'm really trying to learn something new and improve my play. But one thing I did learn from last night, in the long run, the player who plays wreckless is going to lose. Hopefully Anthony came out of last night learning a few nuances of the game since I know he doesn't play as much as we do and doesn't have that experience.
Going back to the learning part, I feel like I'm getting a little better at betting and extracting the most that I could out of people. Last night, was good practice for me, though it wasn't a tournament, I think I can take what I tried out and use it in a tournament setting.
"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do, that defines me. "
Batman (Christian Bale) - Batman Begins
Reading your entry, I didn't think it was a dick move. If you were going to say that kind of stuff with regulars, I don't think it's bad that you said it to someone newer to our table. And I don't know if this ever came to mind, but I think as a long term strategy is that it's a good one. You get directly into a players head (assuming he buys in again or plays with you again) and if you play with someone who doesn't have a short memory, you have a total advantage on him. I find it more interesting when you talk aloud on what you think your opponent has. Though if I were in Anthony's position I would be pissed hahaha, but you know me. It would be because of the competitiveness vs. what you said.
I think also that this could have a benefit on Anthony to try and figure out more what you had to raise him that high. I got the feeling after playing with him is that he's definitely a risk taker, but isn't taking them for the right reason. When you're wreckless on every hand, playing every hand, it takes away from the player. To see someone winning in that capacity gets to me at times because when I'm at the table I'm really trying to learn something new and improve my play. But one thing I did learn from last night, in the long run, the player who plays wreckless is going to lose. Hopefully Anthony came out of last night learning a few nuances of the game since I know he doesn't play as much as we do and doesn't have that experience.
Going back to the learning part, I feel like I'm getting a little better at betting and extracting the most that I could out of people. Last night, was good practice for me, though it wasn't a tournament, I think I can take what I tried out and use it in a tournament setting.
"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do, that defines me. "
Batman (Christian Bale) - Batman Begins
**There is a point to this blog besides me talking about Poker AGAIN...besides I'm playing Paradise Poker and have nothing better to do.
So we just played a cash game comprising of No-Limit Hold'em. I honestly didn't think I had the upper hand in this game since Tony and my dad (who I just found out from Tony a couple weeks ago that he plays NL online and not limit) both play on the internet where I tend to hide out in shallow waters and stick to my game of lower than shit limit. Anyway we actually had an awesome turnout for like a 1 hour notice. The game started off with Bryant, Tony, my dad and I. Later on in the game Derek and Anthony joined us.
I'll give Bryant his props right off the get go. He bought in for only five dollars while the rest of us riverboat gamblers bought in for 10.00. After some calls from Anthony and Tony and flush draws that always seemed to come for Bryant (hehe) he walked away with about a nice 20+ dollar profit. Well Bryant had to go and I think Tony also tapped out at about the same time.
Of course Anthony and Derek weren't finished with my dad and I.
So we kept on playing. Now here is where the story gets a little interesting and I honestly want to know what you guys think...
Now I am confident, but I never let my ego get the best of me since I know that egos have been the doom of too many poker players. HOWEVER, I will say that I am a better cardplayer than Anthony. So basically this hand came up...pardon the 3rd person talk...its easier to keep the hand straight when I type it. I wrote what I was thinking in parenthesis.
Blinds .10 - .20
Brendan is on the small blind w/JQ offsuit. Brendan makes it .40 to go.
Anthony calls.
Flop is Ks 8d 9c
(This gives me a gutshot draw. I know Anthony can have any 2 cards in the deck)
Brendan checks.
Anthony checks.
Turn is 10c
(Bingo. I have no clue how I pulled that out of my ass, but hooray for free cards...I now have the absolute nuts and think about how I want to play this. I know Anthony likes to fish and I don't want him to fold just yet...even if he has the club draw. I'll take those odds any day. I'll go with the amount that I feel Anthony has been calling.)
Brendan bets 1.00
Anthony quickly calls and says "I gotta give it a try right?"
(Now I know he's on a draw [obviously] and hope that the board doesn't come with a club that also pairs the board...which the board pairing isn't a huge problem. Anthony would have raised me if he had two pair and who knows...perhaps pairing the board will give him tripps or even make him two pair if he is holding one pair now.)
