Anyone who makes such a ridiculous claim such as what's suggested by the title of this post should not be allowed to play in the World Series of Poker! I can hear the virtual laughs emanating through cyberspace. I suppose I should attempt to explain.
In my estimation, poker is a game of action and reaction... a bastardized card-driven exercise of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. This universal law that every effect has a traceable cause, transcends all academic, mathematical, and competitive boundaries.
Just Google "Bruce Lee Quotes" and you will find some real gems. He may have been a little bit trippy for my tastes, but one of the quotes attributed to him has had big impact on my poker game. I don't recall the exact wording, but in a nutshell it is, "When my opponent expands, I contract. When my opponent contracts, I expand."
What does it mean for my poker game? It means that I have to always be aware of my opponents strengths and weaknesses. I attack the weaknesses, and I beware of the strengths. If I have an opponent who I know very well, and I know she only plays great hands, and she 'expands' by throwing out a huge bet... what do I do if I am holding trash? I probably 'contract' and fold. The fact is, I can make up that loss by expanding for the next 20 hands while she's waiting for good cards! This is a very simplistic example, but it applies to many situations.
So what does Evander Holyfield have to do with any of this? Evander isn't exactly known the world over as an gifted orator, so if you Google "Evander Holyfied Quotes" you will probably get some quite different results than what you will find for Bruce Lee. Aside from being the only four-time heavyweight boxing champion (besting Muhammad Ali's old record), he is known as arguably the best counterpuncher boxing has ever seen.
For people who are not familiar with boxing terminology, counterpunching is the act of hitting an adversary immediately after he or she has attempted to hit you. To see textbook execution of counterpunching, watch the last minute of Round 10 of the first fight between Holyfield and Riddick Bowe (search "Bowe Holyfield Round 10" on YouTube). Holyfield was all but finished in this fight, and then used counterpunching to turn the tables and nearly knock out Riddick Bowe before the round ended.
Counterpunching is effective in boxing because after a big punch is thrown and does not connect, there is often a period of vulnerability just afterwards when the energy of the big punch has been expended. Evander Hoyfield demonstrates time and time again that, with patience and good timing, it is possible to give your opponents just enough rope to hang themselves in these situations.
For my WSOP run, I must master the poker counterpunch -- letting my opponents swing and miss.... enticing them to thrown in chips when I have the best hand, minimizing my losses when I don't, contracting when they expand, and exercising patience and good judgement to wait for the best time to spring my attack. Just like Bruce and Evander taught me!
Friday, February 23, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Chops vs. Tops
I was recently watching a replay of a televised poker tournament, I don't remember which one it was but I think it was a 2006 WSOP circuit event, and I was reminded of interesting quote made by one of the professional card players in the tournament after raking in a fairly substantial pot. It was something along the lines of, "You play for chops, I play for tops!" to which commentator Norman Chad replied, "I have no idea what that means, but at least it's original."
I am pretty sure that whoever it was who uttered these words meant that he intended to play to win the tournament, as opposed to playing only to 'cash' -- finishing roughly in the top 10%, which is usually the threshold for receiving prize money.
Many poker tournaments end with a 'deal' made, perhaps two or more of the remaining contestants split (i.e. 'chop') the remaining prize money thereby calling it a day. Otherwise, if the tournament is played to the end, the remaining prize money is split between first and second place, with first place receiving in the neighborhood of 65% and second place 35%. Some players resist chopping pots in order to have a shot at the lion's share of the money.
Players chop for all kinds of reason's I'm sure, but I tend to think they do so primarily either because they do not want to go through the trouble of a lengthy 2-handed heads-up match (in cases where two players chop), or they feel like heads-up play is a virtual coin flip anyway, so they may as well split it 50/50 to save the trouble.
As you know by now, I must consider all of these varying viewpoints in the context of my WSOP goals. My primary goal is to win enough money to go to the WSOP at all! Secondly, I want to gain enough experience in live play to prepare myself for a good performance in Las Vegas.
My $600 win from a couple of weeks ago was at the First Turn Poker Club in Monticello, FL. It was a 1st place / 2nd place chop. Had I gone on to win, I would have received $800, and if I had lost, it would have been $400 for second place. Remembering my primary goal, I accepted the offer for a chop in order to be assured of $600 toward my buy-in. I also had to consider that I was outgunned in chips by about a 3-to-2 margin, so I thought I was getting a pretty damn good deal.
