I still haven't quite turned the corner at P* yet, but I am closing in on it - just under $40 to go. But 6 months ago I went to the WPT boot camp, and that changed my game quite a bit. At first, the change was negative, but after I had some tutoring from Crispin, I've seen a definite change. I can validate this by doing an advanced search limiting the results to the last 6 months.
Doing that, on P* I've actually made $109 with a 12% ROI. But that's only with 95 games. I don't play much on P*, since it's so much more convenient to play on FTP.
FTP has not been quite so successful. I'm down $293 with an average loss per game of 50¢ (-10% ROI). But if you look at the graph, there's a huge $600 slide included in that time period that I'm still digging out from. That's across 564 games.
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Friday, August 3, 2007
Never give up
Last night was not a great poker night for me. I played in about 7 tournaments of different types (6 way, heads-up) and various stakes and ended up ahead by $1.50. I feel good about all the decisions I made last night, but wound up repeatedly losing to 2- and 3-out draws. But that's beside the point. The tournaments I won were not trouble-free either. In one heads-up match, I was down to $400 and came back to win it, and in one of the 6-ways, I was down to just $50 (pocket kings lost to ATo that made top pair - whereupon all the money went in - and then rivered a set) when we were 6 handed and came back to win.
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Parallels Desktop v. VMware Fusion
Those of you who haven't been paying attention might have missed the fact that Macs now have Intel processors in them. This means that they can run Windows without ugly, slow CPU emulation. Instead, you can use Boot Camp to boot the machine directly into a separate Windows partition, or you now have a choice of two competing commercial virtualization offerings: Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion.
I've been using Parallels for some time now. They certainly have gotten more right than wrong, but although Fusion is late to the party (and it isn't even released yet), I have to say, their initial offering is a very, very strong competitor with the more mature Parallels product.
Suspending and resuming virtual machines in Parallels has always been a sore spot for me. Though the screen will pop up quite quickly, the entire machine - both the host and guest - seem to be mired in a tar pit for a very long time while the virtual machine pages itself in. During this time, you really have no indication of what is happening or how long it might take. Perhaps this has more to do with the fact that I use Mac Minis that have slow disks, but even so, it's an annoyance.
The only other real difference of any consequence I have found so far is when using the Netflix Watch Now movie player. Under parallels, rapid motion and panning camera shots often show ugly visible "tearing" artifacts. This is likely caused by a lack of synchronization between the vertical refresh interval of the monitor and the virtual graphics card in the guest. Fusion doesn't have this problem. The netflix player in full screen looks and acts, to my eye, exactly like it would running under Boot Camp.
The other sore spot is converting from one to the other. Although you'd really only likely ever have to do this once, so far as I am aware, in both directions it is a byzantine arrangement involving installing a special Windows program in the opposite software's guest and having it write out the disk contents to a network share. Ugh. Even then, there are a couple of added annoyances. VMWare's virtual machine supports ACPI. The Parallels one does not. There is no way to switch Windows XP from standard to ACPI, so you wind up with no MP support and other quirks until/unless you reinstall Windows. Plus, the Parallels tools won't de-install unless you run the deinstall from within Parallels. There's no real harm in leaving the tools there, but you can't get rid of them.
I took VMware up on their pre-release pricing offer and bought a license. At the time, I figured I was just donating money to a lost cause. Parallels had such a lead, it was hard to imagine VMware being able to catch up. Boy, was I wrong. Now we've got a horse race. And the real winners are mac users who are surely going to benefit one way or the other.
I've been using Parallels for some time now. They certainly have gotten more right than wrong, but although Fusion is late to the party (and it isn't even released yet), I have to say, their initial offering is a very, very strong competitor with the more mature Parallels product.
Suspending and resuming virtual machines in Parallels has always been a sore spot for me. Though the screen will pop up quite quickly, the entire machine - both the host and guest - seem to be mired in a tar pit for a very long time while the virtual machine pages itself in. During this time, you really have no indication of what is happening or how long it might take. Perhaps this has more to do with the fact that I use Mac Minis that have slow disks, but even so, it's an annoyance.
The only other real difference of any consequence I have found so far is when using the Netflix Watch Now movie player. Under parallels, rapid motion and panning camera shots often show ugly visible "tearing" artifacts. This is likely caused by a lack of synchronization between the vertical refresh interval of the monitor and the virtual graphics card in the guest. Fusion doesn't have this problem. The netflix player in full screen looks and acts, to my eye, exactly like it would running under Boot Camp.
The other sore spot is converting from one to the other. Although you'd really only likely ever have to do this once, so far as I am aware, in both directions it is a byzantine arrangement involving installing a special Windows program in the opposite software's guest and having it write out the disk contents to a network share. Ugh. Even then, there are a couple of added annoyances. VMWare's virtual machine supports ACPI. The Parallels one does not. There is no way to switch Windows XP from standard to ACPI, so you wind up with no MP support and other quirks until/unless you reinstall Windows. Plus, the Parallels tools won't de-install unless you run the deinstall from within Parallels. There's no real harm in leaving the tools there, but you can't get rid of them.
I took VMware up on their pre-release pricing offer and bought a license. At the time, I figured I was just donating money to a lost cause. Parallels had such a lead, it was hard to imagine VMware being able to catch up. Boy, was I wrong. Now we've got a horse race. And the real winners are mac users who are surely going to benefit one way or the other.
A complete heads-up SnG
Just for a change of pace, let's go through an entire heads-up SnG with me giving the commentary... on my own play. Schizophrenic? Maybe. Let's not analyze that, though. We've got 15 hands to get through. Let's shuffle up and deal!
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:09:03 ET - 2007/07/31
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ad Ah]
Nice way to start the day.
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [5d 9h Kc]
There just is nothing at all better in this world than having rockets and seeing an uncoordinated board with a king on it.
villain checks
hero bets 140
Standard continuation bet.
villain raises to 440
hero raises to 1,410, and is all in
Why mash here? Well, any 3x raise is going to be virtually all-in anyway, so my choice is call or raise. Why raise? Because if he folds, he won't know what I'm holding. I want to protect my continuation bets. He'll think better of trying to raise them, perhaps. Besides, there's an outside chance he could hit two pair or a set. While you can't worry about monsters under the bed, it is still better to win a small pot than lose a big one.
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 970 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (1,060)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,060 | Rake 0
Board: [5d 9h Kc]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (1,060), mucked
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:09:37 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (970)
Seat 2: hero (2,030)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Js Ad]
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [4s 4c 5h]
hero checks
Here I probably might have continuation bet, but it would have looked pretty obvious. If I raised before the flop, did I really have a 4 or a 5 in my hand? That would have invited a check-raise. Could I have called a check-raise with ace high?
villain checks
*** TURN *** [4s 4c 5h] [Qd]
hero checks
villain checks
He's either slow-playing or the ace-high is good. It's not worth trying to steal, so let's see what happens.
*** RIVER *** [4s 4c 5h Qd] [Kc]
hero checks
villain checks
Same again - if my ace is good, then I won't get paid off if I bet, and if it isn't, I'm giving away money.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
villain shows [6h Ah] a pair of Fours
hero shows [Js Ad] a pair of Fours
hero ties for the pot (90) with a pair of Fours
villain ties for the pot (90) with a pair of Fours
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [4s 4c 5h Qd Kc]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) showed [6h Ah] and won (90) with a pair of Fours
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [Js Ad] and won (90) with a pair of Fours
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:05 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (970)
Seat 2: hero (2,030)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qd 8s]
hero calls 15
Hand values go way up heads-up. Q8o is the "computer hand" because it has half the starting hands beat. Certainly worth completing here and then playing in position on my opponent post-flop.
villain checks
*** FLOP *** [Jd Qs 6h]
Nice.
villain checks
hero bets 40
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 40 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (60)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 60 | Rake 0
Board: [Jd Qs 6h]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (60), mucked
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:21 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (940)
Seat 2: hero (2,060)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2s Ks]
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
This was a bit of a mistake, perhaps. If he has an ace or a king, this hand is probably crushed, and since he is raising, the chances of that are far higher. At this moment, the plan was to get a flush or get out.
