Poker Wannabe

1/31/2005 - Return to Lake Charles

Introduction

So last weekend (1/21-1/23) I won a small tournament at the Harrah's in Lake Charles, LA, which in addition to a little bit of cash won me an entry into their month-end WSOP qualifying tournament, for which the winner would win an entry into the WSOP (or takes the cash, $12,500). 

So this past weekend (1/28-1/30) I went back out there to compete in the month-end tournament that was held on Sunday, 1/30.  My roommate and I went out there on Saturday with the plan of playing cash games Saturday night, cash/tournament on Sunday and then leave Sunday night, for a 24 hour whirlwind of poker (he's a graduate student and I'm now a working stiff so we both had places to be Monday morning). 

Besides the tournament, one of the more interesting stories of the weekend would be how Roomie faired in the games since he'd only played microlimits before--.25/.50 limit online, and some $5 live NL tournaments.  He recently played in a $20 tournament (which included "free" dinner) and that was stretching his comfort factor as far as it would go.  The Lake Charles 3/6/12 games with their $100+ buy-in, therefore, would be quite a big game for him to be playing (although that game would definitely not be above his skill level).

Saturday

We arrived Saturday evening and I got seated right away at 10/20 while Roomie went to 3/6/12.  He'd never played in a casino before, so on the car ride up he was asking about tipping dealers and buying chips and switching tables and stuff.  Awww, how cute.

I started off by winning a small pot almost immediately, so at one point I was up $53.  I should have stopped right there.

Much different from the previous weekend, the 10/20 game was kind of tight and so when I was called to 15/30 I was a bit worried about switching to a presumably tougher game.  The 15/30 game was actually looser than the 10/20, though, and so I stayed there for most of the night.  It still wasn't a great game, especially by the Lake Charles standard, but there was one super-soft spot and two calling stations in a mostly six- and seven-handed game, so I was content. 

It still didn't matter.

Being largely an online player now, I often translate live results into online data estimates.  I think my V$IP (voluntarily put money into the pot preflop) had to have been well under 20%, not because of tight play but because of absolutely horrendous hands, my W$SD (won money at showdown) had to have been 40% if that and my Pots Won percentage was, oh, 5-6%, so much lower than the 15%ish average.  I couldn't catch a break.  Opponents' runner-runner two pairs and rivered small sets were the norm, as was missing every one of my own flush draws.  It was the standard "running bad" routine.

Super-soft spot, on the other hand, was an unstoppable Force.  He was a stereotypical Texas-boy, with the cowboy hat, rustic button-up shirt, jeans, cowboy boots, stout-not-fat form, and the moustache.  Oh, yes, the 'stache.  It was thick with greased curls at either end, exactly like Rollie Fingers (although the Force's ends were a little shorter than Rollie's).

He had no clue what he was doing.  He was making the most ludicrously bad plays imagineable.   

He was running over the table.

Every other hand he had was a full house.  It didn't matter if he had to cold-call three bets on the flop with an underpair to catch his set on the turn and rivered board pair, he was doing it.  He single-handedly broke six players (including a few quite strong players, so I wasn't too disappointed).  I kept hanging around though, occasionally refilling my stack, just waiting for his luck to run out and mine to improve.  Neither ever happened.

At one point he had two women behind him fawning over his fantastic play as he kept raking in pot after pot, tipping $5 apeice.  Finally he got up and left, struggling a bit under the weight of all his racks.  Within about 15 minutes the game broke and I was back down to 10/20, where my luck continued as I kept running into AA or KK (or 73o) and I finished the day down about 40BBs.

Roomie was holding his own at the 3/6/12 game.  I went over to see how he was doing a few times and, honestly, it seemed as though his chip stack never budged.  Being fairly inexperienced player and rather cautious with his money, he was playing textbook low-variance poker.  He wasn't going to be winning a ton, but darnit, he wasn't going to be losing a ton either.  The game he was at didn't seem very good, and I recommended that he consider switching to a few other games that were blatantly good games (I believe, through many hours spent collecting observational evidence, that there is a direct correlation between table volume and pot size).  He didn't do it and so was stuck playing at a fairly tight table at a low-limit with a high rake.  In other words, he was probably at an unbeatable game.  He didn't do too badly, though, walking away down only $19.

