High On Poker

Besides my money, there is something that online poker has that no video game can replace. Therein lies the difficulty in my separation from online poker.

Admittedly, one of the aspects of online poker that I focused on during our long breakup was the fact that it was like a video game. Growing up with videogaming, literally WITH videogaming as it too grew up, I was constantly exposed to the joy of joysticks. Atari begat Commodore begat Nintendo begat Sega Genesis and so on. And in the end, a generation of children learned the joy of beating a game just for the pleasure of getting a splash page and the game credits.

Hmmm. Sounds good. Online poker comes along, and meanwhile, my hands were all cramping up thanks to time killers like Grand Theft Auto in its many incantations. Suddenly, I was playing a new type of videogame, one worth money. And that is it. That is the difference. Not the money exactly, but the real world implications.

As I tried to avoid online poker, I distracted myself with various videogames. None of them are particularly interesting. All killed time and offered some challenge. The awards were all the same. A new cut scene, a new mission or board. I believe that blogging is literary masturbation, essentially done only for oneself. Videogames, as it turns out, is just technological masturbation. In the end, all you are left with is a spent game and a feeling of guilt for the time you wasted. Or, I suppose, the time I wasted.

When videogames began feeling meaningless, online poker entered my life. Here was a videogame that had real world implications. I could win real dollars and cents. Suddenly the time wasted on an endeavor like Zelda was not one solely grounded in self-centered geekiness. It was a challenge that could advance me and wifey Kim, and pay for our new mattress or large screen tv or vacation.

When I returned to videogames, I relearned my love of the games. And then they began to wear old. I avoided joining the MMORPGHSAWs, those big multiplayer games that seem to be social networks more than anything. To me, this was the epitome of time-sucking games, ones that had a built in social pressure to play. I met many friends through online poker and this blog, so I was determined NOT to open myself up to another group of gamers. Call it snobbiness or antisocialness. Whatever the case, I wasn’t and I’m still not interested.

But here’s the thing. With some downtime last night (wifey Kim has been working non-stop on a computerized communication thingee for one of her clients), I decided to fire up a videogame. I chose one of the Command & Conquer games that I have yet to beat, and after getting my ass handed to me twice, I just didn’t care. What was the point, really? I should have better things to do with my time. I mean, I don’t, but I should.

So, I fired up PokerStars, and with some trepidation, I went back to work on my $20+ bankroll. Where to go, I wondered. And then I settled on it, a $6.50 Turbo HORSE game.

This was what online poker used to be about for me. It was low stakes. Stakes so low, I barely even noticed winning…or losing. But the truth is, this is probably what I should be playing. I don’t need to be playing 5/10 limit games online. My online game is just not there yet, and all I’m doing is leaking off my live game winnings (which so far this year after only one session is about -$95, but I expect to change that soon). I DON’T play CONSISTENTLY well online. And hence, I SHOULDN’T be playing those higher stakes games, plain and simple.

I won the SNG for a $18 or so profit, before losing a PLO8 SNG for a $6.50. But I had a lot of fun, and losing wasn’t going to hurt me. Maybe this is what I need to do. Play more low stakes SNGs. Use it as a placebo, a time killer that doesn’t cost much but still is legitimate poker (play chips = illegitimate poker). Maybe this is what online poker will have to be for me.

I still don’t know how I’m going to play it. I’ll probably keep with an SNG or so per night at the low stakes. It’ll be good for discipline and keep my poker game from getting rusty. Meanwhile, I’ve arranged a bevvy of live games to play.

The first is this Thursday. I had brought Matty Ebs to the SIF game and SoxLover‘s birthday game, mostly because Matty knows how to carry himself at a poker table. He plays well, but just as importantly, he plays well with others. As it turns out, the tides have changed. This time, Matty got me into a lawyers’ poker game in the city. Its been a while since I’ve been a stranger at someone else’s home game, but I’m looking forward to it. The game’s on Thursday, and there’s a good chance you’ll be hearing about it here on Friday.

As a final addendum, I want to thank everyone for the well wishes and comments yesterday. I also want to maybe correct something that I didn’t make clear. It is embarassing to lose so much of one’s online bankroll at once, playing above that bankroll’s limitations. That said, there are times in this game that you just face the wrong end of variance. You get second-best hands, or you get sucked out. Sure, that begets some tiltage, but to an extent, that’s a part of the game too. My point is, while I am not happy about those losses, my embarassment stems from the proportion to my online bankroll. It does not arise out of my frustration in my own game. The only problem I have with my play was that I was playing too high stakes and I didn’t quit when I saw that it would be an uphill struggle.

