And away we go!

I like the FTP Steps Tournaments. I like to play Super Turbos, which are incredibly high variance. But the steps tournaments generally pay something to at least 2/3 of the field. So I bought into a total of 8 of the Step 2 tournaments ($8.30 + $0.40) over the course of today, and turned one of those buy-ins into a Step 6 ticket, which I've used to buy in to the FTOPS main event



Another one currently is a Step 5 ticket ($216).

Anyway, generally, the top two finishers advance to the next step, 3rd and 4th place tread water, 5th and 6th move down one level, and depending on the step 7th or 8th either get a boobie prize, or go down two levels or something like that. At the bottom 2 levels, the payouts start at 6th, but higher up, all you have to do is not come in dead last.

There is a 7th step. It is a $2100 buy-in tournament. 7-9 get nothing, 4-6 move down a notch, 2-3 tread water and 1st place gets a $18,000 WSOP tournament buy-in package.

UPDATE! I finished in 223rd place out of 4534, for a payout of $1500.

I have climbed the mountain

When Sir Edmund Hillary reached the summit of Mt. Everest, he closed the books on the record for the highest altitude a mountain climber could achieve. The only thing anyone could ever do from then on was tie.

And thus it is with me today. I have climbed the mountain.

There is no worse beat possible in Hold'Em. You cannot be in a worse situation than having exactly two cards in the deck that save you - and needing them both to come out on the turn and river (obviously not counting drawing dead).

My luck being what it is, I am, of course, on the losing end. So yet another achievement for my badge list, to go along with losing with a straight flush and catching under-quads.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, 6.25 Tournament, 20/40 Blinds (2 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Hero (BB) (t2173)
SB (t827)

Hero's M: 36.22

Preflop: Hero is BB with 9♦, 9♣
SB calls t20, Hero bets t120, SB calls t80

Flop: (t240) 4♣, 9♠, 6♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, SB bets t707 (All-In), Hero calls t707

Turn: (t1654) 6♥ (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: (t1654) 6♦ (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: t1654


Results:
SB had 6♣, Q♥ (four of a kind, sixes).
Hero had 9♦, 9♣ (full house, nines over sixes).
Outcome: SB won t1654

He went on to win the tournament - I got it in with top set again, but this time was fucked over by a mere flush draw.

Well, here's a first

Runner-runner, no less.

The money went in post-flop. I normally wouldn't play this way, but against these bots, you wind up playing far more aggressively. And besides, when the money went in, it was still the best hand.

And now, the portfolio is complete

Over the course of a poker lifetime, I think all players who play enough can expect to experience every possible way they can get cold-decked. It doesn't take too long for the nut flush to be beat by a full house. With a little more experience, you're bound to wind up getting hit by set-over-set. But the really esoteric ones are much less likely. Specifically, winding up with the sucker straight-flush (that is, a 3 card straight-flush on board, you have the bottom two, your opponent has the top two), or with the under-quads.

I've already experienced losing with a straight-flush. And last night, I got fed the under-quads.

Now, to be fair, I was playing Chinese Poker with Evan. When you get dealt a quarter of the deck, quads are a bit more likely to happen. But this was quad Jacks under quad Queens.

I just don't know. It's a cruel universe that gives me the skill set to understand the game as well as I do, and then continually feed me shit sandwiches.

Poker of late

So I haven't been playing a lot lately. Here's a good explanation for why not:

Out of the last 20 games I've played, I cashed 6 times, came in fourth 7 times, got 7th or 8th 5 times, one 9th and one 6th.

If just 3 of those 4ths were 3rds, I'd be profitable.

The 18 games before that, I cashed about half the time, got two fourths, 4 7ths, a 6th and 2 9ths - which is the way it normally is when I'm not getting skewered repeatedly. It's the pattern I would expect to see most of the time. The 4 7ths is a bit lumpier than I'd expect, but it is a very small sample size, after all.

