Friday, April 20, 2007
You have got to be kidding
Read this http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070420/ap_on_re_us/presidential_impeachment
I mean, is Vermont really a state?
Isn't Vermont more like a little mining town in Pennsalvania or something? A dirty, rat infested, run down slum of a town?
I heard that Vermont may have wanted to be a real State a few years ago, but New Hampshire put it in a headlock and said no.
Who are they kidding? Vermont? Give me a break.
I mean, is Vermont really a state?
Isn't Vermont more like a little mining town in Pennsalvania or something? A dirty, rat infested, run down slum of a town?
I heard that Vermont may have wanted to be a real State a few years ago, but New Hampshire put it in a headlock and said no.
Who are they kidding? Vermont? Give me a break.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Mea Culpa
So I hosed up a tournament I was hosting pretty good.
THE ANATOMY OF A HOSED UP TOURNAMENT
I was looking at the blind schedule for the WSOP $50k HORSE Tournament and I noticed that the cost of playing each round doesn't really follow a smooth, even ramp upwards like other blind schedules (WSOP 10K NLHE ). Instead, the increases in the cost to play each round (blinds, antes, and forced bets) was kind of "chunky". By chunky, I mean that some rounds have no increases (i.e., round 6 and 7 both have blinds of $500/$1000). Other rounds have a large increase (i.e., the cost to play increases by 64% from round 7 to round 8). On average, though, the blind schedule has increases of 21% round over round.
So I thought I'd re-engineer this defective blind schedule and build one that had the same average increase (21%) from round to round but was a lot smoother. I also thought I'd figure out a way to avoid using red ($5) chips. So I build a totally kick ass, smoothed out, blind schedule for the HORSE tournament (see schedule) - but I had to start the blinds/antes pretty high so I could use the green $25 chip as the minimum denomination.
Then, the next task is to determine the starting chips.
I have a pretty fail safe system for determining the starting chip count. Here's the secret - it works amazingly well. Whatever the big blind is during the round that completes at the 5 hour mark (usually round 10), well - that's the starting chip count. This system has never really failed me when hosting a NL or PL tournament.
So I looked at my beautiful HORSE blind schedule and found that the big blind was around $3000 at the 10th level. So there I had it. The starting chip count would be $3000.
IT ALL STARTS TO UNRAVEL
It didn't take long for the players to recognize that the starting chip counts was very low compared to the first blind level. The big blind on the first level was $200. This makes each player holding only 15 big blinds. No good - obviously.
When I look at some of the blind schedules for the WSOP games this year, it seems like they are starting players off with around 50 big blinds on the first level and the levels escalate so that starting chips are about 10x the BB/lower limit established for round 10 (although this number varies between 2x and 25x). Here are the results:
THE ANATOMY OF A HOSED UP TOURNAMENT
I was looking at the blind schedule for the WSOP $50k HORSE Tournament and I noticed that the cost of playing each round doesn't really follow a smooth, even ramp upwards like other blind schedules (WSOP 10K NLHE ). Instead, the increases in the cost to play each round (blinds, antes, and forced bets) was kind of "chunky". By chunky, I mean that some rounds have no increases (i.e., round 6 and 7 both have blinds of $500/$1000). Other rounds have a large increase (i.e., the cost to play increases by 64% from round 7 to round 8). On average, though, the blind schedule has increases of 21% round over round.
So I thought I'd re-engineer this defective blind schedule and build one that had the same average increase (21%) from round to round but was a lot smoother. I also thought I'd figure out a way to avoid using red ($5) chips. So I build a totally kick ass, smoothed out, blind schedule for the HORSE tournament (see schedule) - but I had to start the blinds/antes pretty high so I could use the green $25 chip as the minimum denomination.
Then, the next task is to determine the starting chips.
I have a pretty fail safe system for determining the starting chip count. Here's the secret - it works amazingly well. Whatever the big blind is during the round that completes at the 5 hour mark (usually round 10), well - that's the starting chip count. This system has never really failed me when hosting a NL or PL tournament.
So I looked at my beautiful HORSE blind schedule and found that the big blind was around $3000 at the 10th level. So there I had it. The starting chip count would be $3000.
IT ALL STARTS TO UNRAVEL
It didn't take long for the players to recognize that the starting chip counts was very low compared to the first blind level. The big blind on the first level was $200. This makes each player holding only 15 big blinds. No good - obviously.
When I look at some of the blind schedules for the WSOP games this year, it seems like they are starting players off with around 50 big blinds on the first level and the levels escalate so that starting chips are about 10x the BB/lower limit established for round 10 (although this number varies between 2x and 25x). Here are the results:
So, for my tournament, I should have started players off with around 50 big blinds. Since the starting big blind was $200, the starting chips should have been around $10k. Also, the BB or lower limit for the 10th round should have been around 1/10th of $10k ($1000). Luckily for me, I had set the 10th level at $1000.
WHAT TO DO
After a couple of "post start" corrections to the starting chips (first adding $3000. Then, adding $5000), players started with $11K. This seemed to appease everyone and in looking at the table above, it looked like $11K was right in-line with the blind schedules that they are using at the WSOP.
INTERESTING OBSERVATION
So if you are looking for a WSOP event to play this year, you may want to look at the ratio of the starting chips to the first blind level. This will give you an idea of how fast the tournament starts. You may also want to take a look at the ratio of starting chips to the BB on level 10. This should give you an idea of how fast the tournamant escalates.
