I'm going to mix it up a little on this four-day trip to Vegas for the annual blogger gathering.
Most importantly, I'm not going to lose my ass playing roulette. I'll play, but I'm setting a stop loss. And I certainly won't spew off most of my cash as soon as I arrive, like I did last time.
I want to play more craps. I'll visit the locals casinos. I'll travel off-strip. I'll read by the pool. I'll eat at In-N-Out Burger. I'm thinking about seeing the neon graveyard.
I'll drink with other drunk poker bloggers. I'll win money playing poker. I'll eat good food and laugh with friends.
Hope to see you there!
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Sunday, December 06, 2009
Solution to Shortstacking Problem
Let's start with a few statements that reflect majority opinion:
1. No one likes shortstackers except shortstackers themselves.
2. Shortstackers are a problem for the game of poker because they reduce it to a preflop shove-or-fold game. They prevent postflop play.
3. Shortstackers harm deepstackers because they force them to play a 20 big blind game. When one player has 100bb and the other has 20bb, the effective stacks are 20bb. It's unfair that shortstackers can dictate effective stack sizes because deepstackers can't reciprocate.
4. Shortstackers generate plenty of rake for poker sites, but they may be bad for the game's longterm growth because they drive mainstream players away by making some tables unplayable.
5. Shortstacking is within the rules of the game.
My idea is to raise the minimum buy-in slightly, from 20bb to 30bb.
Increasing the minimum buy-in by 10bb isn't so dramatic that it will ruin shortstackers, but it deepens stack sizes enough that preflop decisions take a little more thought, and maybe there's even room for some play on the flop.
Full Tilt already has capped tables that limit possible losses to 30bb per hand, and this change in policy would simply create the possibility for the same shortstacking dynamic at standard 100bb buy-in tables.
I like the existing "deep" tables, which require a minimum buy-in of 50bb and maximum buy-in of 200bb. Some players have suggested making these deep tables the standard across the board, but I don't think that's realistic from the business perspective of the poker sites.
A 30bb minimum buy-in seems like a reasonable compromise. Yes, it is changing how the game is played. But that happens all the time in games, from instant replay to stricter rules on how a defender can tackle a quarterback.
Shortstackers are a problem, and a 30bb buy-in is one way it could be solved.
1. No one likes shortstackers except shortstackers themselves.
2. Shortstackers are a problem for the game of poker because they reduce it to a preflop shove-or-fold game. They prevent postflop play.
3. Shortstackers harm deepstackers because they force them to play a 20 big blind game. When one player has 100bb and the other has 20bb, the effective stacks are 20bb. It's unfair that shortstackers can dictate effective stack sizes because deepstackers can't reciprocate.
4. Shortstackers generate plenty of rake for poker sites, but they may be bad for the game's longterm growth because they drive mainstream players away by making some tables unplayable.
5. Shortstacking is within the rules of the game.
My idea is to raise the minimum buy-in slightly, from 20bb to 30bb.
Increasing the minimum buy-in by 10bb isn't so dramatic that it will ruin shortstackers, but it deepens stack sizes enough that preflop decisions take a little more thought, and maybe there's even room for some play on the flop.
Full Tilt already has capped tables that limit possible losses to 30bb per hand, and this change in policy would simply create the possibility for the same shortstacking dynamic at standard 100bb buy-in tables.
I like the existing "deep" tables, which require a minimum buy-in of 50bb and maximum buy-in of 200bb. Some players have suggested making these deep tables the standard across the board, but I don't think that's realistic from the business perspective of the poker sites.
A 30bb minimum buy-in seems like a reasonable compromise. Yes, it is changing how the game is played. But that happens all the time in games, from instant replay to stricter rules on how a defender can tackle a quarterback.
Shortstackers are a problem, and a 30bb buy-in is one way it could be solved.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Outliers
The relevance of Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers" to poker has been discussed at length, and I want to add my experience.
A primary theme of the book is that fortunate timing and 10,000 hours of experience in a field is often what it takes to become successful.
I often think about how I may not have ever become a profitable poker player if it weren't for lucky timing. I was lucky to be caught up in the poker boom created by hole cameras on the World Poker Tour and Chris Moneymaker; I was lucky to have friends who played in $5 buy-in home games; I was lucky to play poker in a time when frequent reload bonuses made it easy for a losing player to still turn a profit; I was lucky Neteller was still around at the time so that I could easily take advantage of those bonuses; I was lucky those good times lasted long enough for me to get the experience I needed to survive on my own.