To add to that, the last midnight tournament I lost in the first hour on the back of getting pocket kings vs. pocket aces, and the time before that I came in 7th when I needed to come in 5th to cash.

I hate this fucking game.

The bad beat of all time

Full Tilt Poker Game #_: 400 FTP Sat to Sun. Brawl Sat (_), Table 1 - 50/100 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:08:59 ET - 2009/04/08
Seat 2: hero (9,210)
Seat 5: villain (4,290)
villain posts the small blind of 50
hero posts the big blind of 100
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2c 8h]
villain calls 50
hero checks
*** FLOP *** [Jh 2h Th]
hero bets 200
villain calls 200
*** TURN *** [Jh 2h Th] [9h]
hero checks
villain checks
*** RIVER *** [Jh 2h Th 9h] [Qh]
hero bets 100
villain raises to 900
hero raises to 2,000
villain raises to 3,990, and is all in
hero calls 1,990
*** SHOW DOWN ***
villain shows [7s Kh] a straight flush, King high
hero mucks
villain wins the pot (8,580) with a straight flush, King high
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 8,580 | Rake 0
Board: [Jh 2h Th 9h Qh]
Seat 2: hero (big blind) mucked [2c 8h] - a straight flush, Queen high
Seat 5: villain (small blind) showed [7s Kh] and won (8,580) with a straight flush, King high

Someone please kill me now.

Dream table

I've been watching Poker After Dark this week. Some guy named Arnold Thimons on Full Tilt won the right to play a table full of the pros of his choice on the show.

It's easy in such circumstances to play armchair quarterback, and I think there were lots of choices I would have made differently in Thimons' shoes. But the heck with that. Instead, I'll chime in on who I would have chosen, had I been asked. Not that anyone cares, of course, but why not?

Most of these folks are instructors at one or more of the boot camps I've attended.

In no particular order:

Kenna James. He was the pro at my table of the SnG at the champion's camp. With 3 aces on the board, I bluffed him off his pocket kings by making what looked like a value bet on the river after checking the two-ace flop and the ace turn. It's still the most amazing lay-down I've ever seen from anyone involved in a hand with me.

Mike Sexton. While he was dealing a lab for us, I made 3 bluff bets at a board I had missed, hoping to impress him with my ability to "fire that third bullet." But in fact, my opponent in the pot had flopped a set and was "walking the dog," as they say. It'd be nice to be able to show him something better than he saw from me at the camp.

Clonie Gowen. Of all the things I learned at the boot camp, Clonie's SnG strategy has been the single most valuable thing. The opportunity to effectively play a 6 handed SnG with her would be outstanding.

Crispin Leyser. He's been at all the camps I've been at, and I've had a private session with him.

Gus Hansen. He's not a boot camp instructor, but if you're going to play tight at the table, then having a loose cannon (though Gus has tightened up his game a bit over the years as the field has gotten more aggressive) is a good thing.

Robin Hood didn't play poker

Today's lesson: don't be a Robin Hood - steal from the poor.

So, you're playing a Full Tilt Super-Turbo. Just to remind everyone, those are just 9-handed Turbo structure SnG tournaments, but with a 300 chip starting stack. That's right, 2700 chips on the table total. And the blinds start at 15/30 and go up every 3 minutes.

So anyway, you've been treading water for a couple orbits, and have 280 chips and the button in front of you. The blinds are 25/50. You look down at KTo, and it's folded around to you. What do you do?

Well, if I'm in your shoes, I don't know what to do yet, because I've left out from the setup the size of the stacks that are in the blinds.

You're certainly not going to limp. The problem with that is that limping is going to cost you almost 20% of your stack, and if you then get raised by one of the blinds, you'll have a quandary. No, this situation is all-in or fold.

Two factors matter:

1. How committed are your opponents? If one or both of them have more than a quarter of their stack out there, they're probably calling with all but the very worst hands. If they have half or more committed in the blind, they're calling with 27o. Yes, you're ahead of 27o, but, as they say, they have 2 live cards.

