I was in Las Vegas last weekend, and I am happy to say that I had a very nice couple of days at the poker table, and I am now officially staked for my $1500 buy-in on June 2nd.
For our annual guys' weekend, we decided to try downtown Las Vegas this time instead of the strip. In the past, our trip has been reserved for Super Bowl weekend, but we opted this year to go to during the March Madness college basketball tournament regional finals. The sports part of the trip was pretty much a bust... we arrived too late to watch two of the four games, and we didn't really find anywhere downtown that was very good for watching sports. I foresee moving things back to the strip on Super Bowl weekend next year. One major advantage to staying downtown, though, is that everything is very convenient. If you get tired of one casino, you can be at the next one within a few minutes. In most cases on the strip, you are looking at a nice 15 minute walk.
We did find an interesting card room at the Plaza Hotel and Casino at the end of Fremont Street. The 'room' itself, is really not a room per se, but more like a carved out corner of the casino. While not the nicest poker spot in Vegas, it does have a great option for tournament play. From 10am until midnight every day, they offer $40 sit-and-go 10-seat tournaments, which turned out to be profitable for me (13 tournaments played, four won, second place twice). Coincidentally, my sister and brother-in-law gave me Phil Gordon's Little Blue Book for my birthday, where he suggests that a good way to practice for final tables is to play in sit-and-go tournaments. I found my experience last weekend to support his suggestion.
Although this is true, based on my experiences last weekend, I think that there are some differences between final tables of multi-table tournaments and single-table sit-and-gos. The most significant difference is that with multi-table tournaments it can take a heck of a lot of concentration, energy, and time to get to the final table depending on the size and structure of the event. With sit-and-gos, it is a simple matter of throwing in your money and you are magically at the final table already! The point is that mental and physical fatigue figure into the final table of large multi-table tournaments. It is no secret that anyone playing in the World Series has to be prepared for long hours of intense play, which further supports my intended plan of getting plenty of rest in the days preceding the tournament. In fact, I am considering moving my flight to Thursday instead of Friday so that I can get used to the time difference and get settled in.
On a completely different note, I also finally came to the realization last weekend that 'other' casino games are for suckers. I know that my coming to this conclusion will not seem like much of a groundbreaking achievement to most, and I know that casinos don't offer games just for the fun of it. Even though I half-heartedly came to this conclusion long ago, the non-poker casino games have always nonetheless been a big source of entertainment for me. The fact is, however, that games like blackjack and craps are volatile... you either finish the session up big or down big, there is rarely any in-between. On the other hand, just about anyone can take $100 to a $1-$2 limit hold 'em table, play a super tight game, and sit there for hours listening to people talk, watching the casino, having free cocktails, and if you are in a nice place, enjoying the surroundings of an upscale card room. With blackjack or craps, you can start with the same amount and be up to $300 in ten minutes, or, the more likely outcome, down the same amount in the same time span. Given the choice, I will take poker every time! I like to keep it cheap, and poker is the way to have cheap fun in Vegas.
So, now that I am staked for the WSOP, where do I go from here? For the next two months, I am planning to focus almost exclusively on multi-table tournaments. Deep-stack events are hard to come by in Atlanta, Georgia, so I am going to have to make do with the local bar games and perhaps a junket to Atlantic City with Pablo and maybe a trip to Tunica. Since funding is no longer a concern, I can experiment a little bit, and see what works best against different styles of play.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Auditors Are No Match For Card Players!
By day, I am an IT Manager for an aluminum company. The company I work for takes technology security and compliance very seriously, and every so often, our head office sends internal auditors to my office in Atlanta to make sure we are on the up and up. Right now, we are in the middle of a two-week marathon audit, and I am so ready for it to be over.