I haven't reached 10,000 hours of poker playing time yet. I figure I've averaged about 2 hours of poker practice a day since I started playing online in spring 2004, meaning I still have seven or eight years to go before I reach that point.
But the practice I did get while clearing those bonuses in my first couple of years playing online is what gave me the time I needed to read, study, write, watch videos, listen to podcasts and think about poker enough to gain a proficiency in this great game. I'm forever thankful to have been caught up in poker during its largest expansion, which gave me the opportunity to reach my poker potential.
A primary theme of the book is that fortunate timing and 10,000 hours of experience in a field is often what it takes to become successful.
I often think about how I may not have ever become a profitable poker player if it weren't for lucky timing. I was lucky to be caught up in the poker boom created by hole cameras on the World Poker Tour and Chris Moneymaker; I was lucky to have friends who played in $5 buy-in home games; I was lucky to play poker in a time when frequent reload bonuses made it easy for a losing player to still turn a profit; I was lucky Neteller was still around at the time so that I could easily take advantage of those bonuses; I was lucky those good times lasted long enough for me to get the experience I needed to survive on my own.
I haven't reached 10,000 hours of poker playing time yet. I figure I've averaged about 2 hours of poker practice a day since I started playing online in spring 2004, meaning I still have seven or eight years to go before I reach that point.
But the practice I did get while clearing those bonuses in my first couple of years playing online is what gave me the time I needed to read, study, write, watch videos, listen to podcasts and think about poker enough to gain a proficiency in this great game. I'm forever thankful to have been caught up in poker during its largest expansion, which gave me the opportunity to reach my poker potential.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Extreme Discipline
Because poker is such a long-run game, the best players are able to continue making accurate folds even when it seems like it's impossible for their opponents to be running so good.
I'm inspired by players who are able to sit down at the table for countless hours, days, weeks and months while making endless impartial judgments on bad rivers. They resist the temptation to call down just once, to sate their curiosity with a showdown, to think that their opponent is trying to run them over with another big bet.
This discipline can be seen by Durrrr vs. Antonius in the Aussie Millions cash game, where Tom Dwan manages to make repeatedly correct laydowns and lose much less than he could have lost.
Or you can see it when Haseeb Qureshi folds flushes and full houses to river raises.
Or when Tommy Angelo discusses folding Aces preflop.
Or when Doyle Brunson talks on High Stakes Poker about how easy it is to lay down Aces when he's playing well.
This is what separates the great players from the rest of us. Relative hand strength means everything, and absolute hand strength means nothing. They're not attached to their premium hands, and they can throw them away even though look so good.
I'm inspired by players who are able to sit down at the table for countless hours, days, weeks and months while making endless impartial judgments on bad rivers. They resist the temptation to call down just once, to sate their curiosity with a showdown, to think that their opponent is trying to run them over with another big bet.
This discipline can be seen by Durrrr vs. Antonius in the Aussie Millions cash game, where Tom Dwan manages to make repeatedly correct laydowns and lose much less than he could have lost.
Or you can see it when Haseeb Qureshi folds flushes and full houses to river raises.
Or when Tommy Angelo discusses folding Aces preflop.
Or when Doyle Brunson talks on High Stakes Poker about how easy it is to lay down Aces when he's playing well.
This is what separates the great players from the rest of us. Relative hand strength means everything, and absolute hand strength means nothing. They're not attached to their premium hands, and they can throw them away even though look so good.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Back to Blogging
With the winter blogger gathering coming up in Las Vegas the weekend of Dec. 11, I became motivated to get back to posting.
The main reasons for my four-month hiatus were that I ran out of things to write about and felt when I did post, it wasn't any good. I got annoyed with the quality of the blog and burned out on a feeling of obligation to update. So I took a break.
My poker habits haven't changed in that time. I've been playing just about every day while also studying and reading about the game. I just haven't been writing about it.
I've always known that blogging helps make me a better poker player because it reinforces hand histories, provides a forum to get feedback and puts stray thoughts into concrete words. I needed to get back in the habit. I hope the content here is useful to readers as well.
Can't wait for Vegas. During the blogger tournament, Bayne, RecessRampage and I are forming a team to win the last-longer sidebet organized by Up For Poker and juiced with $2,000 added to the prize pool by PokerStars. See you there!