2. How much damage can they do to you if the call and win? If one or more of the blinds has you out-chipped, then they can end you immediately. If one or both of them has more than 50% of your stack, then not only are they capable of landing a crippling blow on your stack, with 150 or so chips, they are more likely to feel committed to the pot (particularly the BB, who has a third of his stack in).

There is a third factor - how committed are you to this pot? There are never any antes in Super Turbos, so the answer is quite simply that you're not at all committed to any pot unless you're one of the blinds. But at the same time, if you're short stacked, you're looking for a good situation to try and double up to keep going. If, with the above setup, you had, say, only 150 chips, you'd probably think that KTo with only two opponents left was probably a good enough place to take a stand. Waiting for a better hand will only put you further out of position, reducing your hand range and your likelihood of having an acceptable hand come your way before you're in the big blind (and will likely be committed).

Another thing to note is that button raises are going to be viewed by the blinds with some suspicion. The good news is that you've got a better than average hand, meaning that if they put you on a pure garbage steal, they'll have a nasty surprise. You're certain to get called by any ace in this spot, and by any pair. The good news is that those situations are likely to be fairly close to coin-flips for you (A4o vs KTo is 56/42, 44 vs KTo is 51/47). The bad news is that statistically, you're going to lose half of those.

And that's where the lesson comes in. Short stacks will call with crappier hands, which improves your odds, and even when the odds don't fall your way, they can't hurt you as much. So take their lunch money and give them a wedige every chance you get.

What do YOU do?

This sort of thing happens far, far, far too often.

This is a scheduled MTT. 125 folks are vying for 27 prizes. That's right - one chance in three.

What? I bought in before I figured that out. :)

Anyway, let's take a look at this hand:

Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $75 Token Frenzy (_), Table 5 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 16:55:20 ET - 2008/10/25
Seat 1: (1,290)
Seat 2: (1,950)
Seat 3: (1,770)
Seat 4: (1,395)
Seat 5: (1,440)
Seat 6: (1,375)
Seat 7: (5,245)
Seat 8: hero (1,560)
Seat 9: (1,835)
Seat 9 posts the small blind of 20
Seat 1 posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #8
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ts 4c]
Seat 2 folds
Seat 3 folds
Seat 4 folds
Seat 5 raises to 1,440, and is all in
Seat 6 folds
Seat 7 folds
hero folds
Seat 9 folds
Seat 1 calls 1,250, and is all in
Seat 5 shows [7c 7s]
Seat 1 shows [Qh Ah]
Uncalled bet of 150 returned to Seat 5
*** FLOP *** [As Js Kc]
*** TURN *** [As Js Kc] [4d]
*** RIVER *** [As Js Kc 4d] [7d]
Seat 5 shows three of a kind, Sevens
Seat 1 shows a pair of Aces
Seat 5 wins the pot (2,600) with three of a kind, Sevens
Seat 1 stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,600 | Rake 0
Board: [As Js Kc 4d 7d]
Seat 1: (big blind) showed [Qh Ah] and lost with a pair of Aces
Seat 2: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 3: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 4: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: showed [7c 7s] and won (2,600) with three of a kind, Sevens
Seat 6: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 7: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 8: hero (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 9: (small blind) folded before the Flop

Come on now. You're seriously going to flip a coin with 7s (after all, with pocket 7s, you're likely at best a coin-flip against any hand that can call) on a tournament that's one-in-three? Really?

The big question here is, what do you do with AQ? It's for sure that the donkey opposite wouldn't bet 30 big blinds with a really premium hand. So you're either up against a weaker ace or a small pair or perhaps even dog crap. In other words, the AQ is at worst a coin flip.

But fundamentally, even though your opponent has forced you into a decision like that, I can see both sides. If it were a cash game, you'd be +EV to call, but this is a tournament. If you fold AQ in that spot, you do so only because you don't want to risk the entire tournament on a single early coin flip against a maniac.