*** FLOP *** [Kd 7c 7d]
hero checks
No flush.
villain checks
*** TURN *** [Kd 7c 7d] [9c]
He's either trapping or has nothing. Let's find out.
hero bets 140
villain raises to 850, and is all in
hero calls 710
Oh! Nick, that was a dumb call. What could you beat there? A9? A7? Jacks? Would he have really pressed with those?
villain shows [Kh Qs]
Of course.
hero shows [2s Ks]
*** RIVER *** [Kd 7c 7d 9c] [3c]
villain shows two pair, Kings and Sevens
hero shows two pair, Kings and Sevens
villain wins the pot (1,880) with two pair, Kings and Sevens
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,880 | Rake 0
Board: [Kd 7c 7d 9c 3c]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) showed [Kh Qs] and won (1,880) with two pair, Kings and Sevens
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [2s Ks] and lost with two pair, Kings and Sevens
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:52 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,880)
Seat 2: hero (1,120)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [As Kh]
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [Ts 7d 9d]
villain checks
hero bets 140
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 140 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (180)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [Ts 7d 9d]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (180), mucked
That hand is one of the big patterns in no-limit hold 'em. Raise, call, flop, continuation bet, fold. Happens repeatedly in any tournament.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:12 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,790)
Seat 2: hero (1,210)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [4d 6d]
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 15 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (30)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 30 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (30), mucked
Always nice to get a walk when you're holding crap.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:19 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,775)
Seat 2: hero (1,225)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qs Kc]
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [8d 5c Kh]
villain checks
hero has 15 seconds left to act
hero bets 140
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 140 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (180)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [8d 5c Kh]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (180), mucked
There's that pattern again.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:45 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,685)
Seat 2: hero (1,315)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2c Ad]
villain calls 15
hero checks
*** FLOP *** [9d 2d Qh]
hero bets 40
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 40 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (60)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 60 | Rake 0
Board: [9d 2d Qh]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (60), mucked
You don't see the limp-continuation that often except for heads-up. Why? Because when you limp, it generally encourages further limping (by making the pot bigger, thus offering better odds to players acting behind). There's about a 1 in 3 chance that if you have different ranking cards in your hand that you will connect on the flop. The same holds for your opponent. That means that there's a 1 in 9 chance that you both will. So if you hit the flop at all, even with bottom pair, you have to feel good about it. That will come up later.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:01 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,655)
Seat 2: hero (1,345)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [7c Qd]
hero calls 15
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [Kh 5d 6s]
villain bets 120
hero folds
Uncalled bet of 120 returned to villain
villain mucks
villain wins the pot (180)
The blinds are now 20/40
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [Kh 5d 6s]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) collected (180), mucked
Seat 2: hero (small blind) folded on the Flop
Here, we saw the raise, call, flop, bet, fold pattern run the other direction. Could I have folded the Q7 pre-flop instead? Eh. I suppose. But big cards are valuable heads-up, and as we just discussed, the chances of your opponent connecting are low. Could I have raised him on the flop? What if this was one of those one-in-3 that he HAD connected? Not worth the risk. There's always a better spot.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:25 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,745)
Seat 2: hero (1,255)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qc 8h]
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 20 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (40)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 40 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (40), mucked
Walk.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:31 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,725)
Seat 2: hero (1,275)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Kc 8c]
hero raises to 120
villain calls 80
*** FLOP *** [Kd 6c 9h]
villain checks
hero bets 180
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 180 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (240)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 240 | Rake 0
Board: [Kd 6c 9h]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (240), mucked
There's that pattern again.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:55 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,605)
Seat 2: hero (1,395)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2s Qc]
villain calls 20
hero checks
*** FLOP *** [Td 6h Ah]
hero checks
villain checks
*** TURN *** [Td 6h Ah] [3d]
hero checks
villain checks
*** RIVER *** [Td 6h Ah 3d] [4c]
hero checks
villain checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
hero shows [2s Qc] Ace Queen high
villain mucks
hero wins the pot (80) with Ace Queen high
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 80 | Rake 0
Board: [Td 6h Ah 3d 4c]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) mucked [7c 8d] - Ace Ten high
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [2s Qc] and won (80) with Ace Queen high
Here, again, we got into that mode where my queen high was quite possibly good, but it wouldn't have been worth trying to steal for fear of being played back at.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:18 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,565)
Seat 2: hero (1,435)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5h Ah]
hero raises to 120
villain calls 80
*** FLOP *** [7h Js Kh]
villain checks
hero bets 180
Standard continuation bet...
villain raises to 1,445, and is all in
Wha...?
We have an overcard and the nut flush draw. What could he have?
If he has a set, two pair, aces, or if he has an ace and a king, jack or 7, our flush draw is a 2:1 dog. If he has an ace and bigger kicker than a 5, we have 9 flush outs and 3 5s to beat him. If he has a pair, then we have 9 flush outs and 3 aces to beat him. If he has nothing, we're actually in the lead.
So which situation is it? At this point, I actually think he might have KQ or K9, in which case, I'm in one of those 12 outs spots. With 12 outs, we're only a 2:3 dog, and that's only if I'm right about my read. Let's gamble.
(edit: When I wrote this, I was off by a little bit. The pot odds offered by his all-in were even money because we started with a shorter stack, so the call was not justified on pot-odds by the flush draw alone. But throw in the possibility of the 3 ace outs being good and suddenly it's a coin flip. So on pot odds the call was correct, but when you're going all-in in a tournament, it's no longer about pot odds. It's about life or death. That's why it was a gamble)
hero calls 1,135, and is all in
villain shows [Qc 2c]
Wow.
Let's look at the hand from his point of view. Our opponent raises from the button - so we're going to be playing out of position, and we have a suited queen. It's worth trying for a queen or a flush draw, so we call. The flop has an overcard and not a single club. We check, our opponent leads out and.... we bluff at it? Why would we do that? Our opponent showed pre-flop strength. So there's NO way he has a king or a jack? That's dangerous to the point of being foolhardy. Yes, you're putting your opponent to the test for his entire tournament life.... but look at the relative stacks at the start. You lose this hand and you are going to be completely crippled, so his life isn't the only one really on the line here. I like this bluff play if your opponent has shown aggression and is down to, say, $500 or so (so even if he wins it, you've still got the lead). I don't like it when the consequences of having it backfire are so great.
hero shows [5h Ah]
Uncalled bet of 130 returned to villain
*** TURN *** [7h Js Kh] [3d]
*** RIVER *** [7h Js Kh 3d] [Kc]
villain shows a pair of Kings
hero shows a pair of Kings
hero wins the pot (2,870) with a pair of Kings
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,870 | Rake 0
Board: [7h Js Kh 3d Kc]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) showed [Qc 2c] and lost with a pair of Kings
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [5h Ah] and won (2,870) with a pair of Kings
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:50 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (130)
Seat 2: hero (2,870)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [7h 6d]
villain raises to 130, and is all in
hero folds
Uncalled bet of 90 returned to villain
villain mucks
villain wins the pot (80)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 80 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) collected (80), mucked
Seat 2: hero (big blind) folded before the Flop
He's so short now that every decision should be all-in or fold.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:59 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (170)
Seat 2: hero (2,830)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5s Qs]
hero calls 20
villain raises to 80
He raised half his stack, so it's clear he's pot committed, but he's letting me see the flop cheaply. If he pressed here, I probably would have folded and waited for a better hand. Instead...
hero calls 40
*** FLOP *** [5h Ac 4s]
villain bets 90, and is all in
There is no way in hell he wouldn't have pressed pre-flop holding an ace. Much more likely that this is a stop-n-go play. But the stop-n-go only makes sense if you have sufficient fold equity. Our opponent here had four big blinds at the start of this hand.
2nd pair here is almost certainly good.
hero calls 90
villain shows [2c Kh]
et voila.
hero shows [5s Qs]
*** TURN *** [5h Ac 4s] [Jd]
*** RIVER *** [5h Ac 4s Jd] [7d]
villain shows Ace King high
hero shows a pair of Fives
hero wins the pot (340) with a pair of Fives
villain stands up
hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 340 | Rake 0
Board: [5h Ac 4s Jd 7d]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) showed [2c Kh] and lost with Ace King high
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [5s Qs] and won (340) with a pair of Fives
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:09:03 ET - 2007/07/31
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ad Ah]
Nice way to start the day.
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [5d 9h Kc]
There just is nothing at all better in this world than having rockets and seeing an uncoordinated board with a king on it.
villain checks
hero bets 140
Standard continuation bet.
villain raises to 440
hero raises to 1,410, and is all in
Why mash here? Well, any 3x raise is going to be virtually all-in anyway, so my choice is call or raise. Why raise? Because if he folds, he won't know what I'm holding. I want to protect my continuation bets. He'll think better of trying to raise them, perhaps. Besides, there's an outside chance he could hit two pair or a set. While you can't worry about monsters under the bed, it is still better to win a small pot than lose a big one.