Thanks for reading. Until next time, make mine poker!

Yeah. How to put it? Hmmm…In the vast lexicon of poker blog topics, this is probably one of the trickiest to start. Even thinking about writing it makes my stomach turn. But this is the reality that we live in, and we at HoP (we being me) strive to give you unfiltered content. So, let’s just get it out there.

For the year, I am down over $600 already. There, that wasn’t so bad. I mean, sometimes you just play 1/2 NL with a bunch of bloggers and play shitty. Sometimes, you try to take a decent seemingly orphaned pot with a flush draw and inside straight draw and someone from Pokerworks re-raises you with top pair and you sorta have to call because you are getting great odds. Sometimes, you don’t follow your own advice and play inebriated. And sometimes, you just don’t give a fudge because you think, “I already gave up on online poker, so this is just tooling around with friends.” I suppose, sometimes you might even rationalize your loss. Hey, it happens.

There might also be times that you have not much to do on a weekend, so you decide to play some Razz and TD on Stars. You might also prefer shorthanded Razz tables, and since the shorthanded tables seem to be at 5/10, you decide to play 5/10. After all, you’ve played 8/16 at Full Tilt, and even lost over $300 once, just to make a huge comeback. Sometimes you lose the $300 and then realize that the big comeback isn’t coming.

Then you look at your collective online bankroll and you realize two things: (1) After withdrawals made at the end of 2006, your online bankroll is down to pitiful level. (2) I guess you fulfilled your own prophecy and have ended your online poker run.

This was a lesson in bankroll management for anyone paying attention, and, I suppose, in the thought that you can’t just write off online poker like its just a silly game and then play it and expect to win. Like I’ve always said, you need to go into a game not only expecting to win, but sure of the fact that you will win and are the best. This might not apply to everyone, but it applies to me. At the end of my Razz session (after various bad beats, but also tilted play) I was practically begging to lose my last $25. That, my friends, is no way to play poker, regardless of the setting.

Ironically, Weak Player, who was at the cash game table, asked me if I’d mind if he put me on his list for AlCantHang‘s Busto Pool. I told him to go ahead, since it was a sucker bet. I haven’t gone busto since I was depositing $20/month on Golden Palace in 2004, playing $5 SNGs until I was down to $1 in my account…and then switching to $.25 and $.10 tournaments.

Well, Weak, I’m not quite busto yet, so quit licking your chops.

There, I said it. Thank god I have a tournament with Karol and Dawngenerate of I Had Outs scheduled for the upcoming weekend, followed by a mixed cash game at SIF‘s place in one of the next two weekends. I have a lot of work to do.

This ends our pitiful announcement. I hope I don’t get too many pity comments or flames. I’m not looking for either. But when I was done with my self-destructive behavior, I thought to myself, “Now what about the blog?” I contemplated laying low for a couple of days, but then I realized that I might as well just spill it. It is, after all, what I’m going through right now, and its nothing new to the world of poker.

Online poker is on life support, and will only be commenced in cases of extreme boredom or blogger tournaments. Regardless, there will be no reloads. Meanwhile, I look forward to continuing my poker journey in the 3-D world.

Until next time, make mine poker!

I played some 3/6 limit Duece-to-Seven Triple Draw last night, losing $67 on stupidity. Then I shut off the computer and resumed my anti-online poker stance.

The lack of online play does make blogging a bit different. I have less of a daily reference to poker, but when I do play online, I’m enjoying it more, or, like last night, when I notice I am not enjoying it, I’m shutting it down a lot faster. Baby steps, people. Baby steps. Incidentally, after my loss, I am now up $20 for the New Year. Hooray for me!

I haven’t really gotten to my Year in Review yet. Shit, I might just have to let that one go. I’ve been reading other peoples’ opinions on those sort of posts, and it seems like a lot of people feel that they add little value. As I put mine together, I’m starting to see what they are talking about. Mine is coming out pretty much as a highlight reel of the year, quickly mentioning notable things for every month. In the end, though, if you wanted to read about what happened in May, your best bet is to just click on the link on your right that will take you to all May 2006 posts, right? I mean, I had some gems in there, I suppose, but it’s a lot of old news and all that. Or maybe I’m just saying this so I don’t have to finish that damn post.