How should that hand have gone?

The 7s should have either made a normal raise or limped with the expectation of ether flopping a set or folding. Whether you raise pre-flop or not depends on your playing style. The AQ would have either re-raised or called, depending on his playing style. The 7s would have flat-called the re-raise if it happened. The flop would have come and if there was no re-raise pre-flop, the 7s would have perhaps continuation-bet and the AQ raised, or the 7s would have checked and the AQ bet. The 7s would have folded and the AQ would have taken down a pot with maybe 300 chips in it, but both stacks lived to see the next hand.

M zone calculator

I actually made this little site to help someone else, but on the off chance that it is helpful, I'll let my other 5 or 6 readers check it out too. It's an "M zone" calculator. You can use it during a tournament (it is set up for Full Tilt and PokerStars SnG tournament structures) to figure out what M zone (basic and effective) your chip stack lies in.

Check it out.

Cold deck

I wasn't involved, and there's nothing really to be learned here, but you don't see this sort of thing every day.


Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $55 + $5 Sit & Go (Turbo) (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 12:06:21 ET - 2008/10/21
Seat 1: (1,485)
Seat 2: (1,455)
Seat 3: (1,395)
Seat 4: hero (1,470)
Seat 5: (1,500)
Seat 6: (1,500)
Seat 7: (1,545)
Seat 8: (1,650)
Seat 9: (1,500)
hero posts the small blind of 15
Seat 5 posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #3
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [4c Qc]
Seat 6 folds
Seat 7 folds
Seat 8 folds
Seat 9 folds
Seat 1 folds
Seat 2 raises to 90
Seat 3 folds
hero folds
Seat 5 raises to 180
Seat 2 calls 90
*** FLOP *** [8d Ad As]
Seat 5 checks
Seat 2 checks
*** TURN *** [8d Ad As] [Th]
Seat 5 bets 300
Seat 2 raises to 1,275, and is all in
Seat 5 calls 975
Seat 2 shows [Td Ts]
Seat 5 shows [Ac Ah]
*** RIVER *** [8d Ad As Th] [Tc]
Seat 2 shows four of a kind, Tens
Seat 5 shows four of a kind, Aces

And there you have it: quads over quads.

If this was a cash game at Lucky Chances, that would have been a bad beat jackpot.

Seat 5 wins the pot (2,925) with four of a kind, Aces
Seat 2 stands up
The blinds are now 20/40
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,925 | Rake 0
Board: [8d Ad As Th Tc]
Seat 1: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 2: showed [Td Ts] and lost with four of a kind, Tens
Seat 3: (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 4: hero (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 5: (big blind) showed [Ac Ah] and won (2,925) with four of a kind, Aces
Seat 6: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 7: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 8: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 9: didn't bet (folded)

Beat iPhone hold 'em

So that picture is what you get when you win the Dubai tournament. It's the same as the "winner" screen for all the other tournaments except for the prize amount. I've done this a few times now. It's really not too much trouble to beat the bots in the iPhone poker program. They don't really change any as you progress upwards through the tournaments.

I play with the phone in the landscape mode. In this mode, you can't watch the video of them to look for their "tells," but I find I can't easily follow the position very well with the portrait view. And position and relative stack size are more important anyway.

The biggest weakness of the bots is that they don't have any internal concept of being pot committed or of fold equity. They're quite content to bluff 75% of their stack and then fold to the re-raise. This makes the ideal strategy against them to be one of always raising and never calling. They will call you all-in with crap draws that would normally be very -EV plays (particularly in tournament play). Yes, occasionally those will suck out, but most of the time they won't. And once you cash, simply either fold or go all-in on every hand pre-flop (which alternative will obviously depend on the relative stack sizes in question and, of course, your cards).

Of course, all of this is sort of poker masturbation. In general, it's a bad idea to play against bots - particularly bad ones. The risk is that you'll pick up habits against the bots that don't work against real players (particularly good ones). But in this case, the ideal strategy isn't tremendously different from normal SnG strategy. You just need to crank the aggression factor up much, much higher than you normally would.