One interesting realization I have come to during their visit, believe it or not, is that as I have begun to play cards more seriously these audits have become easier to endure. For anyone who has been involved in an audit, we know that some auditors use very interesting techniques to extract information. Some of them are your best buddies, some of them are stern and authoritative, and some of them are timid so that you feel sorry for them, oddly enough. The problem is, if you say too much to an auditor, they latch on to information that they find interesting and then they sink in their claws, asking for documentation of every detail about the subject. The bottom line is that they are in your office to find problems with your processes. If there are major problems with the way things are being done, they will find those things very quickly. Once you are 'out of the woods', an audit soon becomes an exercise in nit-picking and time wasting. Of course, anything they find, no matter how insignificant, can rarely be argued effectively enough to result in the finding's dismissal from the final audit report. To add insult to injury, the dirty laundry is then distributed after the audit to every IT executive across the company. What a drag.
Poker has helped me become more economical with my communication in these situations. While I firmly believe that audits are necessary to make sure things are being run the way they should, I believe with equal conviction that any auditor can walk into an office such as mine and determine within a day whether or not an IT environment is generally secure and compliant. So.. if they chose to spend two weeks chasing non-existent problems in my office, I pledge to not give any leads or information unless I am forced to turn over my cards!
My opponents on the felt are auditors of my poker game. They use every tactic under the sun to get information from me -- they talk, they stare, they boast, they stand up, they wave their arms, they ask if I have a king, they ask me if I will show my hand if they fold... you name it. Just like auditors in my office, they can forget it. I will show my cards when I have to, and only when I have to.
I think this will be a challenge at the World Series. It will be difficult not to make friendly conversation at the table, especially if I am seated with top pros. I am convinced, however, that if I can handle a two-week IT audit, I can keep my trap shut during a 3-day poker tournament. As painful as this couple of weeks has been, the bright side is that it has been unbelievably good practice!
One interesting realization I have come to during their visit, believe it or not, is that as I have begun to play cards more seriously these audits have become easier to endure. For anyone who has been involved in an audit, we know that some auditors use very interesting techniques to extract information. Some of them are your best buddies, some of them are stern and authoritative, and some of them are timid so that you feel sorry for them, oddly enough. The problem is, if you say too much to an auditor, they latch on to information that they find interesting and then they sink in their claws, asking for documentation of every detail about the subject. The bottom line is that they are in your office to find problems with your processes. If there are major problems with the way things are being done, they will find those things very quickly. Once you are 'out of the woods', an audit soon becomes an exercise in nit-picking and time wasting. Of course, anything they find, no matter how insignificant, can rarely be argued effectively enough to result in the finding's dismissal from the final audit report. To add insult to injury, the dirty laundry is then distributed after the audit to every IT executive across the company. What a drag.
Poker has helped me become more economical with my communication in these situations. While I firmly believe that audits are necessary to make sure things are being run the way they should, I believe with equal conviction that any auditor can walk into an office such as mine and determine within a day whether or not an IT environment is generally secure and compliant. So.. if they chose to spend two weeks chasing non-existent problems in my office, I pledge to not give any leads or information unless I am forced to turn over my cards!
My opponents on the felt are auditors of my poker game. They use every tactic under the sun to get information from me -- they talk, they stare, they boast, they stand up, they wave their arms, they ask if I have a king, they ask me if I will show my hand if they fold... you name it. Just like auditors in my office, they can forget it. I will show my cards when I have to, and only when I have to.
I think this will be a challenge at the World Series. It will be difficult not to make friendly conversation at the table, especially if I am seated with top pros. I am convinced, however, that if I can handle a two-week IT audit, I can keep my trap shut during a 3-day poker tournament. As painful as this couple of weeks has been, the bright side is that it has been unbelievably good practice!
Saturday, March 10, 2007
A Poker Lesson from Pablo
I am a lot like Steve Dannenmann. Not because I finished in second place in the 2005 World Series of Poker Main Event and won $4.2 million, but because I often feel like I am only the third or fourth best player in my home game -- which Steve Dannenmann has been quoted as saying about himself more than once.