If you're a bad player like me, you may want to neutralize a bit of the skill advantage of the other players by choosing an event that starts fast and escalates fast (i.e., $1500 NLHE). If you're a good player, you may want to find an event that starts slow and escalates slowly (the best "values" here seem to be the $1500 SHOE or the $2500 HORSE and of course the $10k NLHE Championship event).
What's missing from this analysis is that for the NLHE events, the antes really need to be considered....maybe I'll do that another time - or maybe not.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
To Expose or not to Expose
As I peruse some of my previous posts, I noticed that I often recap hands where I flop a big hand and win a nice pot. Those are pretty boring. For every one of those hands, there are dozens of hands that I mis-play and lose a little money or mis-play and lose a lot of money. Those are the hands that I should be discussing and soliciting feedback. Those are the ‘leaks’ that must be plugged.
Going forward, I’ll endeavor to recap some of my misplayed hands.
So, last Friday night, we were playing at my place. I was headed out of the town the next morning for a family vacation and was looking to squeeze in a little poker before 3 days of inlaws, 4 hr car trips, pet stains, etc....
I was losing a little money playing $2/$4 limit mixed games. Nothing special. Then, someone suggested we switch to no-limit Hold’Em. Everyone agreed and we made the switch. We’d play with $1/$1 blinds and everyone had around $100 in front of them.
On this one particular hand, we were playing short-handed. A few players had stepped away from the table. Ryno is UTG and raises to $4. I’m next to act and decide this is worth a call with my suited connectors 4d-5d. Compton calls on the button. Brent calls from the SB. Skalony calls from the BB. It’s a raised family pot. Hipee!
The flop comes 6d-2h-3d.
After Brent checks, Skalony leads out for $10. Ryno bows out. I smooth call with the nuts – “it’s a trap!”.
Compton puts an end to the shenagins by going all in for $49. Brent folds. Skalony thinks for a while and finally calls $49 (into an $89 pot). He’s getting 1.8:1 on his call here.
I really liked my hand - obviously. It’s the current nuts with a redraw to a flush and an open ended straight flush. With any luck, both Compton and Skalony hold hands with 2 diamonds. This would leave only 5 diamonds left of which 2 made me the straight flush. They would be praying for only 3 good outs.
Of course, I didn’t think about all of that at the time. I was basically thinking. “Wow, I have the nuts and a redraw to a bigger hand”. So I pushed all in for another $89.
The pot now has $256 (($4 x 5 players)+($49 x 3 players)+($89 raise)). Action back to Skalony. He’s facing an $89 bet into a $256 pot. He’s getting almost 3:1.
He hems and haws. He stews and brews. He complains, “why didn’t I just go all in myself?”. He basically gives away his hand here. He has a diamond draw. He’s a good player, so I know it’s the nut diamond draw.
Here’s where the hand gets interesting. I wasn’t really sure at the time exactly how much was in the pot, but I know he is thinking, “Man, I’m getting the right price to call. I’m 2:1 against hitting one of the remaining 9 diamonds with 2 cards to come and there’s more than enough money in the pot.”
So I figure that there is some real equity for me if he folds. I need to add a little incentive for him to fold.
So when he asks me to run it twice, I decline.
Skalony is just about to complete his analysis of the situation. He starts loading up chips for a call.
I better up the pressure. So, I expose my hand.
I’m sure he didn’t need me to remind him, but I point out, “I’ve got 2 of your outs plus the 7d and 2d are no good for you either as they’d give me a straight flush.
Skalony goes back into the tank. He’s still getting nearly 3:1 on his call but now with only 5 outs, he’s about a 4:1 dog. (Side note: Skalony actually held the Ad-2d so he had 6 good outs – making him a 3.33:1 dog to win the hand with 2 cards to come. The pot was only offering 2.9:1)
He finally folds – in agony.
Compton says, "you're free-rolling" as he tables the 4h-5h. My diamond redraw comes through for me on the turn (Qd) and I take a nice pot.
Skalony later complains that he miscalculated his odds and should have called.
The Analysis:
I disagree. Think about it. If Compton held a hand like 10d-10c, Skalony only would have had 5 outs. If Compton held 2 diamonds, Skalony’s outs would have been down to 4. Even if Compton held a hand like 6c-6h for top set, Skalony would have less outs as any diamond on the river that might pair the turn card would make a full boat.
Even if Skalony was sure that Compton did not have a diamond in his hand or a set, he was only getting 2.9:1 pot odds when he was a 3.33:1 dog in the hand. It was a good fold. Rest easy.
My play, on the other hand – not so good.
I wasn’t able to put this together with much detail at the moment of the actual play. If I would have known that Skalony was getting 2.9:1 pot odds as a 3.33:1 dog, I would have kept my hand disguised and let him make a marginally bad call.
Sure, he would have taken down the pot, but the correct play would have been for me to encourage his call.
I estimated my EV in his call is about 70% of $256 or $179. My EV of his fold is 100% of $167 plus 0% of $89 for $167. So I lost $12 in value from exposing my hand and encouraging his fold.
Is this the right way to think about it?
Going forward, I’ll endeavor to recap some of my misplayed hands.
So, last Friday night, we were playing at my place. I was headed out of the town the next morning for a family vacation and was looking to squeeze in a little poker before 3 days of inlaws, 4 hr car trips, pet stains, etc....
I was losing a little money playing $2/$4 limit mixed games. Nothing special. Then, someone suggested we switch to no-limit Hold’Em. Everyone agreed and we made the switch. We’d play with $1/$1 blinds and everyone had around $100 in front of them.