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 970 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (1,060)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,060 | Rake 0
Board: [5d 9h Kc]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (1,060), mucked
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:09:37 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (970)
Seat 2: hero (2,030)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Js Ad]
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [4s 4c 5h]
hero checks
Here I probably might have continuation bet, but it would have looked pretty obvious. If I raised before the flop, did I really have a 4 or a 5 in my hand? That would have invited a check-raise. Could I have called a check-raise with ace high?
villain checks
*** TURN *** [4s 4c 5h] [Qd]
hero checks
villain checks
He's either slow-playing or the ace-high is good. It's not worth trying to steal, so let's see what happens.
*** RIVER *** [4s 4c 5h Qd] [Kc]
hero checks
villain checks
Same again - if my ace is good, then I won't get paid off if I bet, and if it isn't, I'm giving away money.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
villain shows [6h Ah] a pair of Fours
hero shows [Js Ad] a pair of Fours
hero ties for the pot (90) with a pair of Fours
villain ties for the pot (90) with a pair of Fours
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [4s 4c 5h Qd Kc]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) showed [6h Ah] and won (90) with a pair of Fours
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [Js Ad] and won (90) with a pair of Fours
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:05 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (970)
Seat 2: hero (2,030)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qd 8s]
hero calls 15
Hand values go way up heads-up. Q8o is the "computer hand" because it has half the starting hands beat. Certainly worth completing here and then playing in position on my opponent post-flop.
villain checks
*** FLOP *** [Jd Qs 6h]
Nice.
villain checks
hero bets 40
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 40 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (60)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 60 | Rake 0
Board: [Jd Qs 6h]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (60), mucked
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:21 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (940)
Seat 2: hero (2,060)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2s Ks]
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
This was a bit of a mistake, perhaps. If he has an ace or a king, this hand is probably crushed, and since he is raising, the chances of that are far higher. At this moment, the plan was to get a flush or get out.
*** FLOP *** [Kd 7c 7d]
hero checks
No flush.
villain checks
*** TURN *** [Kd 7c 7d] [9c]
He's either trapping or has nothing. Let's find out.
hero bets 140
villain raises to 850, and is all in
hero calls 710
Oh! Nick, that was a dumb call. What could you beat there? A9? A7? Jacks? Would he have really pressed with those?
villain shows [Kh Qs]
Of course.
hero shows [2s Ks]
*** RIVER *** [Kd 7c 7d 9c] [3c]
villain shows two pair, Kings and Sevens
hero shows two pair, Kings and Sevens
villain wins the pot (1,880) with two pair, Kings and Sevens
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,880 | Rake 0
Board: [Kd 7c 7d 9c 3c]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) showed [Kh Qs] and won (1,880) with two pair, Kings and Sevens
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [2s Ks] and lost with two pair, Kings and Sevens
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:10:52 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,880)
Seat 2: hero (1,120)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [As Kh]
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [Ts 7d 9d]
villain checks
hero bets 140
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 140 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (180)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [Ts 7d 9d]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (180), mucked
That hand is one of the big patterns in no-limit hold 'em. Raise, call, flop, continuation bet, fold. Happens repeatedly in any tournament.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:12 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,790)
Seat 2: hero (1,210)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [4d 6d]
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 15 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (30)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 30 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (30), mucked
Always nice to get a walk when you're holding crap.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:19 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,775)
Seat 2: hero (1,225)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qs Kc]
hero raises to 90
villain calls 60
*** FLOP *** [8d 5c Kh]
villain checks
hero has 15 seconds left to act
hero bets 140
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 140 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (180)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [8d 5c Kh]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (180), mucked
There's that pattern again.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:11:45 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,685)
Seat 2: hero (1,315)
villain posts the small blind of 15
hero posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2c Ad]
villain calls 15
hero checks
*** FLOP *** [9d 2d Qh]
hero bets 40
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 40 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (60)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 60 | Rake 0
Board: [9d 2d Qh]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (60), mucked
You don't see the limp-continuation that often except for heads-up. Why? Because when you limp, it generally encourages further limping (by making the pot bigger, thus offering better odds to players acting behind). There's about a 1 in 3 chance that if you have different ranking cards in your hand that you will connect on the flop. The same holds for your opponent. That means that there's a 1 in 9 chance that you both will. So if you hit the flop at all, even with bottom pair, you have to feel good about it. That will come up later.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 15/30 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:01 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,655)
Seat 2: hero (1,345)
hero posts the small blind of 15
villain posts the big blind of 30
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [7c Qd]
hero calls 15
villain raises to 90
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [Kh 5d 6s]
villain bets 120
hero folds
Uncalled bet of 120 returned to villain
villain mucks
villain wins the pot (180)
The blinds are now 20/40
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 180 | Rake 0
Board: [Kh 5d 6s]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) collected (180), mucked
Seat 2: hero (small blind) folded on the Flop
Here, we saw the raise, call, flop, bet, fold pattern run the other direction. Could I have folded the Q7 pre-flop instead? Eh. I suppose. But big cards are valuable heads-up, and as we just discussed, the chances of your opponent connecting are low. Could I have raised him on the flop? What if this was one of those one-in-3 that he HAD connected? Not worth the risk. There's always a better spot.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:25 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,745)
Seat 2: hero (1,255)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qc 8h]
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 20 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (40)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 40 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: hero (big blind) collected (40), mucked
Walk.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:31 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,725)
Seat 2: hero (1,275)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Kc 8c]
hero raises to 120
villain calls 80
*** FLOP *** [Kd 6c 9h]
villain checks
hero bets 180
villain folds
Uncalled bet of 180 returned to hero
hero mucks
hero wins the pot (240)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 240 | Rake 0
Board: [Kd 6c 9h]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 2: hero (small blind) collected (240), mucked
There's that pattern again.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:12:55 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,605)
Seat 2: hero (1,395)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [2s Qc]
villain calls 20
hero checks
*** FLOP *** [Td 6h Ah]
hero checks
villain checks
*** TURN *** [Td 6h Ah] [3d]
hero checks
villain checks
*** RIVER *** [Td 6h Ah 3d] [4c]
hero checks
villain checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
hero shows [2s Qc] Ace Queen high
villain mucks
hero wins the pot (80) with Ace Queen high
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 80 | Rake 0
Board: [Td 6h Ah 3d 4c]
Seat 1: villain (small blind) mucked [7c 8d] - Ace Ten high
Seat 2: hero (big blind) showed [2s Qc] and won (80) with Ace Queen high
Here, again, we got into that mode where my queen high was quite possibly good, but it wouldn't have been worth trying to steal for fear of being played back at.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:18 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (1,565)
Seat 2: hero (1,435)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5h Ah]
hero raises to 120
villain calls 80
*** FLOP *** [7h Js Kh]
villain checks
hero bets 180
Standard continuation bet...
villain raises to 1,445, and is all in
Wha...?
We have an overcard and the nut flush draw. What could he have?
If he has a set, two pair, aces, or if he has an ace and a king, jack or 7, our flush draw is a 2:1 dog. If he has an ace and bigger kicker than a 5, we have 9 flush outs and 3 5s to beat him. If he has a pair, then we have 9 flush outs and 3 aces to beat him. If he has nothing, we're actually in the lead.
So which situation is it? At this point, I actually think he might have KQ or K9, in which case, I'm in one of those 12 outs spots. With 12 outs, we're only a 2:3 dog, and that's only if I'm right about my read. Let's gamble.
(edit: When I wrote this, I was off by a little bit. The pot odds offered by his all-in were even money because we started with a shorter stack, so the call was not justified on pot-odds by the flush draw alone. But throw in the possibility of the 3 ace outs being good and suddenly it's a coin flip. So on pot odds the call was correct, but when you're going all-in in a tournament, it's no longer about pot odds. It's about life or death. That's why it was a gamble)
hero calls 1,135, and is all in
villain shows [Qc 2c]
Wow.