Speaking of home games, my wife and I had a chance to play with our regular group of friends a couple of weeks ago at our house, and my buddy Pablo was down in Atlanta from Washington, DC to visit. We played a hold 'em micro buy-in tournament w/rebuys and I was heads up with Pablo at around midnight for all the marbles. I do not often find myself in this position at my home game. For whatever reason, I seem to do quite well in tournaments with strangers, but rarely as well in my home game. I tend to think it is due my loose play, combined with my consumption of an adult beverage or two throughout the evening, finally compounded with the superior skills of my opponents.
Throughout the 20 minutes or so of heads up play, I learned a good poker lesson from Pablo. You may remember from a previous post that, for various reasons, I have sworn off chopping pots. For now, this is primarily due to my need to take advantage of every opportunity I can find to develop my heads-up skills.
The lesson Pablo helped me learn was how fatigue plays a part in late tournament play. Is my opponent excited about winning the whole thing, or will he be just as happy to to go home with more money than he came with and get to sleep as soon as possible? Before heads-up play, when the game was three-handed (I was up against Pablo and my wife), I did something sneaky. I asked them both what their thoughts were on chopping the pot. They both were up for it. (I was a distant second in chips behind Pablo, with a slight edge over Katie). After asking this question, and hearing their reply, I said I was not quite ready yet. They both read this blog, so they knew as well as I did that I would never be ready!
After my wife was eliminated, Pablo offered several times to chop the pot. Given the late hour, I knew Pablo was getting tired of playing and wanted to go home -- which is the essence of the lesson I learned: Tired tournament players are often impatient, and will either gamble with coin flips, or call large bets with marginal holdings. I declined each request Pablo made to split the winnings, and inched my way back into the game with what I thought was solid post-flop decisions.
A long story short, I won the tournament and 100% of the money (although it involved a fairly significant bad beat for Pablo) and I was happy with how I played. For the World Series, I plan to use this lesson to my advantage, getting plenty of rest the week before, avoiding alcohol, eating right, and exercising regularly. I think this will help to keep me alert and energized for the tournament.
Speaking of home games, my wife and I had a chance to play with our regular group of friends a couple of weeks ago at our house, and my buddy Pablo was down in Atlanta from Washington, DC to visit. We played a hold 'em micro buy-in tournament w/rebuys and I was heads up with Pablo at around midnight for all the marbles. I do not often find myself in this position at my home game. For whatever reason, I seem to do quite well in tournaments with strangers, but rarely as well in my home game. I tend to think it is due my loose play, combined with my consumption of an adult beverage or two throughout the evening, finally compounded with the superior skills of my opponents.
Throughout the 20 minutes or so of heads up play, I learned a good poker lesson from Pablo. You may remember from a previous post that, for various reasons, I have sworn off chopping pots. For now, this is primarily due to my need to take advantage of every opportunity I can find to develop my heads-up skills.
The lesson Pablo helped me learn was how fatigue plays a part in late tournament play. Is my opponent excited about winning the whole thing, or will he be just as happy to to go home with more money than he came with and get to sleep as soon as possible? Before heads-up play, when the game was three-handed (I was up against Pablo and my wife), I did something sneaky. I asked them both what their thoughts were on chopping the pot. They both were up for it. (I was a distant second in chips behind Pablo, with a slight edge over Katie). After asking this question, and hearing their reply, I said I was not quite ready yet. They both read this blog, so they knew as well as I did that I would never be ready!
After my wife was eliminated, Pablo offered several times to chop the pot. Given the late hour, I knew Pablo was getting tired of playing and wanted to go home -- which is the essence of the lesson I learned: Tired tournament players are often impatient, and will either gamble with coin flips, or call large bets with marginal holdings. I declined each request Pablo made to split the winnings, and inched my way back into the game with what I thought was solid post-flop decisions.
A long story short, I won the tournament and 100% of the money (although it involved a fairly significant bad beat for Pablo) and I was happy with how I played. For the World Series, I plan to use this lesson to my advantage, getting plenty of rest the week before, avoiding alcohol, eating right, and exercising regularly. I think this will help to keep me alert and energized for the tournament.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Measuring My Poker Success
I mentioned in a previous post that I own several books about poker. I also subscribe to CardPlayer magazine. I enjoy consuming just about any media related to poker strategy. A common characteristic among most of these is the assertion that poker success should not be measured by the amount of money one leaves the table with.