On this one particular hand, we were playing short-handed. A few players had stepped away from the table. Ryno is UTG and raises to $4. I’m next to act and decide this is worth a call with my suited connectors 4d-5d. Compton calls on the button. Brent calls from the SB. Skalony calls from the BB. It’s a raised family pot. Hipee!
The flop comes 6d-2h-3d.
After Brent checks, Skalony leads out for $10. Ryno bows out. I smooth call with the nuts – “it’s a trap!”.
Compton puts an end to the shenagins by going all in for $49. Brent folds. Skalony thinks for a while and finally calls $49 (into an $89 pot). He’s getting 1.8:1 on his call here.
I really liked my hand - obviously. It’s the current nuts with a redraw to a flush and an open ended straight flush. With any luck, both Compton and Skalony hold hands with 2 diamonds. This would leave only 5 diamonds left of which 2 made me the straight flush. They would be praying for only 3 good outs.
Of course, I didn’t think about all of that at the time. I was basically thinking. “Wow, I have the nuts and a redraw to a bigger hand”. So I pushed all in for another $89.
The pot now has $256 (($4 x 5 players)+($49 x 3 players)+($89 raise)). Action back to Skalony. He’s facing an $89 bet into a $256 pot. He’s getting almost 3:1.
He hems and haws. He stews and brews. He complains, “why didn’t I just go all in myself?”. He basically gives away his hand here. He has a diamond draw. He’s a good player, so I know it’s the nut diamond draw.
Here’s where the hand gets interesting. I wasn’t really sure at the time exactly how much was in the pot, but I know he is thinking, “Man, I’m getting the right price to call. I’m 2:1 against hitting one of the remaining 9 diamonds with 2 cards to come and there’s more than enough money in the pot.”
So I figure that there is some real equity for me if he folds. I need to add a little incentive for him to fold.
So when he asks me to run it twice, I decline.
Skalony is just about to complete his analysis of the situation. He starts loading up chips for a call.
I better up the pressure. So, I expose my hand.
I’m sure he didn’t need me to remind him, but I point out, “I’ve got 2 of your outs plus the 7d and 2d are no good for you either as they’d give me a straight flush.
Skalony goes back into the tank. He’s still getting nearly 3:1 on his call but now with only 5 outs, he’s about a 4:1 dog. (Side note: Skalony actually held the Ad-2d so he had 6 good outs – making him a 3.33:1 dog to win the hand with 2 cards to come. The pot was only offering 2.9:1)
He finally folds – in agony.
Compton says, "you're free-rolling" as he tables the 4h-5h. My diamond redraw comes through for me on the turn (Qd) and I take a nice pot.
Skalony later complains that he miscalculated his odds and should have called.
The Analysis:
I disagree. Think about it. If Compton held a hand like 10d-10c, Skalony only would have had 5 outs. If Compton held 2 diamonds, Skalony’s outs would have been down to 4. Even if Compton held a hand like 6c-6h for top set, Skalony would have less outs as any diamond on the river that might pair the turn card would make a full boat.
Even if Skalony was sure that Compton did not have a diamond in his hand or a set, he was only getting 2.9:1 pot odds when he was a 3.33:1 dog in the hand. It was a good fold. Rest easy.
My play, on the other hand – not so good.
I wasn’t able to put this together with much detail at the moment of the actual play. If I would have known that Skalony was getting 2.9:1 pot odds as a 3.33:1 dog, I would have kept my hand disguised and let him make a marginally bad call.
Sure, he would have taken down the pot, but the correct play would have been for me to encourage his call.
I estimated my EV in his call is about 70% of $256 or $179. My EV of his fold is 100% of $167 plus 0% of $89 for $167. So I lost $12 in value from exposing my hand and encouraging his fold.
Is this the right way to think about it?
Sunday, April 08, 2007
A Retraction - sort of
I really like the math behind poker. I'm not too good at it, but I find it to be very interesting.
So in my last post, I mentioned what I thought was a bad chop decision by the chip leaders. I may have even called it "horrible". See post and comments.
I didn't know the chip counts or blind structure, but it seemed like a bad chop "from where I was seated".
But as you know, there is always more to the story.
For example, if every player, 1 through 10, had roughly the same chip amount (say between 8% and 12% of the total chips in play). And say, for example, that the blinds were very large in proportion to the average stack (say each player had enough to post only 2 or 3 blinds), then a straight distribution of the prize pool to all of the remaining players would not, mathematically, be too bad of a decision for the chip leader or the short stacks.
On the other hand, if the chip leader had a large portion of the chips in play (i.e, 30%-40%) and the blinds were low compared to the average stack size (i.e., chip leader has about 40 blinds and the short stack had just 2 or 3 blinds), then this chop deal worked out by the final 10 at the TOC would have been, mathematically, a bad one for the chip leaders.
Anyway, based on the chip distributions provided recenlty by one of the players, it looks like a straight distribution of the prize pools was not that bad of a deal for the chip leader (see file) . I still think the chip leader gave up about $100 in equity.
Having said that, there are still plenty of good reasons to give up some equity in a chop deal. These reasons include (risk aversion, tired, don't want to make enemies, need to get home to wife/kids, etc...).
Risk aversion goes like this, "well, I've been playing my ass off for the last 6 hours. Now, I'm so close to the money. I'd really hate to go home empty handed if I catch a run of bad cards. So, even though I should probably get $1700 in this chop deal, I'll accept $1600 and avoid the risk."
