Tuesday, October 11, 2011

How not to play kings

I was playing one of my usual nightly SNG tournaments on Bodog a few hours ago when this hand occurred:



Let's look at how my opponent played his K-K step by step.

He was in third position and limped after two folds (blinds 15/30). This is not good in most cases. If you have an especially aggressive table at which you will reliably see a light raise and reraise from the late-position players, then OK, maybe. But this table definitely did not fit that description. He could easily have ended up out of position facing four to five opponents in a limpfest.

I raised from the button with A-J. The action folded back to our villain, who min-raised. This is nutty. The whole point of the limp-reraise trick is to trap a bunch of money in the pot and take it down preflop with a prohibitively large raise, because you don't want to have to play the entire hand from out of position. The minimum raise will virtually never accomplish this goal. He was making the pot 255, charging me 50 to call. That is, he was offering me better than 5:1 pot odds for a call. Because he was only about a 2.5:1 favorite to win, I would be correct to call in that spot even if I saw his cards and therefore knew that his hand was better than mine. (My guess is that if you asked this guy to recite David Sklansky's fundamental theorem of poker, he would just stare at you with glassy, uncomprehending eyes.)

So now we have a flop: Ad-Qh-10h. He should consider this just about as bad a flop as he could have imagined, because high on the list of hands with which I might have raised and then called his reraise are any ace, Q-Q, 10-10, and K-J, all of which now have him crushed. He leads out with a half-pot bet. OK, I don't blame him for that. I might certainly have some smaller pocket pair that would be forced to fold, or a weak ace that I would fold for fear of him having a better one. But a bet here should be, from his point of view, tentative and probing, not committal. If he wins, he breathes a sigh of relief and moves on. If, on the other hand, he is raised, he has to assume he is far behind. It would also be justifiable to check/fold, just giving up.

I did not believe that he had any of the few hands that beat me here, so I raised. This should have been a clear signal to him to get out while the getting was good. Nope. He called. Fold would have been best. As a second-best choice, a shove over the top has the merit of giving me considerable pause, and might have even worked, convincing me that he played A-A, A-K, A-Q, Q-Q, or 10-10 strangely. I had started the hand with a stack of 1480 and had put in a total of 540 with my flop raise. It would hurt to put in more than a third of my chips and then fold, but I would still have 32 big blinds to play with, so I could do it if he told a good story.

Calling was absolutely the worst of his three options. What was he hoping would happen next? If a king came to give him a set, he'd have to worry that I had A-J or J-J for a straight. If a jack came to give him a straight, he'd have to worry that he'd end up with only half the pot, and only half of the blinds for profit. Any heart and he'd have to wonder if I had made a flush--and if I did, it would likely be the nut flush, so even a fourth heart on the river wouldn't help him. There just wasn't going to be anything on fourth street that he could really be happy with in this situation.

Of course, I was forced to wonder what in the hell he was taking this bizarre line with, but whatever it was, the 6s on the turn could not have helped him. If I was ahead on the flop, I was still ahead. With 1125 in the pot and him having only another 610 behind (I had him covered), it was a no-brainer to shove when he checked the turn. This was his last chance to do something right and fold a clear loser. He had only a bluff-catcher at this point. A fold would still leave him a workable stack of 20 big blinds.

Nope. He called. The only way he could win was with a jack on the river for Broadway--a three-outer. He didn't make it.

This guy had six decision points in this hand. Only two are defensible--the lead-out bet on the flop and the check on the turn (though the latter should have been made with the intention of check-folding if I bet). It would be difficult to find a way to play pocket kings any worse than this.

You see why I find these games profitable?

Guess the casino, #1007







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Stratosphere

Monday, October 10, 2011

Guess the casino, #1006







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Hooters

Sunday, October 09, 2011

Guess the casino, #1005







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Tuscany

Memo and flowers

Warning: No poker content. If that's going to bother you, you could just stop reading now, rather than complain later.


I'm up in Salt Lake City, of course. Visited Mom in the nursing home today. I'm staying with Dad and one of my nieces, who has moved in here since the last time I came. Her cat also moved in. His name is Memo.

Why Memo? I asked her. She very helpfully told me, "It's short for 'Memorandum.'" Can you tell that I come from a family of smartasses?

I've been playing with Memo a lot today. He's an excellent cat and fun to watch.




That's his bird-watching perch. The finches come to the bird feeders a few feet outside this window, and he gets all predatory--crouching, stalking, sometime standing up on his hind legs.

That's my very red rental car in the background.

But his favorite thing to do is chase his butterfly toy. It has something inside that makes an apparently pleasing-to-cats noise when he bats or bites at it. So he does:


He also seems to enjoy swatting it under the stove where he can't get at it, then mewling pitiably until somebody takes mercy on him and fetches it out with a yardstick. Within a few minutes, it's stuffed under there again. It's a strange game, but at least the rules are simple.