I got some nice feedback about the Fun is Good post. It’s been a while since one of my posts have been as well received, and it couldn’t have come at a better time. Like many out there, sometimes I find this whole blogging thing to be an uphill battle. Then I sit at the keyboard, like today, with nothing to write about and it all just comes flowing. Like I mentioned in a recent comment on 1st Rule‘s blog, really, all any of us can do is keep posting. Sometimes its a home run and sometimes you ground out, but its always a show.

I pimped 1st Rule a couple of days ago and I stand by my story. While reading his comments, I came across a commentor named Jordan. I thought, “I didn’t write that.” Now, Jordan isn’t the most common name. It’s getting more common, but growing up in a Christian neighborhood, I was the only Jordan. When I moved to a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, I found a lot more of us, but overall it was still a rare site.

Having a less-common name can be a bitch as a kid. When Michael Jordan became a media empire, my mother went buckwild. It got to the point where I was bopping about in fifth grade with an Air Jordan hat, t-shirt and sweatpants. I was a walking billboard, and all because of the novelty of the name Jordan.

You may be thinking why someone would go nuts just to buy clothing that had their kid’s name all over it. Maybe it was the toothbrushes. Growing up, my older bro Keith and younger bro David had cool toothbrushes with their names engraved on them. You could get them at any drug or gift card store…unless your name was Jordan. Then all you got was the generic one that they gave away with the Aquafresh.

Fortunately for me, Michael Jordan was cool. He was an athlete and an outstanding one at that. I’ve never had much athletic skill, but I loved basketball, so I had that going for me too. Enter, Jordan Knight. Jordan Knight was a New Kid on the Block, a boy band group worshipped by all 12 year old girls and reviled by all 12 year old boys, circa 1991. He also co-opted my name. The cherry on top was when rumors came out that Mr. Knight was gay. Really? Just look at that pic. Who woulda thunk?

Retribution came at the hands of Claire Danes. More accurately, it came from her love interest on the short lived series, My So Called Life. Jordan Catalano was the bad-boy love interest, played by none other than all around great actor Jared Leto. Finally, I had some cred with the ladies, and none too soon, as I was entering and living my teens as the show aired, was cancelled and then was rebord in reruns on MTV.

All was well in the land of Jordans, until the Pink Knight returned. Jordan Knight made a brief comeback in the late nineties, dancing around, suddenly un-gay, and singing about what he would do to some hypothetical girl. Jordan Catalano, having been off MTV for a while, was now a memory to most chicks, and the Jordans of the world wept.

Of course, in all of this, I ignore the secret that probably crushes all Jordans world-wide…or at least those with a Y chromosome. From Jordan begat Jordana, usually conjuring images of some Little House on the Prarie type character, churning butter and tending to the barn. But no, that wasn’t enough for the fairer sex. While I won’t point to particular flicks, as much out of laziness as disdain, the female Jordan plague has been the long standing threat eating the Jordans alive from within.

In approximately 2001, I noticed something though. As I slowly looked through the sundry items of a reststop en route to college, I came across a rack of toothbrushes. David, still there. Keith, yep. But then I saw another: Jordan. It’s a new age for us Jordans. The name is getting to hip, even if 28.1% of newborn Jordans lack testicles.

Where was I going with this? Oh yeah. For you Davids and Jasons and Erics of the world, this is no big thing, but finding another Jordan in the poker blogging cosmos, well its a bit weird. But he doesn’t seem like Jordan Knight, so I’ll welcome him into the fold. Jordan, it’s a pleasure meeting you, but if you join a boy band, please change your name. And if you’d like to meet him too, you can check him out on his blog, Drawing Dead by jl514.

Until next time, make mine poker!

Oh wait, there’s more! I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out some photographs taken by the lovely, degenerate Dawn. Recently, I played in a home game at SoxLover‘s place to celebrate his birthday. I lost $95, but had a great time losing it. Dawn had her camera handy and took a couple of pictures. A couple of favorites, all of which include me, are HERE (how to tell if Jordan’s bluffing), HERE (who’s the mark? my guess is the guy with the sunglasses) and HERE (I wet myself, okay?!). You’ll note Dawn’s rye sense of humor. Must not use b-word. Enjoy!

This message sponsored by new advertiser Anonymous King. For all sexual pleasures, visit Anonymous King.

Last night, I fought the urge to play online poker and satiated myself with a game of Pirates. Thanks, Poker Wolf, for the suggestion. Man, what a gloriously enjoyable waste of time! I had already finished most of Gun, another decent game. This is what happens when you wean yourself off of online poker.