The payouts for the "two table" tournaments (that is, everything above the "Cruise Ship") have payouts that would be reasonably correct if they were actually 3 table shoot-outs, meaning that they take the top 3 finishers from 3 tables and sit them down at the final table (which means you actually had 27 opponents in the prize pool). I've never come across any real tournaments that do that (most shootouts take the 9 first place finishers from 9 single table tournaments and have them play a final table). The payouts for the single table tournaments (Cruise Ship and below) pay out at a much higher rate than they should (obviously the Garage game, being a free-roll, pays out fixed prizes simply as a bootstrap). Thus the ideal bankroll strategy is to play only up to Cruise Ship for as long as you can to build your bank. Then skip upwards only once you've got a lot of (fake) money. Once you have a couple hundred grand you can take a couple shots at Dubai and if one of them hits, you'll have plenty of bank to repeat and build from there.

Oh, *I'M* the donkey?

After the hand, the guy called me out in the chat window, so he gets a public rebuttal. He took a chance on a deceptive play and it backfired on him. That's my fault somehow?

Let's see who made the bad play here.

Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $55 + $5 Sit & Go (Turbo) (_), Table 1 - 100/200 - No Limit Hold'em - 1:30:18 ET - 2008/10/20
Seat 1: (1,900)
Seat 2: (1,015)
Seat 3: (1,600)
Seat 4: (2,920)
Seat 6: villain (1,390)
Seat 7: hero (1,635)
Seat 8: (3,040)
Seat 8 posts the small blind of 100
Seat 1 posts the big blind of 200
The button is in seat #7
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5d 5c]
Seat 2 folds
Seat 3 calls 200
Seat 4 folds
villain calls 200
hero raises to 1,635, and is all in

1. The two limpers are unlikely to have better pairs since they didn't raise.

2. Because the blinds are so high here, any raise would be enough of my stack that I should just push anyway.

3. I have enough fold equity left to hopefully push these two off mediocre hands and pick up a nice pot.

Seat 8 folds
Seat 1 folds
Seat 3 folds
villain calls 1,190, and is all in
hero shows [5d 5c]
villain shows [Td Ts]

Really? Limping with tens? So you're ok letting a big blind see the flop for free with a big pair?

Now, don't get me wrong: I've done a limp-reraise play myself sometimes. But you pull that sort of play only against very aggressive players who have established a pattern of raising with junk. It's also a lot safer once you're actually in the money. Before the money, it's much, much better to win a small pot than lose a big one (which is really about the only two choices available to you with pocket tens).

Uncalled bet of 245 returned to hero
*** FLOP *** [5s 9c Kh]

So, yeah, I sucked out there. But what if the big blind had 59? You make a proper raise there and I guarantee that my 5s hit the muck before your chips stop moving. And if you get called by someone else I'll see that 5 come and I'll go kick my dog.

*** TURN *** [5s 9c Kh] [2s]
*** RIVER *** [5s 9c Kh 2s] [Ad]
hero shows three of a kind, Fives
villain shows a pair of Tens
hero wins the pot (3,280) with three of a kind, Fives
villain: lol pos

I agree: limping with tens is a very POS play, dumb-ass.

villain stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3,280 | Rake 0
Board: [5s 9c Kh 2s Ad]
Seat 1: (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 3: folded before the Flop
Seat 4: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: villain showed [Td Ts] and lost with a pair of Tens
Seat 7: hero (button) showed [5d 5c] and won (3,280) with three of a kind, Fives
Seat 8: (small blind) folded before the Flop

What does it take?

What the do I have to do to get retards to lay down their stupid flush draws? Go all-in on any flop with two of a suit?