Let's look at the hand from his point of view. Our opponent raises from the button - so we're going to be playing out of position, and we have a suited queen. It's worth trying for a queen or a flush draw, so we call. The flop has an overcard and not a single club. We check, our opponent leads out and.... we bluff at it? Why would we do that? Our opponent showed pre-flop strength. So there's NO way he has a king or a jack? That's dangerous to the point of being foolhardy. Yes, you're putting your opponent to the test for his entire tournament life.... but look at the relative stacks at the start. You lose this hand and you are going to be completely crippled, so his life isn't the only one really on the line here. I like this bluff play if your opponent has shown aggression and is down to, say, $500 or so (so even if he wins it, you've still got the lead). I don't like it when the consequences of having it backfire are so great.
hero shows [5h Ah]
Uncalled bet of 130 returned to villain
*** TURN *** [7h Js Kh] [3d]
*** RIVER *** [7h Js Kh 3d] [Kc]
villain shows a pair of Kings
hero shows a pair of Kings
hero wins the pot (2,870) with a pair of Kings
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,870 | Rake 0
Board: [7h Js Kh 3d Kc]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) showed [Qc 2c] and lost with a pair of Kings
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [5h Ah] and won (2,870) with a pair of Kings
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:50 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (130)
Seat 2: hero (2,870)
villain posts the small blind of 20
hero posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [7h 6d]
villain raises to 130, and is all in
hero folds
Uncalled bet of 90 returned to villain
villain mucks
villain wins the pot (80)
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 80 | Rake 0
Seat 1: villain (small blind) collected (80), mucked
Seat 2: hero (big blind) folded before the Flop
He's so short now that every decision should be all-in or fold.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $6 + $0.25 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 13:13:59 ET - 2007/07/31
Seat 1: villain (170)
Seat 2: hero (2,830)
hero posts the small blind of 20
villain posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5s Qs]
hero calls 20
villain raises to 80
He raised half his stack, so it's clear he's pot committed, but he's letting me see the flop cheaply. If he pressed here, I probably would have folded and waited for a better hand. Instead...
hero calls 40
*** FLOP *** [5h Ac 4s]
villain bets 90, and is all in
There is no way in hell he wouldn't have pressed pre-flop holding an ace. Much more likely that this is a stop-n-go play. But the stop-n-go only makes sense if you have sufficient fold equity. Our opponent here had four big blinds at the start of this hand.
2nd pair here is almost certainly good.
hero calls 90
villain shows [2c Kh]
et voila.
hero shows [5s Qs]
*** TURN *** [5h Ac 4s] [Jd]
*** RIVER *** [5h Ac 4s Jd] [7d]
villain shows Ace King high
hero shows a pair of Fives
hero wins the pot (340) with a pair of Fives
villain stands up
hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 340 | Rake 0
Board: [5h Ac 4s Jd 7d]
Seat 1: villain (big blind) showed [2c Kh] and lost with Ace King high
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [5s Qs] and won (340) with a pair of Fives
Profitable July!
According to Sharkscope, I made $250 in SnGs on Full Tilt during July, with a 25% ROI. Alas, PokerStars was not so hot. I lost $90. I think that's just because I hit a bad patch last night. My goal is to build up to break-even lifetime at P*, then cash out one last time and switch over to FTP exclusively. The statistics on sharkscope will be cleaner that way... I just don't want to leave P* without turning the corner, that's all.
WPT Boot Camp, Ca$h edition
I was at the Commerce Casino last weekend for the WPT Boot Camp's Ca$h edition. Like the tournament camp, it's a two day intensive series of lectures and live-play labs taught by a group of poker professionals. In addition to Jules and Crispin Leyser, our camp was taught by Mark Seif, Nick Brancato and Rick Fuller. Mark Seif is a well known poker player, with two WPT final table appearances to his credit and is also a commentator for the PPT. I had personally never heard of Nick Brancato, but in his short, 3 year career playing online poker he has probably seen as many hands as Doyle Brunson has played in his lifetime. Internet poker has made that possible by allowing him to not only see more hands per hour, but to be seated at multiple tables simultaneously.
In addition to the lectures and labs, there was a special component to the Ca$h camp: The ca$h challenge. I didn't really know how this was going to work until it was explained that day. They sat each of us, in turn, in front of a computer. The computer would present all of us the same sequence of 30 hands in a row. After every hand, our bankroll would be either reduced or replenished to $1000. In this way, everyone had the same experience. The sum total of money you made playing was your score. The top 6 played a 2nd challenge the next day. About half the class lost money. I made about $660. 6th place made just a bit less than twice that. I made exactly one decision that probably kept me out of the running - it cost me about $400 instead of allowing me to make about $200, a swing of $600. Still, if I was playing $5/$10 and made $600 in 30 hands, I'd be ecstatic.
I'm not sure I am going to go down the cash poker road or not. It's a different thing than tournaments, that's for sure. Cash poker is all about results over the long term. I liken it to being a day trader - but with fewer unknowns. There's no doubt at all that it can be a profitable experience. But I'm not sure it would be for me. Tournaments have an advantage in that your risk in any one tournament is limited, and each has an end. Cash poker is about statistics gathering and management. The disadvantage of tournament poker is that it's like being a major league hitter: Even the very best fail 2/3 of the time. Sometimes they knock one out of the park, but certainly not every time.
I might still decide to give it a try. I am undecided. At the moment, all my focus is on getting midnight tournament points for the upcoming Bay 101 open. As of the 24th, I'm in 7th place, and there are two shots left.
In addition to the lectures and labs, there was a special component to the Ca$h camp: The ca$h challenge. I didn't really know how this was going to work until it was explained that day. They sat each of us, in turn, in front of a computer. The computer would present all of us the same sequence of 30 hands in a row. After every hand, our bankroll would be either reduced or replenished to $1000. In this way, everyone had the same experience. The sum total of money you made playing was your score. The top 6 played a 2nd challenge the next day. About half the class lost money. I made about $660. 6th place made just a bit less than twice that. I made exactly one decision that probably kept me out of the running - it cost me about $400 instead of allowing me to make about $200, a swing of $600. Still, if I was playing $5/$10 and made $600 in 30 hands, I'd be ecstatic.
I'm not sure I am going to go down the cash poker road or not. It's a different thing than tournaments, that's for sure. Cash poker is all about results over the long term. I liken it to being a day trader - but with fewer unknowns. There's no doubt at all that it can be a profitable experience. But I'm not sure it would be for me. Tournaments have an advantage in that your risk in any one tournament is limited, and each has an end. Cash poker is about statistics gathering and management. The disadvantage of tournament poker is that it's like being a major league hitter: Even the very best fail 2/3 of the time. Sometimes they knock one out of the park, but certainly not every time.
I might still decide to give it a try. I am undecided. At the moment, all my focus is on getting midnight tournament points for the upcoming Bay 101 open. As of the 24th, I'm in 7th place, and there are two shots left.
Aussie Rules Football on KCSM!
I remember watching AFL (back then it was actually VFL) games on ESPN back when I was in college. I missed them when they went off the air. Well, they are available on the Setanta satellite TV channel, but fortunately for me, they're also showing a match of the week on KCSM! We're picking up their digital over-the-air signal, and I believe it's on the -2 stream, but I'm not sure. Through the magic of TiVo, I don't actually know when it gets aired. I have a season pass, so I don't actually worry about such things.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Poker at the Commerce Casino
While I was at the WPT Ca$h Camp this weekend, I had a chance to play at the tables. I did two different things while I was there: I played two sessions at the $1/$2 NL ($40 buy-in cap) game, and I played 5 $34/$6 SnG tournaments. Each deserves some mention for different reasons:
First, the SnGs. These are played on a special table they call "Lightning Poker." It is the size of a normal table, but embedded in the top is one large LCD screen in the center and 10 smaller screens around the periphery. The small screens are touch sensitive and have a small slot for a special mag-stripe ID card. You take your card to the cashier's booth to cash it up, more or less just like online play. The card has a PIN to make sure it can't be used if it's lost or stolen.
While the novelty of the SnGs was cool, I didn't like them for a few important reasons:
1. The house took a $6 rake off each $40 buy-in. That's a hell of a lot. Easily triple what the same tournament rake would be online.
2. They only paid two places. The same SnGs online pay 3 places.
3. Each player starts with a paltry $500 in tournament chips. With the starting blinds at $10/$20, that makes everybody a short stack. If your first move doesn't work out (standard raise plus a continuation bet), you've probably lost half your stack. Your next hand is all-in, and if you lose that you're done. That's a pretty harsh tournament.
I wound up chopping one out of the 5 tourneys I played, for $170 (the computer doesn't know how to chop them, so once the players agree, they simply go all-in in the dark until it's over, then the winner gives the 2nd place player $34 from the $204 first prize). So net loss of $30. But I don't feel too bad about it. The first two I played I lost because of a 2-outer and 3-outer suck-out, respectively. The third I chopped, then in the 4th I lost a race and in the 5th I wound up all-in with an under-pair to an over-pair. I still think that the crowd was pretty soft, but at the same time, the conditions sort of set you up for higher variance, which doesn't favor good players.