But enough about that. Two nights ago, as I toiled away at the WWdn, I chatted with SirWoffleHause. He was trying Duece-to-Seven Triple Draw for the first time, and I tried to give him what little pointers I remembered. In fact, I think my best advice was to read Maigrey‘s primer post, something that I found very informative.

Alas, when he started to play, he came across a bunch of marginal hands. My limited knowledge was already spent, so I offered this advice in the chat:

Jordan X: go have fun and you’ll come upon a strategy
Jordan X: if nothing else, you build an image and loosen up the table

I was really just encouraging him to have fun, since it was a brand new game. Hopefully he was playing at stakes where he could explore the game’s limitations and opportunities without risking a significant portion of his bankroll (not that I follow this rule, as I’ve been playing 3/6 and even a rare 5/10 2-7 TD table here and there).

But as I looked at my text, I realized that my statement was largely my inherent strategy in most poker games. I used to play online to make money. Unfortunately, it became like a job, and I began to play mindlessly, like a factory worker trying to get through the day. So, I quit my job. I still come back to the old office, but I do it on my time, and I do it to have fun.

When it comes to mixed games, anyone who has played with me live will know that I tend to be an action player. I goes back to what I said to Woffle: “go have fun and you’ll come upon a strategy”. My strategy was to play a lot of hands, see how they play out, and, frankly, gamble a bit. This allows me to get a grasp on the game, the players, the action. Naturally, from that flows my second statement to Woffle: “if nothing else, you build an image and loosen up the table.”

It’s a simple and logical enough scenario. You sit at a table and you are playing games that are odd and unfamiliar to you. Maybe it is familiar to you, but the players are not or the poker room is new and you have no feel for the type of game you have on your hands. In situations like this, you’ll shoot yourself in the foot if you decide to start re-raise bluffing with 35o. But you could be setting the pace of the action if you are playing more hands than the rest of the players (within reason). First, you’ll get to interact with the players more. Second, they will remember how you started off. You are setting a tone that says, “I’m a donkey. Come play with me!” All the while, I hope you have some innate card sense and know when it is time to fold. But calling a raise in limit Badugi from the BB and then drawing three out of four cards won’t break the bank. It will, however, get the rest of the table to call your bets in a later Badugi hand when you have the nuts, and it will tilt the table when you win the hand after drawing three.

In actuality, the Badugi move I just described has been dubbed the Bajordi, as I pulled that move to success at least one at the SIF home game. I drew four and hit a 9-low, 4-card Badugi (a fairly strong hand) and took down the pot. Was it a donkey play? Probably. Did it work for me in the short term? Yes, although that was an unexpected surprise. Could it have hurt me significantly? Not really. It could only hurt if I hit a strong hand and was facing an even stronger one. That does happen, but more likely, I miss and fold. I lose one additional big bet, but I show that I’m giving action. And this, loosens a table.

You’ve seen it before. A player comes into a rock-tight table and starts to play like a maniac. Soon everyone and their sister is limping into pots or calling small raises preflop, hoping to shut down the maniac or get in on the fun. Sometimes the maniac gets lucky and gains a huge amount of chips. Other times, they stay loose and go busto. But what if you were that maniac, and you knew enough to control your game once you’ve set the table off in the wrong direction?

That is the crux of the matter. By playing my usual fun-guy game, especially live and at casinos, I effectively can loosen up a table. It’s a byproduct of my behavior, and not the goal, necessarily, but it is a byproduct that I have found profitable. Another great example occurred on my last trip to AC. I was down almost $300 and getting frustrated until I decided to have a few drinks. I win a small hand and I get chatty, as I often do. Prior to that, I was focused on making money and beating the table. After that, I was busy joking around, razzing players and acting a fool. The result was that my game turned around. I loosened up, had fun, and the players began to loosen up with me, calling bets preflop that they might otherwise fold, and playing my game instead of theirs.

So, that’s my advice to anyone playing a new game. Don’t play uber-loose, because you will loose. But feel free to mix it up early, get a feel for how the new game plays, how hands play in particular, and how the other players react. You’ll also be inducing action, so be ready for it and take advantage when opportunity strikes. It might be safer to wait for a super strong hand and then start raising, but you’ll likely get little action. It’s a shit load more fun playing a bunch of hands, losing small pots and then scooping a huge one later, since, after all, you the donkey couldn’t have anything.