The river is a 6d
(I was stupid and wasn't looking at Anthony when the river came. I usually always look at people, but this was a clear tell on my part that I wasn't even concerned with what he had. And you probably won't believe me on this...but I think my play coming up will show you that it is at least legitimate. I was shuffling my chips trying to figure out what exactly he had so I can extract full value for the nuts...then I glanced up and saw Anthony looking down at the board with his head microscopically bobbing. I knew it right then and there. He had either a K7 or A7. He made his 10 high straight on the river. Now I knew I was going to get paid off...now I need to make a bet that is small enough for him to come over the top of me. I know from past experiences with Anthony that while he doesn't necessarily take it personally, it seems that he can easily get into a raising war with someone.)
Brendan bets 2.50
Anthony raises to 4.00 total
(This assures me even more. Again I'll make it a small bet to go)
Brendan re-raises to 6.00 total
Anthony re-raises and makes it 14.80 total
Brendan calls.
Anthony shows A7 for 10 high straight
Brendan shows JQ for King high straight
Now here is the question I am going to ask and I want an honest answer. There is one part to this story I am leaving out. While I had the nuts and knew that Anthony was going to get all his all or most of his money in the pot after the river came out I started looking frustrated and confused and also said things like, "You can't have that 7." "There is no way you rivered again." "You just can't have that 7." and put in my bet with a "I don't think you have it."
Is this wrong? Now against any of the regulars I wouldn't think twice about this. However, Anthony doesn't play that often with us and I exploited that during this one hand that tapped him out. Obviously he wasn't happy that I was pretending to be worried about the 7, but he took it well. So what I want all of you who play with us is to answer this question...because even I feel bad at the poker table when I take all of my friends chips in a CASH GAME not a tournament.
WAS THIS FUCKED UP OF ME TO ACT LIKE THE SEVEN BOTHERED ME?
Well I'm not totally feeling bad about this, don't get me wrong. I've studied, talked with Jonathan, logged in a bunch of hours playing cards so I deserve a little something back. I was just wondering what your thoughts on this was...
BTW for those that were there last night but had to leave early. The very next hand my dad wanted to keep playing heads up with his 10 dollars in chips. I called his final all in 5.00 bet with bottom pair and caught him bluffing. (My dad is gonna kill me for telling you that.) So I came out with a 40 dollar profit last night.
So we just played a cash game comprising of No-Limit Hold'em. I honestly didn't think I had the upper hand in this game since Tony and my dad (who I just found out from Tony a couple weeks ago that he plays NL online and not limit) both play on the internet where I tend to hide out in shallow waters and stick to my game of lower than shit limit. Anyway we actually had an awesome turnout for like a 1 hour notice. The game started off with Bryant, Tony, my dad and I. Later on in the game Derek and Anthony joined us.
I'll give Bryant his props right off the get go. He bought in for only five dollars while the rest of us riverboat gamblers bought in for 10.00. After some calls from Anthony and Tony and flush draws that always seemed to come for Bryant (hehe) he walked away with about a nice 20+ dollar profit. Well Bryant had to go and I think Tony also tapped out at about the same time.
Of course Anthony and Derek weren't finished with my dad and I.
So we kept on playing. Now here is where the story gets a little interesting and I honestly want to know what you guys think...
Now I am confident, but I never let my ego get the best of me since I know that egos have been the doom of too many poker players. HOWEVER, I will say that I am a better cardplayer than Anthony. So basically this hand came up...pardon the 3rd person talk...its easier to keep the hand straight when I type it. I wrote what I was thinking in parenthesis.
Blinds .10 - .20
Brendan is on the small blind w/JQ offsuit. Brendan makes it .40 to go.
Anthony calls.
Flop is Ks 8d 9c
(This gives me a gutshot draw. I know Anthony can have any 2 cards in the deck)
Brendan checks.
Anthony checks.
Turn is 10c
(Bingo. I have no clue how I pulled that out of my ass, but hooray for free cards...I now have the absolute nuts and think about how I want to play this. I know Anthony likes to fish and I don't want him to fold just yet...even if he has the club draw. I'll take those odds any day. I'll go with the amount that I feel Anthony has been calling.)
Brendan bets 1.00
Anthony quickly calls and says "I gotta give it a try right?"