I argue that profit is the only way to accurately measure one's stature and effectiveness as a poker player.... and it is completely independent of a poker player's level of experience! Take for example a beginning hold 'em player who barely has any knowledge of the rules, much less what starting hands to play or fold. What expectation would you have for this player among a group of seasoned card players? Over time, until the person had enough knowledge and experience to consistently compete, you would expect him to lose most of the time. In consideration of measuring success, however, if this person has little knowledge of poker basics, walking away with any profit whatsoever for him is a tremendous success!
In the case of an individual who is a well-rounded card player and plays in games with people of similar capabilities, it is possible for a player to make seemingly outlandish calls, bluffs and raises from out of left field, and still walk away with a significant profit -- flying in the face of textbook, ABC poker.
Poker scholars would argue that poker success should be measured by the correct decisions made during play, regardless of profit. I argue that if I walk away from the table broke every time I play, there is no better measure of poor decision making! Sure, it is possible to have a game once in a blue moon, make all the right decisions, and still walk away with a loss. If this remains the case over time, though, I am definitely doing something wrong.
By playing people and not playing cards, it leads me to do things at the card table that earlier in my career I would have never even considered. Sometimes the moves I make would be considered 'wrong' by most of the poker literature out there. Don't confuse this with making 'high risk' plays. I am not one to make a big river call on a 1-outer just because I see a juicy pot. What I will do is act on my reads, and if my reads are right, the moves that follow are no risk. This is what makes them 'right' when the odds say they are wrong.
Besides this, there are certainly the fringe benefits of playing cards that do not involve profit in any way. For some people, it is probably worth losing a few hundred dollars on a Saturday night just for the adrenaline rush of the game. For others, it might be a rare opportunity to gather with friends and family for a nickel-dime-quarter game. Still for others, it might be the charge we get from making quick mathematical calculations on the fly. In the long run, I suppose we should all measure poker success by what is important to us. Come to think of it, 'correct' decisions mean very little if it's no fun making them!
I argue that profit is the only way to accurately measure one's stature and effectiveness as a poker player.... and it is completely independent of a poker player's level of experience! Take for example a beginning hold 'em player who barely has any knowledge of the rules, much less what starting hands to play or fold. What expectation would you have for this player among a group of seasoned card players? Over time, until the person had enough knowledge and experience to consistently compete, you would expect him to lose most of the time. In consideration of measuring success, however, if this person has little knowledge of poker basics, walking away with any profit whatsoever for him is a tremendous success!
In the case of an individual who is a well-rounded card player and plays in games with people of similar capabilities, it is possible for a player to make seemingly outlandish calls, bluffs and raises from out of left field, and still walk away with a significant profit -- flying in the face of textbook, ABC poker.
Poker scholars would argue that poker success should be measured by the correct decisions made during play, regardless of profit. I argue that if I walk away from the table broke every time I play, there is no better measure of poor decision making! Sure, it is possible to have a game once in a blue moon, make all the right decisions, and still walk away with a loss. If this remains the case over time, though, I am definitely doing something wrong.
By playing people and not playing cards, it leads me to do things at the card table that earlier in my career I would have never even considered. Sometimes the moves I make would be considered 'wrong' by most of the poker literature out there. Don't confuse this with making 'high risk' plays. I am not one to make a big river call on a 1-outer just because I see a juicy pot. What I will do is act on my reads, and if my reads are right, the moves that follow are no risk. This is what makes them 'right' when the odds say they are wrong.
Besides this, there are certainly the fringe benefits of playing cards that do not involve profit in any way. For some people, it is probably worth losing a few hundred dollars on a Saturday night just for the adrenaline rush of the game. For others, it might be a rare opportunity to gather with friends and family for a nickel-dime-quarter game. Still for others, it might be the charge we get from making quick mathematical calculations on the fly. In the long run, I suppose we should all measure poker success by what is important to us. Come to think of it, 'correct' decisions mean very little if it's no fun making them!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