In closing, let me add that this is nothing new. I remember reading how the Poker Grub (one of my all time favorite reads) used to write about playing his first hand really loose to set an image. So, kudos to him for introducing me to the importance of setting up a table image, and kudos to Woffles for getting me to think about why I seem to play mixed games with reckless abandon, lose a bunch of chips, but eventually recover and make a profit.

Until next time, make mine poker!

Here’s another one for the trophy case. After wifey Kim nodded off in a Nyquil-induced slumber, I crept up to the laptop to see what was going on in the wild world of online poker. I knew I had missed the WWdn, but didn’t know that there is a new WWdn Second Chance tournament that started at 10:30 pm. By 12:50, I had beat all 25 competitors and took down first place.

My win seems to mirror my other recent win in the Hoy and Mookie Second Chance. Basically, at the final table, I started in 2nd place, but most players had much less than me and the chipleader. Before then, I was dominating the game with obnoxious raises and re-raises. But moreso than any move, I found that in this particular tournament I was able to make my most money from floating, especially in the middle levels.

For those uninitiated, floating is essentially calling with the intention of making a move in later rounds. I’ve cultivated (cough cough) a reckless image in some of these tournaments, but in reality, I was playing fairly tight to start off. Until the middle levels, I had only played 99, TT and AKo from a position not in the blinds, and I didn’t aggressively defend my blinds either. But when the blinds started to matter, I began stealing more, and as I realized players were, well, putting on plays, I began floating a lot more.

I’ll start with a hand that, I believe, help set my image for the later rounds:

We are on Level 3 of the tournament. I have 2025, which is good for fourth at my table. I post the BB of 50. Wil Wheaton is on my immediate right and posts the SB. His chipstack is 2480. I have Tc4c.

It folds to Smokkee on the button (with 1235) and he raises from 50 to 200. To me, this looks like a suspicious bet. First, he’s in blind stealing position. Second, if he had great cards he’d want to get action, and, I presume, would bet less than 4x the BB with only two players left to act. Third, he needs those chips, since he is down to 1235.

Wheaton folds and I call with seemingly terrible cards (Tc4c). My plan is to hopefully hit, but even if I don’t I’m looking for a board that likely missed Smoke.

The flop is 5h Qc 6d. I missed entirely. The pot is 450 now, and I review what I’ve seen. Basically, I only fear two things from Smoke. One possibility is that he has a Queen. The other is that he has a pocket pair (including the possible 55 or 66 for a set). He has about 1k left in front of him, I have about 1800. The pot is 450. If I bet out and he doesn’t have a Q or pocket-pair (and really most low pocket pairs fold here), then I’m golden. If he does have it, I can shut down and fold if necessary. So when I bet out 400, I’m really betting 400 to win 450, and I’m actually wagering on the probability that he doesn’t have a Q or significant pair. My wager was right, too, and he folded.

I have a lot of respect for Smokkee’s game. I hope he realizes that because my next move after he folded was to show my cards. I figured that it would help me control my image by showing on my terms. I also was proud to have pushed a skilled, aggressive player like Smokkee out of a hand. So, no disrespect intended, Smoke. I showed out of respect and also to reinforce my image. Before the T4c, I really was playing much better cards.

As I progressed to Level 5 (50/100 blinds) I kept on the pressure. I was up to 2225 when I was dealt 3d5s in the BB. Ironically, 35 would be a great hand for me yesterday. The table folds around to Wheaton in the SB. He has 2730 in chips and has been running over the table with well-timed aggression. He raises from 100 to 300 and I decide to call with my crappy cards. This is a classic float situation. I don’t have anything, but I’m in position.

The flop is 4T6, rainbow. I flopped an open-ended straight draw. The pot is 600 and Wil bets 400 into it. Rather than fight him, I opt to call.

The turn is a 2d, giving me a 6-high straight and a possible diamond flush draw. Wil checks, and I bet out 800 into the 1400 pot. He folds and says, ‘gh.’ While I hit my hand and then failed to get paid off, that really isn’t the important thing about this hand. Really, any card on the turn, except for a card that matched Wheaton’s hand, which is presumably only 6 cards max in the whole deck (if he has a pocket pair, he only can match his cards with 2 other cards for a set; otherwise, if he has two unpaired cards, he has 6 outs total for a pair, assuming his cards are decent like AK). So, when he checks, I know I’m probably good. I try to price him in, but he missed totally so he folds, and I’ve earned some easy chips by floating with terrible cards in position.