Full Tilt Poker Game #_: Turbo Fiddy (_), Table 13 - 25/50 - No Limit Hold'em - 1:15:06 ET - 2008/10/20
Seat 2: (3,595)
Seat 3: (540)
Seat 4: (2,005)
Seat 5: hero (2,000)
Seat 6: (1,315)
Seat 7: villain (3,675)
Seat 8: (1,060)
Seat 9: (3,810)
Seat 4 posts the small blind of 25
hero posts the big blind of 50
The button is in seat #3
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ad 6d]
Sear 6 folds
Seat 7 calls 50
Seat 8 folds
Seat 9 calls 50
Seat 2 folds
Seat 3 folds
Seat 4 folds
hero raises to 225
villain calls 175
Seat 9 folds
*** FLOP *** [As Qc 5c]
hero bets 525
villain calls 525
*** TURN *** [As Qc 5c] [Kd]
hero bets 1,250, and is all in
villain calls 1,250
hero shows [Ad 6d]
villain shows [2c 3c]

Really? You called a pre-flop raise and went all the way to the river with the worst flush draw possible?

You know, when they talk about licensing and regulating Internet poker, I often wonder if it's the sites they should really be licensing.

*** RIVER *** [As Qc 5c Kd] [8c]

Oh, of FUCKING course.

hero shows a pair of Aces
villain shows a flush, Queen high
villain wins the pot (4,075) with a flush, Queen high
hero stands up
The blinds are now 30/60
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4,075 | Rake 0
Board: [As Qc 5c Kd 8c]
Seat 2: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 3: (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 4: (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 5: hero (big blind) showed [Ad 6d] and lost with a pair of Aces
Seat 6: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 7: villain showed [2c 3c] and won (4,075) with a flush, Queen high
Seat 8: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 9: folded before the Flop

There is nothing to say

Here's a two-fer from the same SnG:

First, try and guess what each of these two players has. You're going to be wrong. Promise.

PokerStars Game #_: Tournament #_, $50+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2008/10/19 3:05:13 ET
Table '_ 1' 10-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: donkey (1540 in chips)
Seat 3: (1460 in chips)
Seat 4: shark (1500 in chips)
Seat 5: (1500 in chips)
Seat 6: (1500 in chips)
Seat 7: (1500 in chips)
Seat 8: (1500 in chips)
Seat 9: hero (1500 in chips)
Seat 10: (1500 in chips)
Seat 3: posts small blind 10
shark: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [7s 3s]
Seat 5: folds
Seat 6: folds
Seat 7: folds
Seat 8: folds
hero: folds
Seat 10: folds
Seat 1: folds
donkey: raises 20 to 40
Seat 3: folds
shark: raises 60 to 100
donkey: calls 60
*** FLOP *** [Qc Js 5d]
shark: bets 100
donkey: calls 100
*** TURN *** [Qc Js 5d] [Ah]
shark: bets 180
donkey: calls 180
*** RIVER *** [Qc Js 5d Ah] [4h]
shark: bets 500
donkey: raises 660 to 1160 and is all-in
shark: calls 620 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (40) returned to donkey
*** SHOW DOWN ***
donkey: shows [Ts 4s] (a pair of Fours)
shark: shows [As Ad] (three of a kind, Aces)
shark collected 3010 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3010 | Rake 0
Board [Qc Js 5d Ah 4h]
Seat 1: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: donkey (button) showed [Ts 4s] and lost with a pair of Fours
Seat 3: (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: shark (big blind) showed [As Ad] and won (3010) with three of a kind, Aces
Seat 5: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: hero folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: folded before Flop (didn't bet)

And this one:

I was involved here, and once again... There must be something in the water.