(Now I know he's on a draw [obviously] and hope that the board doesn't come with a club that also pairs the board...which the board pairing isn't a huge problem. Anthony would have raised me if he had two pair and who knows...perhaps pairing the board will give him tripps or even make him two pair if he is holding one pair now.)
The river is a 6d
(I was stupid and wasn't looking at Anthony when the river came. I usually always look at people, but this was a clear tell on my part that I wasn't even concerned with what he had. And you probably won't believe me on this...but I think my play coming up will show you that it is at least legitimate. I was shuffling my chips trying to figure out what exactly he had so I can extract full value for the nuts...then I glanced up and saw Anthony looking down at the board with his head microscopically bobbing. I knew it right then and there. He had either a K7 or A7. He made his 10 high straight on the river. Now I knew I was going to get paid off...now I need to make a bet that is small enough for him to come over the top of me. I know from past experiences with Anthony that while he doesn't necessarily take it personally, it seems that he can easily get into a raising war with someone.)
Brendan bets 2.50
Anthony raises to 4.00 total
(This assures me even more. Again I'll make it a small bet to go)
Brendan re-raises to 6.00 total
Anthony re-raises and makes it 14.80 total
Brendan calls.
Anthony shows A7 for 10 high straight
Brendan shows JQ for King high straight
Now here is the question I am going to ask and I want an honest answer. There is one part to this story I am leaving out. While I had the nuts and knew that Anthony was going to get all his all or most of his money in the pot after the river came out I started looking frustrated and confused and also said things like, "You can't have that 7." "There is no way you rivered again." "You just can't have that 7." and put in my bet with a "I don't think you have it."
Is this wrong? Now against any of the regulars I wouldn't think twice about this. However, Anthony doesn't play that often with us and I exploited that during this one hand that tapped him out. Obviously he wasn't happy that I was pretending to be worried about the 7, but he took it well. So what I want all of you who play with us is to answer this question...because even I feel bad at the poker table when I take all of my friends chips in a CASH GAME not a tournament.
WAS THIS FUCKED UP OF ME TO ACT LIKE THE SEVEN BOTHERED ME?
Well I'm not totally feeling bad about this, don't get me wrong. I've studied, talked with Jonathan, logged in a bunch of hours playing cards so I deserve a little something back. I was just wondering what your thoughts on this was...
BTW for those that were there last night but had to leave early. The very next hand my dad wanted to keep playing heads up with his 10 dollars in chips. I called his final all in 5.00 bet with bottom pair and caught him bluffing. (My dad is gonna kill me for telling you that.) So I came out with a 40 dollar profit last night.
Jun 29, 2005
To answer Jonathan's questions since I know he will be playing 6/12 soon, there wasn't too much difference. I really tried to watch for nuances throughout the game to see if the texture was the same. It basically is like 3/6 except that your raises do get a little more respect than at a 3/6 or 2/4 game.
For example, UTG I decided to raise with my AA. I past me might have limped in, but we all now know that you must protect your aces...just like Lederer said, "you need to protect your aces like they are your first born." So this pretty much narrowed down the field to 2 other players. In any 3/6 game you might have 5 people seeing the flop with you. Well just like I said in my post below, my aces got cracked, but at least I wasn't losing to some shit J7suited. The hand I believe that beat me at this particular hand was KQ suited that made his flush on the river...but not before I made him pay for his draw. Unfortunately this time he made it.
The other thing I noticed were that people weren't as cry, cry, crying about how they never make hands. There was the occasional blow up but not as much as 3/6 in my past experiences.
Bottom line: I think out of all of us Jonathan has what it takes to win at 6/12. Perhaps even me, but so far I'm down 200 at 6/12. Haha! The rest of you don't worry...you aren't missing much except for 60/70 dollar pots. =)
Bottom, bottom line: Jonathan, not sure if this was much of a factor, but I don't have the bankroll that I want to sit at a 6/12 table. I'm not sure if this in anyway affected how I played, I know in my decisions at the table it didn't, but who knows...maybe on a subconscious level it might have.
For example, UTG I decided to raise with my AA. I past me might have limped in, but we all now know that you must protect your aces...just like Lederer said, "you need to protect your aces like they are your first born." So this pretty much narrowed down the field to 2 other players. In any 3/6 game you might have 5 people seeing the flop with you. Well just like I said in my post below, my aces got cracked, but at least I wasn't losing to some shit J7suited. The hand I believe that beat me at this particular hand was KQ suited that made his flush on the river...but not before I made him pay for his draw. Unfortunately this time he made it.