Once I reach the buy-in goal of $1500, however, I foresee my strategy changing. In the WSOP, a bracelet does not chop in half that easily, so I will be playing to win. Should I find myself in the fortunate position of making it to the final table, I will want to have had as much short-handed and heads-up experience as possible. No more chops!
I am pretty sure that whoever it was who uttered these words meant that he intended to play to win the tournament, as opposed to playing only to 'cash' -- finishing roughly in the top 10%, which is usually the threshold for receiving prize money.
Many poker tournaments end with a 'deal' made, perhaps two or more of the remaining contestants split (i.e. 'chop') the remaining prize money thereby calling it a day. Otherwise, if the tournament is played to the end, the remaining prize money is split between first and second place, with first place receiving in the neighborhood of 65% and second place 35%. Some players resist chopping pots in order to have a shot at the lion's share of the money.
Players chop for all kinds of reason's I'm sure, but I tend to think they do so primarily either because they do not want to go through the trouble of a lengthy 2-handed heads-up match (in cases where two players chop), or they feel like heads-up play is a virtual coin flip anyway, so they may as well split it 50/50 to save the trouble.
As you know by now, I must consider all of these varying viewpoints in the context of my WSOP goals. My primary goal is to win enough money to go to the WSOP at all! Secondly, I want to gain enough experience in live play to prepare myself for a good performance in Las Vegas.
My $600 win from a couple of weeks ago was at the First Turn Poker Club in Monticello, FL. It was a 1st place / 2nd place chop. Had I gone on to win, I would have received $800, and if I had lost, it would have been $400 for second place. Remembering my primary goal, I accepted the offer for a chop in order to be assured of $600 toward my buy-in. I also had to consider that I was outgunned in chips by about a 3-to-2 margin, so I thought I was getting a pretty damn good deal.
Once I reach the buy-in goal of $1500, however, I foresee my strategy changing. In the WSOP, a bracelet does not chop in half that easily, so I will be playing to win. Should I find myself in the fortunate position of making it to the final table, I will want to have had as much short-handed and heads-up experience as possible. No more chops!
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Poker Books
I own several books about poker rules, poker strategy, poker tells, and other poker concepts. Without mentioning any specifics, most of them are only moderately useful. All of them do an extremely good job of explaining poker basics. As these works delve further into advanced poker concepts, however, I begin to wonder just how much value there is to the idea that advanced poker is somehow formulaic.
I used to sit in poker games all the time and try to remember what 'the book' said to do in certain situations. Truth be told, in most situations, the correct action to take depends minimally on the cards you hold and more directly on the myriad of circumstances involving you and your opponent. Am I hungry, tired, angry, happy, confident? I sometimes have trouble determining these tells from myself, much less my opponents!
Don't misunderstand, I think there are professional poker players that have a ridiculously accurate sense for the holdings of other players. In most of these cases, I believe that they have gained this ability not through an extraordinary inclination toward mathematics, but rather an innate sense for intuitively and quickly understanding the personalities of others. It is these people who I think are the best poker players.
By a long shot, the best poker book I have read to date is The Tao of Poker by Larry W. Phillips. If you are looking for a book that will give you a formula of how you should respond when an agressive opponent bets into your outside straight draw on the turn, then this book is not for you.
The Tao of Poker walks the reader through 285 high-level real life-inspired concepts that will improve your poker game. I sincerely feel that anyone who puts all of the concepts found in this book into practice will be a successful card player; in tournaments, cash, limit, no-limit, pot-limit, or whatever. The tips are universal. Here are a few that I like:
Rule 228: Don't tie yourself up in knots trying to make something happen when it clearly is not happening!
Rule 240: Never drop "I'm being outplayed" from your list of reasons why you may be losing.
Rule 120: If you look at an opponent too long, you may get misinformation.
The book goes into more detail on these rules and 282 others. I found most of them to be very useful, and I think the book has really helped my game a great deal.
I used to sit in poker games all the time and try to remember what 'the book' said to do in certain situations. Truth be told, in most situations, the correct action to take depends minimally on the cards you hold and more directly on the myriad of circumstances involving you and your opponent. Am I hungry, tired, angry, happy, confident? I sometimes have trouble determining these tells from myself, much less my opponents!