PokerStars Game #_: Tournament #_, $50+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2008/10/19 3:21:33 ET
Table '_ 1' 10-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: (1640 in chips)
Seat 3: (1515 in chips)
Seat 4: (3465 in chips)
Seat 5: (1215 in chips)
Seat 7: villain (2000 in chips)
Seat 8: (1870 in chips)
Seat 9: hero (1975 in chips)
Seat 10: (1320 in chips)
[skip a bunch of lines of everybody putting in a 10 chip ante]
Seat 5: posts small blind 50
villain: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Kd Ks]
Seat 8: folds
hero: raises 200 to 300
Seat 10: folds
Seat 1: folds
Seat 3: folds
Seat 4: folds
Seat 5: folds
villain: raises 1690 to 1990 and is all-in
hero: calls 1665 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (25) returned to villain

He turns up 5To.

Really? I was making a bull-crap move from 2nd position? Having played almost no hands so far?

*** FLOP *** [4h Jh 6h]
*** TURN *** [4h Jh 6h] [2h]
*** RIVER *** [4h Jh 6h 2h] [4s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
villain: shows [5c Ts] (a pair of Fours)
hero: shows [Kd Ks] (two pair, Kings and Fours)
hero collected 4060 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4060 | Rake 0
Board [4h Jh 6h 2h 4s]
Seat 1: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 7: villain (big blind) showed [5c Ts] and lost with a pair of Fours
Seat 8: folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: hero showed [Kd Ks] and won (4060) with two pair, Kings and Fours
Seat 10: folded before Flop (didn't bet)

Nice call, eeyore

Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $110 + $9 Sit & Go (Turbo) (_ Table 1 - 80/160 - No Limit Hold'em - 10:26:14 ET - 2008/10/17
Seat 1: (1,230)
Seat 5: (3,920), is sitting out
Seat 6: (850)
Seat 7: villain (4,650)
Seat 8: hero (2,850)
villain posts the small blind of 80
hero posts the big blind of 160
The button is in seat #6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [3h 3d]
Seat 1 folds
Seat 5 folds
Seat 6 folds
villain calls 80
hero raises to 480
villain calls 320
*** FLOP *** [7c 4s 7h]
villain checks

He called a raise. The only hand I would do that with in this spot would be a couple of face cards or maybe a dry ace. If he has A7 then that would suck, but it's unlikely. This guy has been getting out of line all day long, so I think I can get paid in this spot.

hero bets 2,370, and is all in
villain calls 2,370
hero shows [3h 3d]
villain shows [9d 7d]

Fucking donkey. Keep calling my raises with shit.

*** TURN *** [7c 4s 7h] [2h]
*** RIVER *** [7c 4s 7h 2h] [8h]
hero shows two pair, Sevens and Threes
villain shows three of a kind, Sevens
villain wins the pot (5,700) with three of a kind, Sevens
hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 5,700 | Rake 0
Board: [7c 4s 7h 2h 8h]
Seat 1: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 7: villain (small blind) showed [9d 7d] and won (5,700) with three of a kind, Sevens
Seat 8: hero (big blind) showed [3h 3d] and lost with two pair, Sevens and Threes

Full Tilt Poker Matrix SnGs

Have you ever thought that you were better than the rest of the folks at the table, but that you couldn't prove it because of a cold deck or bad beat?

Full Tilt has introduced a new concept called a Matrix Sit-n-Go. The idea is that they take 9 players and sit them down to 4 simultaneous single table SnG tournaments. It's one thing to get lucky and win a tournament. It's quite another to pwn the same field of 9 over the course of 4 independent ones.

But is it worth it? Let's analyze the Matrix and see how far down the rabbit hole goes.

There are actually 5 prize pools in a Matrix tournament - one for each of the individual tournaments, plus an overall prize pool for the Matrix itself. The prize pools take the traditional 50%, 30%, 20% breakdown for 1st, 2nd and 3rd. If you win all four of the individual tournaments, you can "scoop" the Matrix pool. So let's make the math easy - There are 50 "points" for the Matrix, and winning any of the contests gets you 5, coming in 2nd gives you 3 and coming in 3rd gives you 2. "Scooping" the Matrix gives you 10. So the best you can theoretically do is 4 * 5 + 10 - 30 points. For a $22+$2 Matrix SnG, each point is worth $3.96, so that's $118.80. If you instead had entered 4 plain SnGs each worth $5.50 + $0.50 (which is the $22+$2 divided by four), you'd have won $99. That's a premium of $19.80, or 20%. The next best finish you can get is winning 3 of them and placing 2nd in the 4th. No scoop for you! Instead, you'd almost certainly win the Matrix prize, plus 3 1st place and 1 2nd place, or 4 * 5 + 3 - 23 points. That's $91.08, compared to the alternative of $89.10 - a premium of only 2%!