I had two sessions of no-limit. These had a $40 buy-in cap to play $1/$2 NL. That also makes the stacks a bit shorter than they ought to be. One of the things I learned at camp was that the correct buy-in for NL cash is 100x the big blind. That said, we should be starting $1/$2 with $200 stacks. Being so short, it plays a bit more like a tournament, with normal moves resulting in people being pot committed and then all-in.
The first session was a beautiful thing. I wound up winning $20 in a half hour before breakfast. The crowd was quite soft. The second session, I also found myself up $20 and almost stood up and left with it, but decided I wasn't done. I then lost all that and another $20 behind. Bummer. So total for the weekend in cash: down $40.
I'll write more about the camp later.
First, the SnGs. These are played on a special table they call "Lightning Poker." It is the size of a normal table, but embedded in the top is one large LCD screen in the center and 10 smaller screens around the periphery. The small screens are touch sensitive and have a small slot for a special mag-stripe ID card. You take your card to the cashier's booth to cash it up, more or less just like online play. The card has a PIN to make sure it can't be used if it's lost or stolen.
While the novelty of the SnGs was cool, I didn't like them for a few important reasons:
1. The house took a $6 rake off each $40 buy-in. That's a hell of a lot. Easily triple what the same tournament rake would be online.
2. They only paid two places. The same SnGs online pay 3 places.
3. Each player starts with a paltry $500 in tournament chips. With the starting blinds at $10/$20, that makes everybody a short stack. If your first move doesn't work out (standard raise plus a continuation bet), you've probably lost half your stack. Your next hand is all-in, and if you lose that you're done. That's a pretty harsh tournament.
I wound up chopping one out of the 5 tourneys I played, for $170 (the computer doesn't know how to chop them, so once the players agree, they simply go all-in in the dark until it's over, then the winner gives the 2nd place player $34 from the $204 first prize). So net loss of $30. But I don't feel too bad about it. The first two I played I lost because of a 2-outer and 3-outer suck-out, respectively. The third I chopped, then in the 4th I lost a race and in the 5th I wound up all-in with an under-pair to an over-pair. I still think that the crowd was pretty soft, but at the same time, the conditions sort of set you up for higher variance, which doesn't favor good players.
I had two sessions of no-limit. These had a $40 buy-in cap to play $1/$2 NL. That also makes the stacks a bit shorter than they ought to be. One of the things I learned at camp was that the correct buy-in for NL cash is 100x the big blind. That said, we should be starting $1/$2 with $200 stacks. Being so short, it plays a bit more like a tournament, with normal moves resulting in people being pot committed and then all-in.
The first session was a beautiful thing. I wound up winning $20 in a half hour before breakfast. The crowd was quite soft. The second session, I also found myself up $20 and almost stood up and left with it, but decided I wasn't done. I then lost all that and another $20 behind. Bummer. So total for the weekend in cash: down $40.
I'll write more about the camp later.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
You don't know Jack on the web!
The folks at Jellyvision, once responsible for the "You Don't Know Jack" series of quiz games have sort of moved in a more... corporate direction. Now they want to take their expertise at conversational interfaces and make demos and attract flash for marketing. Nice work if you can get it, I suppose.
But all is not lost! They are making YDKJ snippets available on the web for free - including the Daily DisOrDat. To get you in the mood, why don't you have a taste? The subject of this DisOrDat is particularly apropos.
Just so you know, I scored. Huh huh.
P.s. I tried to embed it on this page, but the flash didn't work correctly. Oh well.
But all is not lost! They are making YDKJ snippets available on the web for free - including the Daily DisOrDat. To get you in the mood, why don't you have a taste? The subject of this DisOrDat is particularly apropos.
Just so you know, I scored. Huh huh.
P.s. I tried to embed it on this page, but the flash didn't work correctly. Oh well.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Algorithm for evaluating poker hands
I've never actually seen the full description in one place on the net, so I thought I'd do a public service.
First, if you're playing a game with extra cards, like Hold'em or 7 stud, you first use recursion thusly: Iterate through the set of cards, removing one at a time and recurse. From the recursion results, save the best hand and return it.
Once you get down to 5 cards, you first take a histogram of the card ranks. That is, for each rank in the hand, count how often it appears. Sort the histogram by the count backwards (high values first).
If the histogram counts are 4 and 1, then the hand is quads.
If the histogram counts are 3 and a 2, then the hand is a boat.
If the histogram counts are 3, 1 and 1, then the hand is a set.
If the histogram counts are 2, 2 and 1, then the hand is two pair.
If the histogram has 4 ranks in it, then the hand is one pair.
Next, check to see if the hand is a flush. You do this by iterating through the cards to see if the suit of a card is the same as its neighbor. If not, then the hand is not a flush. Don't return a result yet, just note whether or not it's a flush.
Next, check for straights. Do this by sorting the list of cards. Then subtract the rank of the bottom card from the top card. If you get 4, it's a straight. At this point, you must also check either for the wheel or for broadway, depending on whether your sort puts the ace at the top or bottom. I would expect most folks to put the ace at the top of the sort, since it is usually a high card. So to check for the wheel, check to see if the top card is an ace and the 2nd to top card is a 5. If so, then it is the wheel.
If the hand is a straight and a flush, it's a straight-flush. Otherwise if it's one or the other, you can return that.
If we haven't matched the hand by now, it's High Card.
Once you know what the hand is, it is fairly straightforward to compare two hands of the same type. For straights, you simply compare the top card. For flushes, you iterate down through a reverse sort of the ranks until you find a higher card or run out. For the histogram-based hands, you start at the beginning of the reverse-sorted count list and compare the ranks (two pair is tricky - you must always evaluate the higher of the two pairs for each hand first - the histogram won't help, then the lower pair, then the kicker).
Checking for a low (for high/low or Razz) is a little easier. Sort the hand by rank. Iterate through the list. If any card is bigger than an 8 or is the same rank as it's neighbor, it's not a low hand.
First, if you're playing a game with extra cards, like Hold'em or 7 stud, you first use recursion thusly: Iterate through the set of cards, removing one at a time and recurse. From the recursion results, save the best hand and return it.
Once you get down to 5 cards, you first take a histogram of the card ranks. That is, for each rank in the hand, count how often it appears. Sort the histogram by the count backwards (high values first).
If the histogram counts are 4 and 1, then the hand is quads.
If the histogram counts are 3 and a 2, then the hand is a boat.
If the histogram counts are 3, 1 and 1, then the hand is a set.
If the histogram counts are 2, 2 and 1, then the hand is two pair.
If the histogram has 4 ranks in it, then the hand is one pair.
Next, check to see if the hand is a flush. You do this by iterating through the cards to see if the suit of a card is the same as its neighbor. If not, then the hand is not a flush. Don't return a result yet, just note whether or not it's a flush.
Next, check for straights. Do this by sorting the list of cards. Then subtract the rank of the bottom card from the top card. If you get 4, it's a straight. At this point, you must also check either for the wheel or for broadway, depending on whether your sort puts the ace at the top or bottom. I would expect most folks to put the ace at the top of the sort, since it is usually a high card. So to check for the wheel, check to see if the top card is an ace and the 2nd to top card is a 5. If so, then it is the wheel.
If the hand is a straight and a flush, it's a straight-flush. Otherwise if it's one or the other, you can return that.
If we haven't matched the hand by now, it's High Card.
Once you know what the hand is, it is fairly straightforward to compare two hands of the same type. For straights, you simply compare the top card. For flushes, you iterate down through a reverse sort of the ranks until you find a higher card or run out. For the histogram-based hands, you start at the beginning of the reverse-sorted count list and compare the ranks (two pair is tricky - you must always evaluate the higher of the two pairs for each hand first - the histogram won't help, then the lower pair, then the kicker).
Checking for a low (for high/low or Razz) is a little easier. Sort the hand by rank. Iterate through the list. If any card is bigger than an 8 or is the same rank as it's neighbor, it's not a low hand.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
MST3K mark 2
The Mystery Science Theater 3000 guys are back. They call themselves The Film Crew, and their first effort is available via Netflix's Watch Now feature.
The silhouettes are gone, but the commentary is as good as it ever was. There are also fewer skits and more taking apart of the movie.