Don't misunderstand, I think there are professional poker players that have a ridiculously accurate sense for the holdings of other players. In most of these cases, I believe that they have gained this ability not through an extraordinary inclination toward mathematics, but rather an innate sense for intuitively and quickly understanding the personalities of others. It is these people who I think are the best poker players.
By a long shot, the best poker book I have read to date is The Tao of Poker by Larry W. Phillips. If you are looking for a book that will give you a formula of how you should respond when an agressive opponent bets into your outside straight draw on the turn, then this book is not for you.
The Tao of Poker walks the reader through 285 high-level real life-inspired concepts that will improve your poker game. I sincerely feel that anyone who puts all of the concepts found in this book into practice will be a successful card player; in tournaments, cash, limit, no-limit, pot-limit, or whatever. The tips are universal. Here are a few that I like:
Rule 228: Don't tie yourself up in knots trying to make something happen when it clearly is not happening!
Rule 240: Never drop "I'm being outplayed" from your list of reasons why you may be losing.
Rule 120: If you look at an opponent too long, you may get misinformation.
The book goes into more detail on these rules and 282 others. I found most of them to be very useful, and I think the book has really helped my game a great deal.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Bars, Casinos, and the Internet
We're always told that in order to become a better card player, one has to play poker more often. I agree with this theory 100%. The regular game at Zucca Bar and Pizzeria here in Smyrna, Georgia is tonight, and as I am thinking about going to play, I find myself hesitating.
As I mentioned in my last post, I cut my teeth playing cards in the local Atlanta-area bars (it is quite a scene -- check out this list of Atlanta bar games, which is about 6-months old at the time of this post). In most cases, these games are free and so are the players. Bar poker has certainly taught me how to play No Limit Hold 'Em tournaments against weak opponents -- although, for the record, players at Zucca are a notch above most bars. I have also played thousands of hands on the internet (PartyPoker in the past, and Bodog since the most recent legislative term). The competition in low stakes online tournament poker is slightly stronger than what you might find in the bars around here. In preparing for my World Series run, however, I am finding that there is no substitute for live tournament play in brick-and-mortar casinos and card rooms.
The biggest reason I have found live tournament play more useful is because it has acclimated me to the casino tournament environment. I played in my first casino tournament at Harrah's in Las Vegas a little over a year ago. I was so enamoured with the nice tables, the champions' pictures on the wall, the raucous table talk, and free drinks that I lost my mind and busted out way early. On the surface, you would expect this to have done more damage to my confidence than anything, but this is not the case. I learned from my mistakes, and over time as I have played in more casino tournaments, I have become increasingly comfortable. I know for certain that this going to help me this summer. My rhetorical question for the day is, what is better for preparing for the World Series? Bar/online poker, or no poker at all?
I know there are weak players in the World Series of Poker, but there are also very strong players as well -- including the world's top pros. The bottom line is that, for me, my biggest adversary will not be any one individual among the field of players, and not a run of cold cards, but rather the onslaught of distractions to overcome in Las Vegas -- airport security, bags, transportation, check-in, the lights, the slot machines, the sounds, the excitement, the cocktails, the 'ESPN' logos -- all things expertly designed to take my mind off my game!
I think the answer to my question is simpler than I thought. Any poker is better than no poker when preparing for the World Series, but you can't beat the experience of a live card room.
As I mentioned in my last post, I cut my teeth playing cards in the local Atlanta-area bars (it is quite a scene -- check out this list of Atlanta bar games, which is about 6-months old at the time of this post). In most cases, these games are free and so are the players. Bar poker has certainly taught me how to play No Limit Hold 'Em tournaments against weak opponents -- although, for the record, players at Zucca are a notch above most bars. I have also played thousands of hands on the internet (PartyPoker in the past, and Bodog since the most recent legislative term). The competition in low stakes online tournament poker is slightly stronger than what you might find in the bars around here. In preparing for my World Series run, however, I am finding that there is no substitute for live tournament play in brick-and-mortar casinos and card rooms.