Sunday

The tournament started and noon, and so at 11:30 we were at Harrah's, Roomie at their 3/6/12 game and me waiting for the tourney to start.  Just like last week, there was a somewhat unusual payout structure:

1st: $12,500 (or seat in WSOP + $2500)

2nd: $7400

3rd: $3700

4th: $2200

5th: $1500

6th - 8th: $200

9th-10th: $100

60 players total. 

Therefore, I would have to finish 5th just to get as much money as I could have sold my entry for ($400ish).  In fact, 5th would allow me to essentially "break-even" for the trip, making up for my cash game loses and as much as I could have sold the entry for last week. 

It was obvious from the start that this tournament would be an entirely different animal from last week's.  Last week's tournament was populated with horrible players trying to give their money away.  This week's tournament was full of super-tight, thinking (at least occasionally) players. 

Many hands never saw a flop, the large majority never saw the turn.  Luckily, after an hour or so, people started getting a bit impatient and loosening up.  I took out two players when I isolation raised with 77 against a poor player with a short stack (in fact, the guy who finished second in last week's tournament with his all-in call with T6s), but ended up with one other guy going all-in as well (also with a small stack for barely more than what I had raised to pot to) .  It was ATo, QJo and my 77.  Board came J53...A....7 (!!) and they were both sent to the rail. 

At one point I was the chip-leader for my table, with about 8500 (starting chip stack was 3000). 

Unfortunately, the blind structure was brutal, essentially doubling every 20 minutes--at this point the blinds were raised to 500-1000, so my chip-stack lead lasted a total of less than half a dozen hands.

Since the blinds were big relative to the stacks and it was a fairly tight game, I probably should have tried to steal more.  I didn't because of my endless parade of 83o cards, and I wanted something that had a halfway decent shot of holding up were someone to call (is A8o, or KTo too much to ask for?).  Still, I should have taken a couple blinds with my 83o.  Also frustrating was that I kept getting dealt 22 UTG, an automatic fold, and then flopping sets.  Three times that happened, and each time someone ended up going all-in.  If only those could have happened one hand later, in my BB...

I managed to tread water for a long time as people began dropping like flies while the blinds kept cleaving their stacks in half.  It took over two hours to go from 60 players to 30, but barely 30 minutes to go from 30 to about 15.  With two tables going, we started synchronizing hands so one table couldn't "outwait" the other.  In another 30 minutes, we were down to the final table.  I had made the money at least.

Unfortunately, my prospects for making the "real" money, 5th or higher, were dim.  With the blinds at 2000/4000, one guy had 1000 in chips, I had 6500, while the remaining players each averaged over 20,000.  And those players were remarkably uniform, with all but the chip-leader pretty much between 15,000 and 25,000.  They could just wait for us smaller stacks to get blinded out and then start to play.

The guy with only 1000 in chips began the final table as the SB and busted immediately.  We were at nine players.  With the blinds bearing down on me, I then started talking deal.

Deal?  Deal?  Deal.

Surprisingly, it seemed as though the whole table agreed to save a little extra for spots 6-9.  Most didn't want to do an even chop, or even a proportional chop, but they were all willing to add a little to the "gas money" payouts. 

Unfortunately, the clock didn't stop and so the hands kept coming while we were trying to negotiate a deal.  The blinds were only two hands away from me.  500 off first, 400 off second, 300 off third, add 300 to each of the bottom four spots?  400/400/400?  No one was really objecting, but no one was in any hurry to get a deal done, it seemed.  They had an eye on my chip stack.

Soon enough, it was my BB.  4000 of my 6500 stack went into the pot.  The big stack raised, and I knew his raising standards were low, so when I saw K2s, I was tempted to call. 

Me: "Do we have a deal yet?"

The other seven players at the table: "Sure."

The big stack: "No.  After this hand."

I folded.

The next hand was my SB.  2000 of my remaining 2500 went into the pot, leaving me with a single 500, the smallest chip on the table.  The big stack raised again and the button went all in.  It didn't much matter what I had, as long as it wasn't a big pocket pair.