Still, I played a $22+$2 one for the novelty of it. I didn't do too badly. I won two of the four tournaments, placed 4th in the third (bad beat) and 9th in the last (made an ill advised move against pocket kings). I wound up 1st in the Matrix prize pool, so I earned 15 points, or $59.40. Had I played individually, I would have won $49.50 - a 20% premium.

Here's how it broke down:



Figuring out who benefitted is easy. Everybody who cashed at all cashed 20% less than they would have, except for the 3 of us who cashed in the Matrix pool. So if you don't make it into the upper echelons pretty predictably, you probably should avoid these. I may play one once in a while for the novelty of it, but playing 4 SnGs at the same time is a bit more busy than I would normally want to be.

Taking a hard, honest look at my play

SharkScope really is an invaluable tool for anyone serious about poker.

I played a dozen $14+1 and $28+$2 Super Turbo 9 handed SnGs on Full Tilt this afternoon. Lost Every. Damn. One. Sat down to a 9 handed $55+$5 SnG and won it.

Now, the good news is that the Super Turbo and regular Turbo tournaments have different stakes, so you can delve into SharkScope's database by filtering on a stake list to differentiate them. It's also nice that the Turbo and non-Turbo tournaments also have different stake levels.

So since my last boot camp, I have a -4% average ROI overall. That's actually much improved from where I was, say, a year ago (lifetime at full tilt before the last boot camp, average ROI -13%).

But the really shocking thing is that if you filter out 6 handed SnGs and super turbos, I actually have a positive 9% aROI.

6 or fewer handed, I have a -15% aROI and in the Super Turbos, I am -11%.

And then, it struck me. The reason I play 6 handed and Super Turbos is that I want it to be over faster. Call it a short attention span, or a desire for instant gratification or impatience, whatever, but I rather suspect that if you analyze every aspect of my life, that's the most glaring character flaw you'll be likely to find. And I can see it turning up in Poker too.

Sigh.

I don't need a Poker coach. Playing the plan that I was given at the last boot camp is working. SharkScope proves that. What I need to do is not try and get fancy in an attempt to get success more easily, because it should be obvious to me by now that it doesn't work.

6th and 7th

Well, I am in the hospital for the weekend with a DVT, but I borrowed Mark's WAN data dongle so I could work and play. Yesterday I played a $10+$1 tournament and came in 6th. I played another one today and came in 7th. Each win was about $120 or so. Not bad for playing in bed in a gown with my ass hanging out the back.

Online poker cheating scandal

Slashdot is reporting that a scandal has broken out around Absolute Poker involving a backdoor that exposed players hole cards to cheaters.

Now, since Internet poker began, poor players have always groused that the only explanation for their losses was that the sites were dishonest. Heck, it's been that way in meatspace since Poker was invented. It only takes a few moments of thought before it becomes completely obvious that a site has far, far more to gain by attracting players to a scrupulously honest game and far, far more to lose if any whiff of scandal surfaces. It's nothing short of astonishing that a poker site would throw away its reputation so easily.

I'd be quite surprised if this doesn't completely end Absolute Poker. I do hope that the more mainstream sites (Full Tilt and Poker Stars, in particular) at least make some hand-waving to reassure the playing public that their sites are secure. I'm actually quite sure that their sites are secure, but it would be nice for them to go through the motions of some sort of external audit (perhaps some auspicious body like Card Player magazine could oversee it) to bring it out into the open.