This effort appears to be direct to video.
The silhouettes are gone, but the commentary is as good as it ever was. There are also fewer skits and more taking apart of the movie.
This effort appears to be direct to video.
Metallica IS Spinal Tap
I've always thought metallica sucked. But I never really cared so much. I sort of ignored them when they were on the radio. But ever since Metallica came out as the sock puppets for the RIAA against Napster, I've actively disliked them. Not that I'm really in favor of illegal music swapping, but the RIAA was (and is) more a part of the problem than not. It's just extra fitting that Metallica, out of everyone, would be the tools that would step up and spout the party line for them.
But this isn't about that, really.
Lately, a new Metallica track has been playing on SquiZZ. It's Metallica's take on "The Ecstasy of Gold." Now, you may not recognize that song title. It's part of the soundtrack of the movie "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly." Remember the scene where Tuco, Blondie and Angel Eyes had a 3-way shoot out in the graveyard near the end of the movie? It's that music. It's one of Ennio Morricone's finest works. And, like John Williams, Morricone is truly representative of what classical music composers historically have been. The fact that the music is the background to a movie isn't really that different from the times when the music was the background to an opera. So I give much props to Morricone's talent. His work will live as long as Mozart's.
So, again, where does Metallica come in? Remember the scene from "This Is Spinal Tap" where Nigel and Marty discuss the minor key and its relationship to classical music... only to then reveal that the complex classical-based composition they've been noodling around is called, "Lick My Love Pump." That's really the only thing missing from the Metallica to Spinal Tap connection with Morricone's tune - they didn't rename it "The Ecstasy of Taking My Meat Hammer Up Your Poop-chute."
Feh. Take that to eleven, beyotch.
P.s. Before anyone jumps down my throat, yes, I am aware that the band has used "Ecstasy" as their warm up music for years. That just drives the point home, as far as I'm concerned. I wasn't aware of it before now because you'd never catch me dead at one of their concerts.
But this isn't about that, really.
Lately, a new Metallica track has been playing on SquiZZ. It's Metallica's take on "The Ecstasy of Gold." Now, you may not recognize that song title. It's part of the soundtrack of the movie "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly." Remember the scene where Tuco, Blondie and Angel Eyes had a 3-way shoot out in the graveyard near the end of the movie? It's that music. It's one of Ennio Morricone's finest works. And, like John Williams, Morricone is truly representative of what classical music composers historically have been. The fact that the music is the background to a movie isn't really that different from the times when the music was the background to an opera. So I give much props to Morricone's talent. His work will live as long as Mozart's.
So, again, where does Metallica come in? Remember the scene from "This Is Spinal Tap" where Nigel and Marty discuss the minor key and its relationship to classical music... only to then reveal that the complex classical-based composition they've been noodling around is called, "Lick My Love Pump." That's really the only thing missing from the Metallica to Spinal Tap connection with Morricone's tune - they didn't rename it "The Ecstasy of Taking My Meat Hammer Up Your Poop-chute."
Feh. Take that to eleven, beyotch.
P.s. Before anyone jumps down my throat, yes, I am aware that the band has used "Ecstasy" as their warm up music for years. That just drives the point home, as far as I'm concerned. I wasn't aware of it before now because you'd never catch me dead at one of their concerts.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Was this a bad play?
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $20 + $2 Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:54:01 ET - 2007/07/13
Seat 1: hero (2,825)
Seat 2: (1,245)
Seat 3: (4,220)
Seat 4: (710)
Seat 2 posts the small blind of 20
Seat 3 posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ah 5h]
villain calls 40
hero raises to 160
Yes, it was a loose raise, but we were 4 handed and I'd been very tight.
Seat 2 folds
Seat 3 folds
villain calls 120
*** FLOP *** [3s 5c 7d]
villain bets 550, and is all in
So he limp-called before the flop. Classic tell of a small or mid pair. At the time, I didn't pick up on it. Now he jumps for his last 550 chips, with over 300 in the pot already. I at least have a pair, and if he's bluffing with crap, then I've got him beat. If he has a better hand than my pair of 5s with an ace, then I'm still in good shape overall. I decided to risk that he was just pulling a stop-n-go with any two cards.
hero calls 550
villain shows [8s 8c]
hero shows [Ah 5h]
*** TURN *** [3s 5c 7d] [5d]
*** RIVER *** [3s 5c 7d 5d] [3d]
villain shows two pair, Eights and Fives
hero shows a full house, Fives full of Threes
hero wins the pot (1,480) with a full house, Fives full of Threes
villain stands up
At this time he starts lambasting me in the chat window as being a donkey.
I called him because he was short, and because I had something and could afford it. If I either beat him or sucked-out, then we'd get that one step closer to the money.
It wasn't the proudest call I've ever made, but I think it was, all in all, more correct than incorrect. What do you all think?
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,480 | Rake 0
Board: [3s 5c 7d 5d 3d]
Seat 1: hero (button) showed [Ah 5h] and won (1,480) with a full house, Fives full of Threes
Seat 2: (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 3: (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 4: villain showed [8s 8c] and lost with two pair, Eights and Fives
I went on to go heads up with Seat 3 and win, but I got very lucky to take out the 3rd place finisher.
It's been my lucky week so far, even being Friday the 13th and all. I hope it continues.
Seat 1: hero (2,825)
Seat 2: (1,245)
Seat 3: (4,220)
Seat 4: (710)
Seat 2 posts the small blind of 20
Seat 3 posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Ah 5h]
villain calls 40
hero raises to 160
Yes, it was a loose raise, but we were 4 handed and I'd been very tight.
Seat 2 folds
Seat 3 folds
villain calls 120
*** FLOP *** [3s 5c 7d]
villain bets 550, and is all in
So he limp-called before the flop. Classic tell of a small or mid pair. At the time, I didn't pick up on it. Now he jumps for his last 550 chips, with over 300 in the pot already. I at least have a pair, and if he's bluffing with crap, then I've got him beat. If he has a better hand than my pair of 5s with an ace, then I'm still in good shape overall. I decided to risk that he was just pulling a stop-n-go with any two cards.
hero calls 550
villain shows [8s 8c]
hero shows [Ah 5h]
*** TURN *** [3s 5c 7d] [5d]
*** RIVER *** [3s 5c 7d 5d] [3d]
villain shows two pair, Eights and Fives
hero shows a full house, Fives full of Threes
hero wins the pot (1,480) with a full house, Fives full of Threes
villain stands up
At this time he starts lambasting me in the chat window as being a donkey.
I called him because he was short, and because I had something and could afford it. If I either beat him or sucked-out, then we'd get that one step closer to the money.
It wasn't the proudest call I've ever made, but I think it was, all in all, more correct than incorrect. What do you all think?
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,480 | Rake 0
Board: [3s 5c 7d 5d 3d]
Seat 1: hero (button) showed [Ah 5h] and won (1,480) with a full house, Fives full of Threes
Seat 2: (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 3: (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 4: villain showed [8s 8c] and lost with two pair, Eights and Fives
I went on to go heads up with Seat 3 and win, but I got very lucky to take out the 3rd place finisher.
It's been my lucky week so far, even being Friday the 13th and all. I hope it continues.
A solution to the GPS-less iPhone
I am embarrassed I didn't think of this myself.
One shortcoming of the iPhone is that the google maps app - though it is without a doubt amazing - doesn't have any positional information. That is, the map doesn't know where you are. There's just no room in the iPhone (or juice in the battery) for a GPS chipset.
But who says the GPS has to be built in?
All credit goes to Craigy on MacRumors for the idea. And it's a fantastic one. If you simply kept a bluetooth GPS box in your car, then your iPhone could use it to provide a "You are here" pin in the google maps app, and could automatically step through the turn-by-turn directions as you go. It could even give you ETAs (with real-time traffic, of course).
Yes, it would be better to have GPS built-in, but Apple could create a whole market for iPhone GPS add-ons. And, conceivably, they don't actually have to be bluetooth tethered. There's no reason you couldn't simply connect up a GPS add-on to the dock connector.
But in any event, it's going to require a lot of software support from Apple.
We'll see.
One shortcoming of the iPhone is that the google maps app - though it is without a doubt amazing - doesn't have any positional information. That is, the map doesn't know where you are. There's just no room in the iPhone (or juice in the battery) for a GPS chipset.
But who says the GPS has to be built in?