On the very next hand, I’m dealt a monster in the SB, 35s! It folds to me with almost 3k in the SB and I call. The BB is Spock, with 1620, and he decided to raise from 100 to 300. I have him covered by a decent margin (something that makes a lot of difference in a situation like this), so I flat call, floating OUT of position.

The flop is 9TQ, rainbow. I decide to bet 500 into the 600 pot. This is a much trickier bluff. But the key is that if he had any lower pocket pair, he’s going to run scared. In fact, if he has anything less than top pair, he’s likely to fold. On the flipside, if he hit it, he’s going to raise or maybe call. Whichever one he does, I’m folding once he bets out, so the most I can lose is 500 to win 600. The fact that he has 1320 after his preflop raise makes the bet even easier. No one likes going busto, and the 500 to call is a big chunk of his stack. He folds. More easy chips.

We are still in Level 4, but we are a couple of hands later. I’m in the BB again, 2890 chips total. I’m dealt Qs8s. It folds to Wheaton in the SB with 2230 and he calls. I check.

The flop is KQ9. I hit middle pair, so my only real fear is top pair, or perhaps middle pair, bigger kicker. Sure there are other possibilities, like two-pair, but that’s essentially the same thing as top pair or middle pair better kicker here. He may’ve made the straight, too, but we’ll know soon enough.

Wheaton checks, and I bet out 200, which is pot. Wheaton decides to check-raise to 600 and I call in a semi-float move. The truth is, my image is shot, so he may think I’m raising with crap and is trying to force me off of my hand. Wil is nothing if not clever.

The turn is a harmless 4d, creating a flush draw. He checks, and at this point, I don’t have a good read on what he has, so I’ll see one more card to get more information, since I’m in position.

On the rivered 2s, Wil bets 800 into the 1400 or so pot. I definitely take my time here. However, the “value bet” on the river looks too value-bet-like, and I know that Wil (a) thinks I’m a maniac with probably crappy cards, and (b) is very smart and capable of making a play here. 800 is doable, since I will still have over 1300 if I’m wrong. I can work with 1300. In fact, short-stacks is my specialty. So I call and he announces “greal call, High” before saying that he must’ve been crazy for trying to get me off of second pair. When people “say” things like that, like I’m some silly donkey, my immediate reaction is to get defensive. In this case, though, it was a product of my table image, and that is exactly what I was trying to do (and what I was exploiting in this hand). So, the blame is all on me, but frankly, I’m here for the money.

This is the last hand in our floating tour. We are still at Level 4, and now I have 4390 in chips. I guess floating works best in the blinds, since I’m in the SB in this hand when I’m dealt 34d. Incidentally, the blinds are the best spot, since I’m not forced to cold call with a hand like 34d. In most positions, it’s an easy fold.

In fact, I think this is the very next hand, because Smokkee calls me a calling station in the notes. I’m sure he kids, but if not, well, you know the policy. If my table image is that I suck, then I’ll use that to my advantage.

Le Beulette calls in MP with 4798 in chips, my only real competition, stack-wise. Ricky (1790) calls immediately after him. It folds to me and I call in the SB. This isn’t quite a float. I’m calling because the 50 is good pot odds to potentially win 400. Spock checks in the BB.

The flop is 368, rainbow, and I hit a baby pair. I’m in first position, so with 400 in the pot, I bet 200, a seemingly harmless bet from out of position. Everyone folds. Why? Because (a) they don’t have a piece of the board and (b) they don’t have a pocket pair. People most often miss. I could’ve checked there and hoped to see another card, but since I was out of position, a bet is preferable. First, if they call, I can afford the 200 if I miss and fold. Second, if the fold, I win outright, as we see, with nothing. Third, if they raise, I can fold, unless the implied odds are right (in this spot, very rare). Meanwhile, if I check, I’m praying for it to check around. I rather bet 200 than call 200, but I might call here. I would probably not call a bet of 400 though, and this is all the more likely. This is a defensive bet and the rest of the table is probably thinking that I lucked out and hit two-pair. The 200 bet is deceptive, since it seems to invite a call.

This is essentially the way I chipped up in the middle rounds. I’ve noticed that I have a leak in my tournament games. I don’t tighten up against short stacks late in the tournament. I worked on that last night, and as a result, I dominated when my stack was huge at the final table. When we were three-handed, my two opponents were the tightest (according to Poker Tracker) out of anyone at the table. It was a wet dream.