I think there are a lot of poker players out there that are risk averse. I think I'm one of them. In my last post I mentioned a play where I got my money all in with AK vs. QQ and I agreed to just chop the pot with the other player. This was the play of someone who would prefer to avoid risk. "Running it twice" is another example of avoiding risk.
Buying life insurance is another example of risk aversion. When you buy life insurance, you are in essense, paying a premium to insure against the unlikely event - you die.
Gamblers (of which poker players are a subset), even the risk averse kind, are generally seeking out opportunities to take risks when the odds are favorable (even just slightly favorable). The theory is that if you gamble enough times when you are a 51% favorite, you'll be a long-term winner.
So, I take it back - a retraction. The chip leaders did not make a horrible decision when then agreed to accept a chop. They just missed an opportunity to gamble when the odds were slightly favorable.
So in my last post, I mentioned what I thought was a bad chop decision by the chip leaders. I may have even called it "horrible". See post and comments.
I didn't know the chip counts or blind structure, but it seemed like a bad chop "from where I was seated".
But as you know, there is always more to the story.
For example, if every player, 1 through 10, had roughly the same chip amount (say between 8% and 12% of the total chips in play). And say, for example, that the blinds were very large in proportion to the average stack (say each player had enough to post only 2 or 3 blinds), then a straight distribution of the prize pool to all of the remaining players would not, mathematically, be too bad of a decision for the chip leader or the short stacks.
On the other hand, if the chip leader had a large portion of the chips in play (i.e, 30%-40%) and the blinds were low compared to the average stack size (i.e., chip leader has about 40 blinds and the short stack had just 2 or 3 blinds), then this chop deal worked out by the final 10 at the TOC would have been, mathematically, a bad one for the chip leaders.
Anyway, based on the chip distributions provided recenlty by one of the players, it looks like a straight distribution of the prize pools was not that bad of a deal for the chip leader (see file) . I still think the chip leader gave up about $100 in equity.
Having said that, there are still plenty of good reasons to give up some equity in a chop deal. These reasons include (risk aversion, tired, don't want to make enemies, need to get home to wife/kids, etc...).
Risk aversion goes like this, "well, I've been playing my ass off for the last 6 hours. Now, I'm so close to the money. I'd really hate to go home empty handed if I catch a run of bad cards. So, even though I should probably get $1700 in this chop deal, I'll accept $1600 and avoid the risk."
I think there are a lot of poker players out there that are risk averse. I think I'm one of them. In my last post I mentioned a play where I got my money all in with AK vs. QQ and I agreed to just chop the pot with the other player. This was the play of someone who would prefer to avoid risk. "Running it twice" is another example of avoiding risk.
Buying life insurance is another example of risk aversion. When you buy life insurance, you are in essense, paying a premium to insure against the unlikely event - you die.
Gamblers (of which poker players are a subset), even the risk averse kind, are generally seeking out opportunities to take risks when the odds are favorable (even just slightly favorable). The theory is that if you gamble enough times when you are a 51% favorite, you'll be a long-term winner.
So, I take it back - a retraction. The chip leaders did not make a horrible decision when then agreed to accept a chop. They just missed an opportunity to gamble when the odds were slightly favorable.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Decisions-Decisions; Might As Well Make Em' Good Ones
There have been some poker experts that write that the key to success as a poker player is just to make, on the average, better decisions than your opponents. If you are able to just make better decisions, the money will follow. These experts implore their readers to not focus on outcomes (money won or lost), but instead to focus on the decisions.
Poker Success then can be expressed as ƒ[(∑ your good decision)/( ∑ your opponents good decisions)]
A classic example is in blackjack. When you are dealt 2 aces and the dealer is showing a 6, the obvious and correct play is to split the aces and double your bet. This is the best decision regardless of the eventual outcome. Blackjack players easily understand this concept.
Anyway, I think good decision making goes beyond just the tactics used in any given hand (making a call on the river, making a value bet, over calling a raise, etc…). Good, profit maximizing, decisions are available before you sit down (seat selection, game selection, stakes, etc…), during the session or tournament, and even at the end of the tournament.
So I witnessed the end of a home poker tournement a few nights back. This was a 40-50 person, NLHE tourney. What made this particular tourney a little strange was that it was a season ending tournament where the players were playing for a very heavy overlay that was collected during the season of 10 tournaments. The prize structure was such that each of the top 8 finishers each recieved the same prize ($2000 cash/trip package). After play was down to 8 players, the tournament would end, and each of the remaining players would win the same prize - regardless of thier chip position at that point.
When play got down to 10 handed, players started discussing a chop. At first, the chip leader opposed making a deal. Eventually, the short stacked players applied enough pressure and the chip leader caved in and agreed to a chop.
The chop deal they worked was that each remaining player would recieve $1600.
I'm sure everyone thought the deal was fair.
From where I'm sitting, the deal was a real good one for the short stack and a real poor deal for the chip leader.
Let me explain. If you think of the final 10 players competing for 10 prizes, it helps conceptualize the issue. Think of these 10 players competing for 1st prize $2000, 2nd prize $2000, and so on down to 8th prize $2000, 9th prize $0 and 10th prize $0.
Each of the remaining players has an ownership stake in each of these prizes. Their claim or "equity" to these prizes is a function of their chip stacks in proportion to the total chips in play.
The short stack has a pretty small claim to the top prize, a slightly higher claim to the 2nd prize, and so on. The short stack does have a pretty good sized claim the very last prize. The short stacks total equity then is the sum of his claims to each of the prizes.