The main reasons for my four-month hiatus were that I ran out of things to write about and felt when I did post, it wasn't any good. I got annoyed with the quality of the blog and burned out on a feeling of obligation to update. So I took a break.
My poker habits haven't changed in that time. I've been playing just about every day while also studying and reading about the game. I just haven't been writing about it.
I've always known that blogging helps make me a better poker player because it reinforces hand histories, provides a forum to get feedback and puts stray thoughts into concrete words. I needed to get back in the habit. I hope the content here is useful to readers as well.
Can't wait for Vegas. During the blogger tournament, Bayne, RecessRampage and I are forming a team to win the last-longer sidebet organized by Up For Poker and juiced with $2,000 added to the prize pool by PokerStars. See you there!
Thursday, November 26, 2009
A misplayed draw
I made a big mistake in this hand when I flopped a flush draw and overcards. I didn't stop to think about the hand and just spewed my money in.
Because the pot size was still small, I would have been better off calling the flop. Then I could have decided whether to make a move on the turn when the pot was bigger and I'd have more fold equity against draws that dominate mine.
I also should have slowed down after my opponent put in the 3-bet on the flop. Instead, I went all in with no fold equity whatsoever. By that point, I had screwed up so badly that I had resigned myself to getting it all in.
Full Tilt Poker $2/$4 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 392462
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter
SB: $842.50
BB: $416.20
UTG: $412.00
Hero (MP): $555.00
CO: $107.00
BTN: $400.00
Pre Flop: ($6.00) Hero is MP with J
Q
UTG raises to $12, Hero calls $12, CO requests TIME, 4 folds
Flop: ($30.00) 9 6
5 (2 players)
UTG bets $20, Hero raises to $74, UTG raises to $188, Hero raises to $543 all in, UTG calls $212 all in
Turn: ($830.00) 2
(2 players - 2 are all in)
River: ($830.00) 4 (2 players - 2 are all in)
Final Pot: $830.00
UTG shows K T (King Ten high)
Hero shows J Q (Queen Jack high)
UTG wins $827.00
(Rake: $3.00)
Because the pot size was still small, I would have been better off calling the flop. Then I could have decided whether to make a move on the turn when the pot was bigger and I'd have more fold equity against draws that dominate mine.
I also should have slowed down after my opponent put in the 3-bet on the flop. Instead, I went all in with no fold equity whatsoever. By that point, I had screwed up so badly that I had resigned myself to getting it all in.
Full Tilt Poker $2/$4 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 392462
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter
SB: $842.50
BB: $416.20
UTG: $412.00
Hero (MP): $555.00
CO: $107.00
BTN: $400.00
Pre Flop: ($6.00) Hero is MP with J
QUTG raises to $12, Hero calls $12, CO requests TIME, 4 folds
Flop: ($30.00) 9
6 5 (2 players)UTG bets $20, Hero raises to $74, UTG raises to $188, Hero raises to $543 all in, UTG calls $212 all in
Turn: ($830.00) 2
(2 players - 2 are all in)River: ($830.00) 4
(2 players - 2 are all in)Final Pot: $830.00
UTG shows K
T (King Ten high)Hero shows J
Q (Queen Jack high)UTG wins $827.00
(Rake: $3.00)
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
State Taxes
States including Hawaii, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Ohio now prohibit deductions of gambling losses on state income taxes. These laws could make it difficult for even a winning player to have much money left over.
Fortunately, there's an alternative -- filing as a professional gambler.
Even in these states that bar gambling deductions, it appears that filing as a professional allows you to deduct losses on a Schedule C to the extent of winnings. Check with an accountant to be sure.
Filing as a professional comes with some disadvantages as well because you have to pay self-employment taxes, but that hardship is far less than the burden of paying taxes on gross profits.
Also check out Poker Cats' recent post on online gambling and taxes.
In other news, it looks like the Treasury Department has delayed enforcement of UIGEA regulations for six months, according to PokerNews.
Fortunately, there's an alternative -- filing as a professional gambler.
Even in these states that bar gambling deductions, it appears that filing as a professional allows you to deduct losses on a Schedule C to the extent of winnings. Check with an accountant to be sure.
Filing as a professional comes with some disadvantages as well because you have to pay self-employment taxes, but that hardship is far less than the burden of paying taxes on gross profits.
Also check out Poker Cats' recent post on online gambling and taxes.
In other news, it looks like the Treasury Department has delayed enforcement of UIGEA regulations for six months, according to PokerNews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