As for flowers, well, here are the two that my dad mounted to the top of his car to make it easy to spot his car in a parking lot:




And here, in the rosebushes that line one end of the front yard, is one of the last roses of the season. It made me think of somebody I'm missing very much.




That's all from Utah. Heading back to Vegas tomorrow.

Saturday, October 08, 2011

Poker gems, #439

Mark Twain, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court.


The best swordsman in the world doesn’t need to fear the second best swordsman in the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn’t do the thing he ought to.

Guess the casino, #1004







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: South Point

Friday, October 07, 2011

Guess the casino, #1003







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Mirage

Thursday, October 06, 2011

Over and out

I'll be gone for a few days, off to Salt Lake City to visit the parental units.



To tide you over until I get back, here's the latest adventure in the life of the Mighty Deuce-Four:



Guess the casino, #1002







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Harrah's

Wednesday, October 05, 2011

Hodgepodge

First up, in the "What's in a screen name" category, we have this excellent example:



Second, it keeps on raining quads for me at Bodog. These two happened in the same game today:





Finally, no post would be complete without at least one example of the Mighty Deuce-Four at work. Here the flop was checked around. I bet the turn, on the strength of my sure-to-get-there draws, got one caller. He called again on the river. He had A-J with no spade. He thought that was enough to take down the Deuce-Four. I pity the fool!



Guess the casino, #1001







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Excalibur

Tuesday, October 04, 2011

I am pure awesome sauce

If you should doubt that, just ask Josie.

Screw-ups at Full Tilt

Excellent read about what may have happened, by Bill Rini:


http://www.billrini.com/2011/10/04/screwed-full-tilt-poker/

The part that doesn't ring true to me, however, is the bit about the big investors accepting ongoing payments, when they knew they really shouldn't, because they had to keep up appearances. I just don't buy the premise that Howard Lederer was depositing checks for millions of dollars at a time, while muttering under his breath, "Damn, I really hate that I have to take this money, but it's for the good of the company, so I'll do it."

Guess the casino, #1000







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Binion's

Monday, October 03, 2011

Poker gems, #438

Tom Schneider, today on Pokerati.



The one thing I’m most curious about is Chris Ferguson. Why Jesus? Why did you let this happen to us Jesus? Why did you need that much money? It’s obvious that you didn’t spend it at the barber. Your clothing budget couldn’t have been very much since you have worn the same long, black, scary leather jacket for the last ten years. The poker community after review of all of the facts should take a vote on whether Jesus should be able to keep his name. Whatever, we probably couldn’t even organize that.

Barry Greenstein as judge of character

The news today is that Barry Greenstein and Doyle Brunson say they believe their friends over at Full Tilt Poker may have been incompetent businessmen, but they couldn't possibly have had any malicious, criminal intention.



I want to focus just on Greenstein here. He is quoted saying, “There’s no doubt in my mind that their thought wasn’t ‘We’re going to steal from customers’ but when Black Friday hit it came at the absolute worst time for them.” Further, “Most of these guys on Team Full Tilt are friends of mine and most of them definitely didn’t know what was going on." And, finally, “I don’t think anyone believes that the initial intent was to defraud the customers, it just worked out that way in their method of fixing the problem."

Well, that's fine and noble of him. But how is Greestein's track record as a judge of character?

Here he is in 2008, speaking of Russ Hamilton, after going to his house to interview him specifically to determine whether Hamilton was guilty in the UltimateBlecch scandal: “This is being investigated and there’s no doubt in my mind that it will end up that Hamilton knew who the cheaters were, but I don’t get the feeling that we’ll be saying that Russ Hamilton is one of the cheaters.” “I didn’t get the feeling that he was that knowledgeable about what was going on as we hoped he would be.” “Russ seemed like he knew a couple of the guilty parties, but in the end, I don’t think it was him.”

We all know how that story turned out.

So it seems to me we have to conclude one of two things:

(A) Greenstein is an astute reader of human minds, he correctly assessed Hamilton's soul, and the poor guy is wrongly accused, as pure as the driven snow, despite all the evidence (only some of which was known at the time of Greenstein's interview), and despite the formal conclusions of the investigating gaming commission.

or

(B) Greenstein is a nice guy and tends to assume that other people are also nice guys, and he has a blind spot to the evil that men do. Furthermore, he has a habit of trusting his own gut feeling about people in preference to objective evidence. As a result, his comments about Howard Lederer and Chris Ferguson and Rafe Furst should be viewed as the product of friendship and wishful thinking, rather than a reliable, objective assessment of the whole situation.

I know which way I'm voting.


Guess the casino, #999







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Tropicana

Sunday, October 02, 2011

Guess the casino, #998







To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: MGM Grand

Poker gems, #437

Sam Trickett, in Party Poker Big Game 5, episode 2.



There's too many levels in this stupid game.