In contrast, the chip leader has a pretty good sized stake or claim to the top prize, a slighlty smaller claim to the 2nd prize, etc... and has a pretty small claim to the 10th prize. His total equity then is the sum of his equity in each of the prizes.
It is clear that the short stack in this situation would have a relatively small claim to the total prize pool compared to the chip leader-who would have a relatively large claim to the prize pool.
I'm not really sure what the actaul chip distribution was on this particular night, so it's difficult to calculate a precisely equitable chop distribution for this situation, but it's easy to imagine a situation where the chip leader could make a legitamate claim to almost all of the $2000 top prize (say $1950). The short stack would have a pretty large claim to the last prize ($0) but a pretty small claim to the top prizes. It's easy to imagine that the short stack could make a legitamate claim to say $600 of the prize pool.
The fact that the chip leader agreed to take the same amount as the short stack was just a horrible, horrible deal for the chip leader. He easily gave away $300 in equity in this deal. The short stacks made an absolute faboulous deal. They were able to somehow succesfully negotiate around $1000 in equity that they did not really deserve.
At first, you may say, 'so what's the big deal.' We'll, the big deal is in the poor quality decision of the chip leader. This decision was a looser. Giving up $300 in prize equity is the same thing as taking $300 over to the cash game and calling down a $300 bet on the river holding a jack high. It's a bad decision. It's giving away money. This was money that the chip leader earned by good play for the first 6 hours or the tournament.
Poker Success then can be expressed as ƒ[(∑ your good decision)/( ∑ your opponents good decisions)]
A classic example is in blackjack. When you are dealt 2 aces and the dealer is showing a 6, the obvious and correct play is to split the aces and double your bet. This is the best decision regardless of the eventual outcome. Blackjack players easily understand this concept.
Anyway, I think good decision making goes beyond just the tactics used in any given hand (making a call on the river, making a value bet, over calling a raise, etc…). Good, profit maximizing, decisions are available before you sit down (seat selection, game selection, stakes, etc…), during the session or tournament, and even at the end of the tournament.
So I witnessed the end of a home poker tournement a few nights back. This was a 40-50 person, NLHE tourney. What made this particular tourney a little strange was that it was a season ending tournament where the players were playing for a very heavy overlay that was collected during the season of 10 tournaments. The prize structure was such that each of the top 8 finishers each recieved the same prize ($2000 cash/trip package). After play was down to 8 players, the tournament would end, and each of the remaining players would win the same prize - regardless of thier chip position at that point.
When play got down to 10 handed, players started discussing a chop. At first, the chip leader opposed making a deal. Eventually, the short stacked players applied enough pressure and the chip leader caved in and agreed to a chop.
The chop deal they worked was that each remaining player would recieve $1600.
I'm sure everyone thought the deal was fair.
From where I'm sitting, the deal was a real good one for the short stack and a real poor deal for the chip leader.
Let me explain. If you think of the final 10 players competing for 10 prizes, it helps conceptualize the issue. Think of these 10 players competing for 1st prize $2000, 2nd prize $2000, and so on down to 8th prize $2000, 9th prize $0 and 10th prize $0.
Each of the remaining players has an ownership stake in each of these prizes. Their claim or "equity" to these prizes is a function of their chip stacks in proportion to the total chips in play.
The short stack has a pretty small claim to the top prize, a slightly higher claim to the 2nd prize, and so on. The short stack does have a pretty good sized claim the very last prize. The short stacks total equity then is the sum of his claims to each of the prizes.
In contrast, the chip leader has a pretty good sized stake or claim to the top prize, a slighlty smaller claim to the 2nd prize, etc... and has a pretty small claim to the 10th prize. His total equity then is the sum of his equity in each of the prizes.
It is clear that the short stack in this situation would have a relatively small claim to the total prize pool compared to the chip leader-who would have a relatively large claim to the prize pool.
I'm not really sure what the actaul chip distribution was on this particular night, so it's difficult to calculate a precisely equitable chop distribution for this situation, but it's easy to imagine a situation where the chip leader could make a legitamate claim to almost all of the $2000 top prize (say $1950). The short stack would have a pretty large claim to the last prize ($0) but a pretty small claim to the top prizes. It's easy to imagine that the short stack could make a legitamate claim to say $600 of the prize pool.
The fact that the chip leader agreed to take the same amount as the short stack was just a horrible, horrible deal for the chip leader. He easily gave away $300 in equity in this deal. The short stacks made an absolute faboulous deal. They were able to somehow succesfully negotiate around $1000 in equity that they did not really deserve.
At first, you may say, 'so what's the big deal.' We'll, the big deal is in the poor quality decision of the chip leader. This decision was a looser. Giving up $300 in prize equity is the same thing as taking $300 over to the cash game and calling down a $300 bet on the river holding a jack high. It's a bad decision. It's giving away money. This was money that the chip leader earned by good play for the first 6 hours or the tournament.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Roller Coaster
This week has been a real roller-coaster of events.
First, I had a bad session of poker last Friday night and lost some money. Roller coaster going down.
Then, I found out that I’m getting a new assignment at work. I’ll be leaving a position that I was not really very well-suited for and frankly not all that good at. I’ll be taking a position in call center operations management. This job is more in my ‘wheel-house’. I'm really looking forward. Roller coaster going up.
Then, on Wednesday night, I come home to find my family (Wife, Kids, and pets) freaking out about a noise coming from one of the interior walls of my house. I soon assessed the situation to be some sort of vermin trapped inside of the wall. By the sounds of the scratching and clawing, this could have been anything from a small mouse, to a bird, to a large raccoon or bobcat for all I knew (your imagination can sometimes get the best of ya in a situation like this).