There you have it. I have some other great ideas to share but Floating will do for now.

Until next time, make mine poker!

While this is more of a test about what you think of yourself rather than what you really are, I have to say, it’s nice to see that my Superman shirt that I wear when I play poker is not so far from the truth. Enjoy!

Your results:
You are Superman

Click here to take the Superhero Personality Test

And since I don’t mind playing the part of villain:

Your results:
You are Lex Luthor

Click here to take the Super Villain Personality Test

Thanks to Woffles and SoxLover for posting this quiz.

For the New Year, I’ve created a new segment here at the High On Poker studios. I hope you all enjoy:

High On…1st Rule of Poker
The blogosphere is constantly in flux, and I’ve noticed that I’ve gotten a renewed group of “link me” requests lately. For the most part, I give the same response, especially if the site is clearly just seeking affiliate and ad revenue: “Thank you for your interest, but I try to only link sites I read or enjoy, and as yet, I am unfamiliar with your site. I’ll keep an eye out and maybe we can link exchange later.”

Usually, they never re-contact me and often, they don’t add any more content to their sites. But one in particular caught my attention, 1st Rule of Poker. He has a unique style, with posts extolling individual Rules of Poker (all chosen by 1st Rule, of course), and a decent amount of live play recaps. So, 1st Rule is 1st on my High On list. Check him out if you get a chance. It’s certainly a good read, if nothing else.

Low On…the New Blogger.com
HoP has been housed at Blogger.com from the get-go, and I’ve had nothing but positive things to say, for the most part. Then came the New! Blogger Beta, which apparently is out of Beta mode. I guess Blogger was bought by Google, because the New! Blogger uses your Google name and password instead of the old Blogger.com name and password. But, um, Blogger, you got a few glitches you need to work out.

Like, why can’t I associate this current blog with a Google name and password. I can start a new profile through Google and then invite that profile to be a contributor for HoP, but I can’t seem to find a way to simply make my current Old! Blogger account into a New! Blogger account with a Google name and password. The net effect, I have to log on to Blogger sites that have changed over to New! Blogger format with my Google account to comment, and then when I try to post on my Old! Blogger site, HoP, I have to sign out and re-sign in under my Blogger account name. Tres Stupid!

*This is not a paid advertisement.*

I’ve been remiss, posting less than usual while I undergo a bit of blogger burnout. It’s cyclical, folks. Meanwhile, I slowly work on my Year in Review post, which will be out some time in 2009.

That said, while I may be burnt out from poker blogging, I do have a tangential poker issue that I wouldn’t mind opining about.

In January 2006, New Jersey banned smoking in public places, including restaurants and bars, following a trend that has already touched New York and has reached as far as Ireland. The law is based upon the concept that restaurant employees are forcibly subjected to a dangerous condition – second hand smoke – while working. Since all restaurants and bars, for the most part, allow smoking somewhere in their premises, the employees in that industry have no choice but to work in these dangerous conditions.

This is by no means the first time that laws have been created to protect workers at the whim of their employers. A perfect example, coming out of New York, are the scaffolding Labor Laws. Under those laws, a construction worker need only prove that there was something wrong with the scaffold or that he lacked safety devices like a harness, to win a verdict against the property owner. That’s the OWNER, folks, not his employer. His employer is “protected” under Workers’ Compensation law, which also allows the employee easy access to medical treatment and supplemental income while injured. NY, however, realizing that Worker’s Comp was often insufficient to fully compensate some injuries, created the scaffold (and ladder) Labor Law provisions making recovery against property owners relatively easy, with exceptions for one and two-family dwellings.

While that scintillating paragraph on NY Labor Law probably got you all excited, there was another point. It is nothing new for laws to be created that may appear unfair (in the Labor Law context, to the owner who has little oversight over scaffolding and ladders) to protect workers, who often do not have the resources of those who suffer. But while the NY Worker’s Compensation and Labor Laws are effective, they are also (supposed to be) narrowly tailored to effectuate their purpose. The smoking ban does not do this.

In January 2006, when the law passed banning smoking in public places in New Jersey, the strong casino industry lobby was able to get an exception for the casinos. Now, it looks like that exception will be negated in the next coming months. The result is that casino profitability is expected to drop a whopping 20%, and the very employees to be protected will be laid off.

The bottom line, folks, is that the law is wrong. The law has always been wrong, it will continue to be wrong, and regardless of the positive aspects of the law, it remains wrong.