The other thing I noticed were that people weren't as cry, cry, crying about how they never make hands. There was the occasional blow up but not as much as 3/6 in my past experiences.
Bottom line: I think out of all of us Jonathan has what it takes to win at 6/12. Perhaps even me, but so far I'm down 200 at 6/12. Haha! The rest of you don't worry...you aren't missing much except for 60/70 dollar pots. =)
Bottom, bottom line: Jonathan, not sure if this was much of a factor, but I don't have the bankroll that I want to sit at a 6/12 table. I'm not sure if this in anyway affected how I played, I know in my decisions at the table it didn't, but who knows...maybe on a subconscious level it might have.
Congrats Tony! Since we both finished fourth before I think the winner is the one who made the most money against the larger field. That is me. Haha! Just kidding. I always said that I thought you had just the right amount of gamble...well maybe a just a tad too much...but I think your placing proves it! Seriously, good job.
Now a good poker blog with a shitty poker blog. I'm going to make this short and sweet. I'm sure my dad will be disappointed with this one...
- I go to Bay101 after Stitch's birthday dinner.
- It's about 10:30 by the time I get there. I was feeling a little tired.
- I took out 2 bills from the bank earlier today.
- I see no names on the 3/6 list. Cool shit.
- I sit down for about 45 minutes and I'm up 20 but feel extremely bored. Then I hear...
- Seating now on 6/12. I decide that it is time I grow some balls and try it.
- I sit down. I look around and I see 4 people with sunglasses on.
- All of them are older than me except one guy who looked about my age.
- I sit down and buy 200 dollars worth of chips.
- In 2 hours I am up about a rack (200 dollars)
- Good news is that I felt I could beat the game. I didn't feel intimidated at all.
- Bad news is that I felt I wasn't playing my best game.
- I didn't go on tilt, but after being up 200 bucks I couldn't make a hand.
- My aces got cracked three times. No straight or flushes after being up 200.
- So about 45 mintues later after the above statement happened...I was back to even.
- I KNOW IT IS BAD MONEY MANAGEMENT. I SHOULD HAVE LEFT. PLEASE DON'T LECTURE.
- BUT on the other hand even though I felt I was playing just a little sloppy, I wasn't through with my 6/12 experiment.
- Cut to the chase...I lost my initial buy in. You are going to have to believe me that I was not on tilt, the cards just weren't there tonight...you know after I won.
- So fuck me and my drive to keep playing. But at least I can say I tried it and while writing this I am playing Paradise Poker 3/6 and I'm up 150.00
Again congrats Tony!
Now a good poker blog with a shitty poker blog. I'm going to make this short and sweet. I'm sure my dad will be disappointed with this one...
- I go to Bay101 after Stitch's birthday dinner.
- It's about 10:30 by the time I get there. I was feeling a little tired.
- I took out 2 bills from the bank earlier today.
- I see no names on the 3/6 list. Cool shit.
- I sit down for about 45 minutes and I'm up 20 but feel extremely bored. Then I hear...
- Seating now on 6/12. I decide that it is time I grow some balls and try it.
- I sit down. I look around and I see 4 people with sunglasses on.
- All of them are older than me except one guy who looked about my age.
- I sit down and buy 200 dollars worth of chips.
- In 2 hours I am up about a rack (200 dollars)
- Good news is that I felt I could beat the game. I didn't feel intimidated at all.
- Bad news is that I felt I wasn't playing my best game.
- I didn't go on tilt, but after being up 200 bucks I couldn't make a hand.
- My aces got cracked three times. No straight or flushes after being up 200.
- So about 45 mintues later after the above statement happened...I was back to even.
- I KNOW IT IS BAD MONEY MANAGEMENT. I SHOULD HAVE LEFT. PLEASE DON'T LECTURE.
- BUT on the other hand even though I felt I was playing just a little sloppy, I wasn't through with my 6/12 experiment.
- Cut to the chase...I lost my initial buy in. You are going to have to believe me that I was not on tilt, the cards just weren't there tonight...you know after I won.
- So fuck me and my drive to keep playing. But at least I can say I tried it and while writing this I am playing Paradise Poker 3/6 and I'm up 150.00
Again congrats Tony!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