Being the manly man of the house, I didn’t need to call any type of service to remove this pest. I’d handle it myself.
I quickly determined that the animal was trapped in a exhaust vent from my downstairs bathroom. So, perched on a step stool, I carefully removed the fan exhaust cover. I was in a very vulnerable position. I was guarding against the likely possibility that as I removed this cover, the raccoon (or whatever) would come launching out of the hole in the ceiling, attach to my face, and either suffocate or scratch me to death.
Whew! The cover came off without incident. Now, for those of you who maybe unfamiliar with the makings of a bathroom exhaust fan - it is made up of a housing and a motor/fan. I carefully removed the fan from the housing. I noticed that the vent is actually covered with a sort of one-way valve. This valve allows exhaust to flow out of the room but prevents air from flowing into the room. I thought this was pretty handy safety feature as it might prevent the bobcat in my ceiling from gaining access to my face.
After a quick assessment of the situation, I thought my best course of action was to prop open the exhaust valve and quickly run out of the bathroom and close the door. This way, the sewer rat in my ceiling could climb out and I’d have it locked in the bathroom – of course I didn’t really have a plan beyond that point to deal with this particular contingency.
So I prop open the exhaust valve with a piece of wadded up paper towel and scramble out of the bathroom and slam the door behind me.
Now, I positioned just outside of the bathroom door. I have broom in hand ready to clobber any vermin such as a small mouse that maybe able to squeeze under the bathroom door. After a while, the scratching noise in the wall ends. This is my cue that the animal in my ceiling has found it’s opening to escape the exhaust vent. So I crack open the door to sneak a peek at the horrible creature. It turned out to be a small black bird. I’m able to easily catch the bird once it gets tangled in the blinds on the bathroom window. No injuries to report. But I’m feeling like a bit of a sissy for being a little intimidated by the situation. Roller coaster down and then up.
Then, on Saturday, after weeks of pleading and begging, I finally gave into my wife’s and daughter’s manipulation to get another family pet. My daughter just had a birthday and she thought she needed to have her own puppy as the ultimate present. So, against my better judgment, I caved in. I’ll admit, the puppy is cute and funny and all that other stuff, but I swear it’s just like we had another baby. We are dealing with pooping and peeing in the house. We’re up in the middle of the night attending to this infant canine. Then, there’s the baby talk, “Annie need to go outside?”, “Annie want a treat?”, “goochie, goocie, ga, ga”. I’m going to have to say roller coaster going down at this point.
Finally, I escaped for some late evening poker on Saturday night at a home game. I arrive about 10p. This is a cash game that follows a large 40-50 person tournament. Over the years, this has been a pretty good cash game. It seem like the players usually show up with several hundred $$ that they are willing to gamble with. The play is usually pretty loose/wild. I attribute this to the fact that most of these players just spent 2-3 hours playing very tight in the tournament, now they are ready to gamble it up. The downside is that at a 10 handed table, there may be 5 or 6 really good players. My biggest problem is playing against players that are comfortable enough to get ‘creative’ and make some very non-standard plays. I usually loose a lot of money on these more creative plays.
Anyway, I had a good night. I won $435 (whooo hooo!). Roller coaster going back up.
At this home game, we usually end up playing NLHE all night. There is not much tolerance for other games. Even though ½ of the table may be willing play some different games, there are usually a few people who object. I don’t really mind as this gives me a chance to work on NLHE against some better players.
The interesting part of this evening was a general willingness of the table to play games other than NL Hold’Em. I don’t consider myself a really good poker player at anyone one game, but I think I have graduated up from being a terrible player on most of the games. As it turns out, not being a terrible player was probably enough to make a little money at this particular session.
First the ‘standard’ game was NL Hold’Em, $100 max buyin, $1/$1 blinds. An interesting hand came up. I was in the big blind with AK suited. 2 early position players limp. A very tight and, up to that point – inactive, player raised to $5. The small blind calls. I raise to $20. Action is folded to the original raiser who re-raises and goes all in for an additional $20. Other player folds. I call, getting more than 3:1. We table our hands. He shows QQ. I show my AKs. We look at each other. I could sense we were both looking for a way to avoid flipping a coining in this spot, so I say “chop it?”. He agrees instantly. We pull back our money and chop the 7 dollars in dead money. What do you think of this play? Is this a sissy play, or is the play of a seasoned poker player who has no interest in flipping coins for a large pot?
Then, another interesting hand came up when I had a pair of 5s – again in the big blind. The pot was raised to $8 and it was cold called by 2 players. I called as well. 4 of us to the flop. There’s $32 in the pot. The flop was a thing of beauty 2-3-5. I was already anticipating how I was going to triple up through players holding overpairs. I check. The early position player bets $20. 1 player folds, one player calls. Since the board was coordinated and the pot was multi-way, I decided to stop messing around right then and there. I check-raised to $65. The original raiser goes all in for another $40. The guy who called the initial $20, folds. I call. Other guy shows A-4 for a flopped straight. I need the board to pair or to somehow or find the case 5. Another 2 falls on the turn and I suck out for a big pot. I take a little flack for sucking out. I try to play it up like I’m a big fish that likes to gamble for all of my money.
Then, the game was switched to $2-$10 spread limit stud. Once again, I’m not a good stud player, but I figured to be at a small advantage vs the field.