All credit goes to Craigy on MacRumors for the idea. And it's a fantastic one. If you simply kept a bluetooth GPS box in your car, then your iPhone could use it to provide a "You are here" pin in the google maps app, and could automatically step through the turn-by-turn directions as you go. It could even give you ETAs (with real-time traffic, of course).
Yes, it would be better to have GPS built-in, but Apple could create a whole market for iPhone GPS add-ons. And, conceivably, they don't actually have to be bluetooth tethered. There's no reason you couldn't simply connect up a GPS add-on to the dock connector.
But in any event, it's going to require a lot of software support from Apple.
We'll see.
Heads-up position
I haven't played much poker since the victory on Monday. It's as if I don't want to spoil the victory, in a way. But last night I did sit down to a $20 heads-up match at FTP. I won it in 3 hands. I managed to catch on the other two hands and that allowed me to appear to be quite aggressive to my opponent, which probably had a lot to do with the outcome, but in any event, the last hand was a great lesson in heads-up position.
When you're heads-up, the button is the small blind and acts first before the flop, and last after. That little change-up is something quite special in heads-up play.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $20 + $1 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 10/20 - No Limit Hold'em - 20:19:53 ET - 2007/07/12
Seat 1: victim (1,320)
Seat 2: hero (1,680)
hero posts the small blind of 10
victim posts the big blind of 20
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Td Ad]
hero raises to 60
victim raises to 120
So he has indicated that he has something. A re-raise normally would tell me that it's a big pocket pair, but heads-up it could be any pair or even a big ace. The minimum raise is often a monster hand tell, but before the flop it's not all that meaningful, particularly heads-up. As we'll see shortly, all he did was make it really cheap for me to call. He saw that I was an aggressive player the other two hands. He might have pressed here to try and take the play away from me. But no.
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [2s 3c Ts]
victim bets 200
Here's where position comes in. If we were out of position, I would have made this bet and he would have had to evaluate whether or not I was full of crap. He might have just called a bet given what his hand is.
As for me, I've flopped top pair with an ace. I am only beat by a pocket set or a bigger pair. If he has one of those, so be it.
hero raises to 1,560, and is all in
victim calls 1,000, and is all in
hero shows [Td Ad]
victim shows [9c 9h]
That was a bad call. I raised before the flop and called a re-raise. What hand could he have put me on that 9s would beat? A smaller pair (but not 2s or 3s)? There have only been two other hands. Could he really have believed that I made that big a move with nothing?
Uncalled bet of 360 returned to hero
*** TURN *** [2s 3c Ts] [Kd]
See? If he'd have been in position on me and if I had made the continuation bet and he'd have called it, the king would have been a scare card. He could have represented it and probably taken the pot away from me. That's exactly why I went all-in on the flop. I had what was likely the best hand and didn't want to see any more cards.
*** RIVER *** [2s 3c Ts Kd] [3d]
hero shows two pair, Tens and Threes
victim shows two pair, Nines and Threes
hero wins the pot (2,640) with two pair, Tens and Threes
victim stands up
hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,640 | Rake 0
Board: [2s 3c Ts Kd 3d]
Seat 1: victim (big blind) showed [9c 9h] and lost with two pair, Nines and Threes
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [Td Ad] and won (2,640) with two pair, Tens and Threes
When you're heads-up, the button is the small blind and acts first before the flop, and last after. That little change-up is something quite special in heads-up play.
Full Tilt Poker Game #_: $20 + $1 Heads Up Sit & Go (_), Table 1 - 10/20 - No Limit Hold'em - 20:19:53 ET - 2007/07/12
Seat 1: victim (1,320)
Seat 2: hero (1,680)
hero posts the small blind of 10
victim posts the big blind of 20
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Td Ad]
hero raises to 60
victim raises to 120
So he has indicated that he has something. A re-raise normally would tell me that it's a big pocket pair, but heads-up it could be any pair or even a big ace. The minimum raise is often a monster hand tell, but before the flop it's not all that meaningful, particularly heads-up. As we'll see shortly, all he did was make it really cheap for me to call. He saw that I was an aggressive player the other two hands. He might have pressed here to try and take the play away from me. But no.
hero calls 60
*** FLOP *** [2s 3c Ts]
victim bets 200
Here's where position comes in. If we were out of position, I would have made this bet and he would have had to evaluate whether or not I was full of crap. He might have just called a bet given what his hand is.
As for me, I've flopped top pair with an ace. I am only beat by a pocket set or a bigger pair. If he has one of those, so be it.
hero raises to 1,560, and is all in
victim calls 1,000, and is all in
hero shows [Td Ad]
victim shows [9c 9h]
That was a bad call. I raised before the flop and called a re-raise. What hand could he have put me on that 9s would beat? A smaller pair (but not 2s or 3s)? There have only been two other hands. Could he really have believed that I made that big a move with nothing?
Uncalled bet of 360 returned to hero
*** TURN *** [2s 3c Ts] [Kd]
See? If he'd have been in position on me and if I had made the continuation bet and he'd have called it, the king would have been a scare card. He could have represented it and probably taken the pot away from me. That's exactly why I went all-in on the flop. I had what was likely the best hand and didn't want to see any more cards.
*** RIVER *** [2s 3c Ts Kd] [3d]
hero shows two pair, Tens and Threes
victim shows two pair, Nines and Threes
hero wins the pot (2,640) with two pair, Tens and Threes
victim stands up
hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2,640 | Rake 0
Board: [2s 3c Ts Kd 3d]
Seat 1: victim (big blind) showed [9c 9h] and lost with two pair, Nines and Threes
Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [Td Ad] and won (2,640) with two pair, Tens and Threes
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
WPT Ca$h camp
I'll be at the WPT Ca$h camp at the Commerce casino at the end of the month.
Why?
You'll recall that I went to the 2 day "normal" tournament camp in January (thanks to my lovely wife Scarlet), and got some good validation and help tuning my game. I also met Crispin, who helped tune my game further.
Scarlet and I went to Reno a couple weeks ago and while I didn't have any tournament success, I actually was up in the cash games. But that was, for the most part, playing $3/$6 and $4/$8. I made $25 playing no-limit during one session, but I was out of my comfort zone. I know I can succeed at cash games, but my aggressive tournament style is not correct for cash play, and knowing that I am not where I need to be in the cash game keeps me uncomfortable because of the higher risks.
So unlike last time, I am not really seeking validation of where my game is. Rather, I know my game is not where it needs to be and I need to tweak it a little, get more comfortable, and then I'll know I'm one of the sharks rather than one of the minnows.
Why?
You'll recall that I went to the 2 day "normal" tournament camp in January (thanks to my lovely wife Scarlet), and got some good validation and help tuning my game. I also met Crispin, who helped tune my game further.
Scarlet and I went to Reno a couple weeks ago and while I didn't have any tournament success, I actually was up in the cash games. But that was, for the most part, playing $3/$6 and $4/$8. I made $25 playing no-limit during one session, but I was out of my comfort zone. I know I can succeed at cash games, but my aggressive tournament style is not correct for cash play, and knowing that I am not where I need to be in the cash game keeps me uncomfortable because of the higher risks.
So unlike last time, I am not really seeking validation of where my game is. Rather, I know my game is not where it needs to be and I need to tweak it a little, get more comfortable, and then I'll know I'm one of the sharks rather than one of the minnows.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Victory!
I won this morning's Bay 101 Midnight tournament!
I credit this win almost completely to Crispin helping me tune my game. I played conservative poker for most of it. A key lesson I've learned from my last few failures is that when you get close to the bubble, tighten up. You don't want to spend all that time playing for 11th place. That play took quite a bit of patience, since I was a relatively short stack going into hand-for-hand play. I folded AJo and pocket 5s while we were at 11. Once we were safely in the money, I opened up a tiny bit and managed to get lucky in a couple of key hands and double into the chip lead. Once there, I just waited for good spots to punish the blinds and short stacks. I lost a bunch of match-ups, but for the most part they were situations where the big blind was all-in and it was one more chip to call - you throw down with 27o in those situations.
So all in all, $120 turned into $2990 (minus a $50 toke for the dealers).
Since the last time I won at Bay 101, they seem to have stopped giving away jackets and winner chips. Bummer!
But I got 290 more points towards the Bay 101 open in August. That should put me in fifth place overall at the moment.