The biggest reason I have found live tournament play more useful is because it has acclimated me to the casino tournament environment. I played in my first casino tournament at Harrah's in Las Vegas a little over a year ago. I was so enamoured with the nice tables, the champions' pictures on the wall, the raucous table talk, and free drinks that I lost my mind and busted out way early. On the surface, you would expect this to have done more damage to my confidence than anything, but this is not the case. I learned from my mistakes, and over time as I have played in more casino tournaments, I have become increasingly comfortable. I know for certain that this going to help me this summer. My rhetorical question for the day is, what is better for preparing for the World Series? Bar/online poker, or no poker at all?
I know there are weak players in the World Series of Poker, but there are also very strong players as well -- including the world's top pros. The bottom line is that, for me, my biggest adversary will not be any one individual among the field of players, and not a run of cold cards, but rather the onslaught of distractions to overcome in Las Vegas -- airport security, bags, transportation, check-in, the lights, the slot machines, the sounds, the excitement, the cocktails, the 'ESPN' logos -- all things expertly designed to take my mind off my game!
I think the answer to my question is simpler than I thought. Any poker is better than no poker when preparing for the World Series, but you can't beat the experience of a live card room.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Here we are!
I began playing cards seriously during the 2005 Super Bowl. My wife and I invited about 10 people over to watch the game, and break in my new poker tabletop. I had played a few times before, and knew the basics of poker, but I was very green. We played cards for about 7 hours that day, and the Super Bowl became an afterthought. It was a $10 buy-in elimination tournament with rebuys, and I finished in second place for about $100, and poker has been a big part of my life ever since.
I will spare you the boring details of my poker existence between February 6, 2005 and now, but between a few trips to Las Vegas, Atlanta bar tournaments, a home game in Washington DC where I thought I might get killed for playing consrevatively, and loads of other excitement, I decided this year to make a run at a World Series bracelet.
As far as my finances are concerned, I would consider myself comfortable, but not wealthy. Because this is the case, I cannot justify the big buy-ins required for major tournaments (and neither can my wife!). The fact of the matter is, I could play cards for no stakes at all, and have loads of fun. I don't play for a living, and probably never will.
Because this is the case, I am attempting to to pay my way into a World Series event with poker winnings throughout the twelve months leading up to the festivities. In the 2006 World Series, there was a $1000 Hold 'Em event offered, and I set my sights on this same event for 2007.
The 2007 schedule was released last month (you can look at it here), and lo and behold, no $1000 event. So the $1500 event it is! Event #3 on June 2nd, to be exact.
My biggest win in the last eight months was a $600 chop this weekend, which has put me really close to what I need for the buy-in. Right now, I am at $1305. It finally hit me this weekend that this could actually happen, which is why I decided to start writing here.
Between now and June, I will try to consistently update this journal... providing some insight into what is going through my mind, what difficulties I am facing in my game, and what dificulties I am facing outside of my game. If everything goes as planned, I hope to also write about a very successful trip to the Rio in June.
Stay tuned... this should be an interesting ride.
I will spare you the boring details of my poker existence between February 6, 2005 and now, but between a few trips to Las Vegas, Atlanta bar tournaments, a home game in Washington DC where I thought I might get killed for playing consrevatively, and loads of other excitement, I decided this year to make a run at a World Series bracelet.
As far as my finances are concerned, I would consider myself comfortable, but not wealthy. Because this is the case, I cannot justify the big buy-ins required for major tournaments (and neither can my wife!). The fact of the matter is, I could play cards for no stakes at all, and have loads of fun. I don't play for a living, and probably never will.
Because this is the case, I am attempting to to pay my way into a World Series event with poker winnings throughout the twelve months leading up to the festivities. In the 2006 World Series, there was a $1000 Hold 'Em event offered, and I set my sights on this same event for 2007.
The 2007 schedule was released last month (you can look at it here), and lo and behold, no $1000 event. So the $1500 event it is! Event #3 on June 2nd, to be exact.
My biggest win in the last eight months was a $600 chop this weekend, which has put me really close to what I need for the buy-in. Right now, I am at $1305. It finally hit me this weekend that this could actually happen, which is why I decided to start writing here.
Between now and June, I will try to consistently update this journal... providing some insight into what is going through my mind, what difficulties I am facing in my game, and what dificulties I am facing outside of my game. If everything goes as planned, I hope to also write about a very successful trip to the Rio in June.
Stay tuned... this should be an interesting ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