On the very first hand of the rotation, I’m dealt A-K-Q with the ace in the door. After the bring-in and 2 limpers, the guy who called the game, raises the pot with a queen in the door. Since, I had a queen and there was another queen dead behind me, I decided to re-raise to isolate. I made a full $10 re-raise. My cards were completely live. It worked. I was heads-up. 4th street was a blank. I made a continuation bet/bluff, he called. 5th Street, I caught a pair of Kings and bet. He called. 6th Street was a blank, I checked my one pair. His board was really uncoordinated. He checked behind. River – I made Kings up. I bet, he folded I dragged a nice pot without showing.
On the very next hand, I was dealt split kings with a 5. I figured that there may be some players that would like to take a flyer for $10 with some weak hands, so I raised to $12 after 2 limpers hoping to thin the field. I get 2 callers. 4th street is a good card – a 5. I made Kings up and it’s well disguised. Plus, I’m guessing that since I didn’t show down my last hand, I may get someone who wants to “look me up” if I bet. So I bet $10. I find the table sheriff that I’m looking for. I get re-raised a full $10. In a structured limit game, where the betting doubles on 5th street, I’d just call here and then check raise on 5th street to trap more money in the pot, but since the betting did not go up on 5th street, I decided to re-raise a full $10 right here on 4th street. I get called. I know I’m in good shape here. 5th street is a brick. I bet $10. He calls. 6th street are bricks for both of us. I check, he checks. I still have Kings up on the river. I check – no sense in getting raised here if he made a straight or flush. He bets. I make an agonizing call and immediately announce my hand. He mucks. I drag a nice $150 pot. I made about 100 bucks in 2 hands of stud. That’s nice!
Then, someone started calling Pot Limit Omaha Hi/Lo 8 or better with $1/$1 blinds. Interestingly, we played this game for the rest of the evening (approx 4 hours straight). This may be a sign of things to come when NLHE specialists prefer to play PLO8 at the cash game. Anyway, I played pretty well and made some money. On one particular hand, I made a play on a good player. This is a play that simply would not work on a newer player. I executed what was a “promo” fake check-raise on the turn. Here's how it went down.
First, I had a bad session of poker last Friday night and lost some money. Roller coaster going down.
Then, I found out that I’m getting a new assignment at work. I’ll be leaving a position that I was not really very well-suited for and frankly not all that good at. I’ll be taking a position in call center operations management. This job is more in my ‘wheel-house’. I'm really looking forward. Roller coaster going up.
Then, on Wednesday night, I come home to find my family (Wife, Kids, and pets) freaking out about a noise coming from one of the interior walls of my house. I soon assessed the situation to be some sort of vermin trapped inside of the wall. By the sounds of the scratching and clawing, this could have been anything from a small mouse, to a bird, to a large raccoon or bobcat for all I knew (your imagination can sometimes get the best of ya in a situation like this).
Being the manly man of the house, I didn’t need to call any type of service to remove this pest. I’d handle it myself.
I quickly determined that the animal was trapped in a exhaust vent from my downstairs bathroom. So, perched on a step stool, I carefully removed the fan exhaust cover. I was in a very vulnerable position. I was guarding against the likely possibility that as I removed this cover, the raccoon (or whatever) would come launching out of the hole in the ceiling, attach to my face, and either suffocate or scratch me to death.
Whew! The cover came off without incident. Now, for those of you who maybe unfamiliar with the makings of a bathroom exhaust fan - it is made up of a housing and a motor/fan. I carefully removed the fan from the housing. I noticed that the vent is actually covered with a sort of one-way valve. This valve allows exhaust to flow out of the room but prevents air from flowing into the room. I thought this was pretty handy safety feature as it might prevent the bobcat in my ceiling from gaining access to my face.
After a quick assessment of the situation, I thought my best course of action was to prop open the exhaust valve and quickly run out of the bathroom and close the door. This way, the sewer rat in my ceiling could climb out and I’d have it locked in the bathroom – of course I didn’t really have a plan beyond that point to deal with this particular contingency.
So I prop open the exhaust valve with a piece of wadded up paper towel and scramble out of the bathroom and slam the door behind me.
Now, I positioned just outside of the bathroom door. I have broom in hand ready to clobber any vermin such as a small mouse that maybe able to squeeze under the bathroom door. After a while, the scratching noise in the wall ends. This is my cue that the animal in my ceiling has found it’s opening to escape the exhaust vent. So I crack open the door to sneak a peek at the horrible creature. It turned out to be a small black bird. I’m able to easily catch the bird once it gets tangled in the blinds on the bathroom window. No injuries to report. But I’m feeling like a bit of a sissy for being a little intimidated by the situation. Roller coaster down and then up.
Then, on Saturday, after weeks of pleading and begging, I finally gave into my wife’s and daughter’s manipulation to get another family pet. My daughter just had a birthday and she thought she needed to have her own puppy as the ultimate present. So, against my better judgment, I caved in. I’ll admit, the puppy is cute and funny and all that other stuff, but I swear it’s just like we had another baby. We are dealing with pooping and peeing in the house. We’re up in the middle of the night attending to this infant canine. Then, there’s the baby talk, “Annie need to go outside?”, “Annie want a treat?”, “goochie, goocie, ga, ga”. I’m going to have to say roller coaster going down at this point.