I credit this win almost completely to Crispin helping me tune my game. I played conservative poker for most of it. A key lesson I've learned from my last few failures is that when you get close to the bubble, tighten up. You don't want to spend all that time playing for 11th place. That play took quite a bit of patience, since I was a relatively short stack going into hand-for-hand play. I folded AJo and pocket 5s while we were at 11. Once we were safely in the money, I opened up a tiny bit and managed to get lucky in a couple of key hands and double into the chip lead. Once there, I just waited for good spots to punish the blinds and short stacks. I lost a bunch of match-ups, but for the most part they were situations where the big blind was all-in and it was one more chip to call - you throw down with 27o in those situations.
So all in all, $120 turned into $2990 (minus a $50 toke for the dealers).
Since the last time I won at Bay 101, they seem to have stopped giving away jackets and winner chips. Bummer!
But I got 290 more points towards the Bay 101 open in August. That should put me in fifth place overall at the moment.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Little things in iPhone
Here's a to-do for Steve and his team:
1. A mechanism to add additional root certificates to the X509 key store for Safari. Lots of folks use them for intranet stuff.
2. LEAP authentication for wireless. It's what we do where I work. The mac can do it, so should the iPhone.
3. Flash. You're just not going to get your way on this one, Steve. Promise.
4. Voice dialing.
5. Internet IM.
6. custom ringtones from iTunes.
7. A2DP - also known as high quality stereo over bluetooth. Rumored to already be on the way.
1. A mechanism to add additional root certificates to the X509 key store for Safari. Lots of folks use them for intranet stuff.
2. LEAP authentication for wireless. It's what we do where I work. The mac can do it, so should the iPhone.
3. Flash. You're just not going to get your way on this one, Steve. Promise.
4. Voice dialing.
5. Internet IM.
6. custom ringtones from iTunes.
7. A2DP - also known as high quality stereo over bluetooth. Rumored to already be on the way.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Comprehensive iPhone report
Ok. Now that I've had 12 hours with the phone (though to be fair, for most of that time I was asleep), and am on a real keyboard (the built-in keyboard is very smart, but I'm much faster with a full sized one where I can use all 10 fingers), I can make a full report.
You cannot (yet) assign an iTunes song as a ring-tone. That's kind of a bummer, but it's so obvious that I do expect them to fill that gap with a software update later.
Turning the phone sideways for landscape mode is very cool, but it only works in selected apps. It works in the browser and in iPod (though videos always play landscape). Where it does work you can flip it left or right (that is, with the home button on the right or left side of the screen) and it works. You cannot flip the to upside-down portrait mode (it stays upside-down).
I've browsed a number of websites and, for the most part, they all worked just as well as they did on my desktop machine unless they required flash or java. I'm unconvinced that Apple is going to completely have its way about a plugin-less web. I think they're going to have to buckle under and support one of the two (and I'm pretty sure the obvious choice would be flash).
The phone functionality is very nice, and visual voicemail is the topper. My only complaint is that the speakerphone is very, very weak and there is no voice dialing capability.
Voice dialing is sort of a double-edged sword. It was never very reliable for me on my RAZR, but it was much safer for driving. The iPhone is going to be a lot more trouble for drivers not only because of the lack of voice dialing, but because the touch surface is, obviously, completely lacking in tactile feedback (that is, you have no choice but to look at the screen to know where to touch). Fortunately, I have a GPS with a built-in speakerphone, and thus I can at least interact with a touch screen that will be positioned near the windshield.
Since I have a GPS in the car, I'm not sure I'll have too much use for Google Maps. But the one improvement is that it can display real-time traffic information. Adding that to my GPS would cost me about $10/mo, plus buying a traffic dongle.
Typing complex passwords in with the keyboard can be amusing.
I guess having youtube built-in sort of makes up for the lack of games (at the moment). Unfortunately, most of the web based games I play with require flash. The big thing I occasionally count on from my phone is entertainment when I have to wait for something. While I was in line for the iPhone, I played Tetris and Bejeweled. Now, if I have to wait in line for something, I can surf the web.
One big blow is that I have not yet found a way to turn on the ability to use the phone as a hard disk. This used to be the big reason I had an iPod - I could always plug it into a machine and use it to sneaker-net files around. So far as I can tell, that ability is absent on iPhone.
Another was that the iPhone will not act as a dialup modem for a laptop. In fact, though you can discover the iPhone via bluetooth, there's nothing at all you can do with it. It appears only to be able to use bluetooth to set up a handsfree connection, at least right now. Given that you can, theoretically, move up to 7 GB of data across to the phone, syncing over bluetooth would probably be too much to ask. And since it is so Internet connected, you can, for example, use e-mail to move pictures out of the camera.
Another missing point is that the WiFi capability is limited to accessing the Internet. You can't use it to print or browse local shares for files or anything of the sort. Of course, if you have web sites on your intranet, they are accessible.
The biggest difference of all, though, is that this phone is very likely to receive software updates as we go along. No other phone I've ever owned got a software update ever, even if the same model often got updated firmware in the retail channel. So maybe some of these deficiencies will be addressed later on.
You cannot (yet) assign an iTunes song as a ring-tone. That's kind of a bummer, but it's so obvious that I do expect them to fill that gap with a software update later.
Turning the phone sideways for landscape mode is very cool, but it only works in selected apps. It works in the browser and in iPod (though videos always play landscape). Where it does work you can flip it left or right (that is, with the home button on the right or left side of the screen) and it works. You cannot flip the to upside-down portrait mode (it stays upside-down).
I've browsed a number of websites and, for the most part, they all worked just as well as they did on my desktop machine unless they required flash or java. I'm unconvinced that Apple is going to completely have its way about a plugin-less web. I think they're going to have to buckle under and support one of the two (and I'm pretty sure the obvious choice would be flash).
The phone functionality is very nice, and visual voicemail is the topper. My only complaint is that the speakerphone is very, very weak and there is no voice dialing capability.
Voice dialing is sort of a double-edged sword. It was never very reliable for me on my RAZR, but it was much safer for driving. The iPhone is going to be a lot more trouble for drivers not only because of the lack of voice dialing, but because the touch surface is, obviously, completely lacking in tactile feedback (that is, you have no choice but to look at the screen to know where to touch). Fortunately, I have a GPS with a built-in speakerphone, and thus I can at least interact with a touch screen that will be positioned near the windshield.
Since I have a GPS in the car, I'm not sure I'll have too much use for Google Maps. But the one improvement is that it can display real-time traffic information. Adding that to my GPS would cost me about $10/mo, plus buying a traffic dongle.
Typing complex passwords in with the keyboard can be amusing.
I guess having youtube built-in sort of makes up for the lack of games (at the moment). Unfortunately, most of the web based games I play with require flash. The big thing I occasionally count on from my phone is entertainment when I have to wait for something. While I was in line for the iPhone, I played Tetris and Bejeweled. Now, if I have to wait in line for something, I can surf the web.
One big blow is that I have not yet found a way to turn on the ability to use the phone as a hard disk. This used to be the big reason I had an iPod - I could always plug it into a machine and use it to sneaker-net files around. So far as I can tell, that ability is absent on iPhone.
Another was that the iPhone will not act as a dialup modem for a laptop. In fact, though you can discover the iPhone via bluetooth, there's nothing at all you can do with it. It appears only to be able to use bluetooth to set up a handsfree connection, at least right now. Given that you can, theoretically, move up to 7 GB of data across to the phone, syncing over bluetooth would probably be too much to ask. And since it is so Internet connected, you can, for example, use e-mail to move pictures out of the camera.
Another missing point is that the WiFi capability is limited to accessing the Internet. You can't use it to print or browse local shares for files or anything of the sort. Of course, if you have web sites on your intranet, they are accessible.
The biggest difference of all, though, is that this phone is very likely to receive software updates as we go along. No other phone I've ever owned got a software update ever, even if the same model often got updated firmware in the retail channel. So maybe some of these deficiencies will be addressed later on.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Got my iPhone!
I am blogging this post from my new iPhone.
I stood in line for a couple hours at fhe AT&T store in Santa Clara. The line moved very slowly once 6 PM rolled around. I think that had a lot to do with the fact that they were trying to upsell accessories and DSL, and their computers were bogging down. It's a little weird using the keyboard, but I'm sure I can get used to it.
I'm going to stop here and switch to a real keyboard now.
I stood in line for a couple hours at fhe AT&T store in Santa Clara. The line moved very slowly once 6 PM rolled around. I think that had a lot to do with the fact that they were trying to upsell accessories and DSL, and their computers were bogging down. It's a little weird using the keyboard, but I'm sure I can get used to it.
I'm going to stop here and switch to a real keyboard now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)