The positive aspects are readily apparent to any New Yorker (who doesn’t smoke). First, when you are in a bar or restaurant, you don’t leave stinking of smoke. Second, presumably the smokers smoke less because they have to leave the establishments to smoke. This probably helps the public’s general health. Then, of course, there is the fact that second-hand smoke ingestion is reduced.

But at what cost? I’m not saying that the legislature should allow smoking in all these venues. I am saying, however, that there should be cut outs for certain places, places where there are no children to protect. This would be (1) bars, and (2) casinos.

You may be thinking, what about the employees? Well, first off, to think that someone who works in a bar or casino can ONLY work in those locations is a bit narrow-minded. Plus, when choosing a career or job, there are certain things that must be weighed by the potential employee, including where the hell he or she is working. If they choose a bar or casino, they CHOOSE to be in a smoking environment.

But let’s ignore the fact that employees in those industries can move on to others. Let’s assume we need to provide them with an opportunity to work in a non-smoking environment. Enter the tax-break. The anti-smoking law should be narrowly tailored to satisfy its purpose but not restrict businesses from operating as they see fit. By applying a tax to all businesses which allow smoking (and mind you, I ONLY think that children-free places should have the option of allowing smoking), you can provide deep tax incentives to those who ban smoking all together. This would allow the businesses to offset the loss of revenue from the ban by the tax incentive. It would also allow other places to operate as usual. Finally, it would give the bar and casino employees options on where to work in a given industry. They can choose to work in a smoking or non-smoking establishment.

Here is the other backup, one that may be allowed, for all I know. There should be a way to allow establishments to have fully-ventilated, indoor smoking rooms. They don’t have to serve people in the rooms, but at least people wouldn’t have to leave an establishment (and their drinks) to have a smoke. Let the room be as big or as small as the establishment wants. Don’t serve in the room, so that the fragile little employees can protect their weak and feeble lungs. But don’t just ban smoking outright in public.

If you need two other reasons why smoking should not be banned in public outright, here they are: (1) this nation was built on tobacco, our greatest export while we were growing into a world power, and (2) smoking is still legal. To suddenly punish smokers, most of whom are addicted to nicotine due to the availability of the legal tobacco, is just asinine. We are treating smokers like second-class citizens because they have a “dirty” habit that we, as a nation, have generally permitted.

Plain and simple, the government should tailor their laws to be as narrow as possible to effectuate their purpose. They should not hinder businesses or individuals with their overreaching laws.

For the record, I do not smoke and I prefer the smoke-free environment in restaurants and bars. I just don’t think it will help the casinos and I sure-as-hell don’t think that it is necessary or proper for the government to decide it. As I’ve stated, it’s one thing to protect children who cannot protect themselves. But we are not children, and should not be treated as such.

Until next time, make mine cigarettes…er, um poker!

There can be nothing better for a young poker lover to feel proud about than winning in internet online poker and advancing through the playing ladders. Even after one does happen to understand every point of the game to the extent of making a championship winning one should know to differentiate between the importance of their regular job, family, leisure and poker play. All these things are 4 different aspects and one should not necessarily confuse all these between themselves. Internet online poker is important, but other aspects of life is also important and one should not sacrifice or compromise on the other needs of life when playing internet online poker for fun or for money.

There are going to be a lot of good consequences of internet online poker because a lot of other evils of life can be eliminated when you are attached to internet online poker. You do not walk in to a real time casino, so you do not meet with real time people who can tempt you to a range of behaviors drinking alcohol through drugs either socially of just like that. From playing internet online poker, you are playing poker without suffering the compulsion to indulge in drinking or doing drugs due to peer pleasure. Though such an advantage is there with internet online poker there have been many instances that report internet online poker addiction. You must frequently test yourselves by taking up the quiz and test from online psychological analysis to have your gambling impulses checked. If you see that the test results show beginning or well rooted signs of internet online poker addiction then you will have to seek professional help and counseling.

There are a number of gambling addiction relief programs that can help you to be free of internet online poker addiction and it can help you to play internet online poker within limits without harming the other essential routines of life. Poker is essential, but there are many things that are top in the priority. There can be some times when you will have to dedicate your internet online poker schedule for other priorities of life. When the priorities are in the form of social demands, family needs or business or job related needs, better keep them first. Internet online poker is always going to be there. If you miss 2 hours from your regular playing time you can always compensate it by playing the extra 2 hours later on. By all means, you should be able to stop anytime, never feel compulsive about playing it.