Finally, I escaped for some late evening poker on Saturday night at a home game. I arrive about 10p. This is a cash game that follows a large 40-50 person tournament. Over the years, this has been a pretty good cash game. It seem like the players usually show up with several hundred $$ that they are willing to gamble with. The play is usually pretty loose/wild. I attribute this to the fact that most of these players just spent 2-3 hours playing very tight in the tournament, now they are ready to gamble it up. The downside is that at a 10 handed table, there may be 5 or 6 really good players. My biggest problem is playing against players that are comfortable enough to get ‘creative’ and make some very non-standard plays. I usually loose a lot of money on these more creative plays.
Anyway, I had a good night. I won $435 (whooo hooo!). Roller coaster going back up.
At this home game, we usually end up playing NLHE all night. There is not much tolerance for other games. Even though ½ of the table may be willing play some different games, there are usually a few people who object. I don’t really mind as this gives me a chance to work on NLHE against some better players.
The interesting part of this evening was a general willingness of the table to play games other than NL Hold’Em. I don’t consider myself a really good poker player at anyone one game, but I think I have graduated up from being a terrible player on most of the games. As it turns out, not being a terrible player was probably enough to make a little money at this particular session.
First the ‘standard’ game was NL Hold’Em, $100 max buyin, $1/$1 blinds. An interesting hand came up. I was in the big blind with AK suited. 2 early position players limp. A very tight and, up to that point – inactive, player raised to $5. The small blind calls. I raise to $20. Action is folded to the original raiser who re-raises and goes all in for an additional $20. Other player folds. I call, getting more than 3:1. We table our hands. He shows QQ. I show my AKs. We look at each other. I could sense we were both looking for a way to avoid flipping a coining in this spot, so I say “chop it?”. He agrees instantly. We pull back our money and chop the 7 dollars in dead money. What do you think of this play? Is this a sissy play, or is the play of a seasoned poker player who has no interest in flipping coins for a large pot?
Then, another interesting hand came up when I had a pair of 5s – again in the big blind. The pot was raised to $8 and it was cold called by 2 players. I called as well. 4 of us to the flop. There’s $32 in the pot. The flop was a thing of beauty 2-3-5. I was already anticipating how I was going to triple up through players holding overpairs. I check. The early position player bets $20. 1 player folds, one player calls. Since the board was coordinated and the pot was multi-way, I decided to stop messing around right then and there. I check-raised to $65. The original raiser goes all in for another $40. The guy who called the initial $20, folds. I call. Other guy shows A-4 for a flopped straight. I need the board to pair or to somehow or find the case 5. Another 2 falls on the turn and I suck out for a big pot. I take a little flack for sucking out. I try to play it up like I’m a big fish that likes to gamble for all of my money.
Then, the game was switched to $2-$10 spread limit stud. Once again, I’m not a good stud player, but I figured to be at a small advantage vs the field.
On the very first hand of the rotation, I’m dealt A-K-Q with the ace in the door. After the bring-in and 2 limpers, the guy who called the game, raises the pot with a queen in the door. Since, I had a queen and there was another queen dead behind me, I decided to re-raise to isolate. I made a full $10 re-raise. My cards were completely live. It worked. I was heads-up. 4th street was a blank. I made a continuation bet/bluff, he called. 5th Street, I caught a pair of Kings and bet. He called. 6th Street was a blank, I checked my one pair. His board was really uncoordinated. He checked behind. River – I made Kings up. I bet, he folded I dragged a nice pot without showing.
On the very next hand, I was dealt split kings with a 5. I figured that there may be some players that would like to take a flyer for $10 with some weak hands, so I raised to $12 after 2 limpers hoping to thin the field. I get 2 callers. 4th street is a good card – a 5. I made Kings up and it’s well disguised. Plus, I’m guessing that since I didn’t show down my last hand, I may get someone who wants to “look me up” if I bet. So I bet $10. I find the table sheriff that I’m looking for. I get re-raised a full $10. In a structured limit game, where the betting doubles on 5th street, I’d just call here and then check raise on 5th street to trap more money in the pot, but since the betting did not go up on 5th street, I decided to re-raise a full $10 right here on 4th street. I get called. I know I’m in good shape here. 5th street is a brick. I bet $10. He calls. 6th street are bricks for both of us. I check, he checks. I still have Kings up on the river. I check – no sense in getting raised here if he made a straight or flush. He bets. I make an agonizing call and immediately announce my hand. He mucks. I drag a nice $150 pot. I made about 100 bucks in 2 hands of stud. That’s nice!
Then, someone started calling Pot Limit Omaha Hi/Lo 8 or better with $1/$1 blinds. Interestingly, we played this game for the rest of the evening (approx 4 hours straight). This may be a sign of things to come when NLHE specialists prefer to play PLO8 at the cash game. Anyway, I played pretty well and made some money. On one particular hand, I made a play on a good player. This is a play that simply would not work on a newer player. I executed what was a “promo” fake check-raise on the turn. Here's how it went down.
I was playing with a 2-3-x-x in my hand. A beautiful Ace came on the flop with another low card. Somehow the pot got built pretty good (~$70). I was in early position. When another low card came on the turn and I made the nut low, I checked preparing the check raise pot. The other player checked behind. Then, I made some comment that indicated my disappointment that was not able to check raise him. Right as I was saying this, the dealer put out the river. I said something like, “Ok good! The board didn’t pair so now I can bet pot”. I bet pot. The other player thought a while and mucked what he later claimed was 2 pair. This is an example of the perfectly executed ‘fake out promo check-raise on the turn” in PLO8.
Next weekend – no Poker. Family vacation to Fort Wayne. Roller coaster going…..?
Next weekend – no Poker. Family vacation to Fort Wayne. Roller coaster going…..?