Me: "Do we have a deal yet?"

Others: "Nope."

Once again I folded, knowing I could last another seven hands if necessary. 

Luckily the button ended up busting out, and since we hadn't made a deal yet, he only got the $100. 

The very next hand I got AK.

Me: "Deal?"

Table: "No, and don't count on it."

I went all in against a guy who had already raised and ended up having AT.  I won and so with the blind money, was now at 2000.

Finally, with a few guys now facing the blinds, I convinced them to stop the clock and work on a deal before continuing.

Pretty quickly, everyone agreed to give spots 6-8 $600 instead of $200 by skimming some off of the first three payouts.  But at the last second the big stack (a real prick I might add, for reasons independent of how he dealt with these negotiations) objected.  "Give them $400, no more."  Everyone else agreed to that almost immediately, and having 2000 in front of me with 2000/4000 blinds didn't give me much power, so I had to agree.

Two off the button I got K8o.  It folded around to me and I went all-in, figuring at this tight table I had a good chance of getting heads up with the random big-blind hand.  I should have waited, but having secured a better payout and since I figured I had to get at least 5th, I decided had to start taking risks and hope to win a couple races.

The cutoff did The Pause, however.  The traditional Big Decision With a Big Hand Pause.  He looked around the table, counting stacks.  He counted his own stack. 

"Raise."

Another pause while he thought, his eyes unreadable behind his dark glasses.

"14,000."

Both blinds folded.  We were heads up.

I turned to him, "I'm in trouble, aren't I?"

He was noncommital as he turned over QQ.  Argh.

599....A....A.

My tournament was over.

Tournament Thoughts

So I ended up in 8th place, with a $400 payout, about what I could have sold the entry for.

I thought I played pretty well despite being card dead for pretty much the entire tournament.  My biggest mistake was not adjusting quickly enough to the skyrocketing blinds and thus stealing more.  Just a few more steals would have left me in much better chip position at the final table, perhaps good enough to wait out 5th place if need be. 

The only other mistake was in a hand where I was shortstacked in the BB with Q2.  We had 13 players at this point.  1000/2000 blinds.  The SB, the aggressive, not-nearly-as-good-as-he-thinks-he-is, absolute prick chip leader, just completed.  I thought he might be trying to trap.  The flop came A72, giving me bottom pair and he checked, so I checked behind.

The turn came (A72)T.  Once again he checked.  At this point I figured that if he had a pair he would have bet.  But I was afraid of something like 33 or 44, and I definitely did not have enough to push him around much, with only 6500 in front of me.  I should have pushed, but once again I checked.

River: (A72T)J.  Now he though for a second and bet 2000.  He was weak.  He gave me a menacing look.  He was REALLY weak.  I should have called, 2000 to win 6000 and increase my stack to 12500.  But my thoughts were that the blinds were about to increase to 2000/4000 and I might need the extra 500 to last yet one more round (which ended up being true).  I thought it was safer to fold, just in case he did have 33 or 44 or hit a J or had a 7 all along or whatever.

So basically, I played just to reach the gas-money payouts, and that's what I did--I won gas money.  Players who win tournaments don't play "just to make the money."  They play to win.  I had more than enough odds and reasons to call that last bet, and I think had I called it, I would have been in much better position at the final table, not with my back against the wall.  To further convince me, the SB then went over to giggle with his friends, saying stuff like "I got away with murder," which I took to mean he had absolutely nothing (I told you he was a prick; once he leaned over to try to see my cards after he had folded and I had raised).  Poor, poor play on my part.

So, ultimately, I think I played well, especially once I reached the final table and was able to turn what I thought was a $100 payday into a $400 payday (although my final hand was questionable).  But I did make a few mistakes, and as is the nature with tournaments, a couple mistakes can cost you big time, in this case as much as thousands of dollars. 

To End on a Low Note

It was still before 4pm, so I sat down at 3/6/12 to play a few last hands right next to my roommate.  He was doing well, up about $60.  But then he caught a bit of my luck.

My AA lost to TT when my opponent, ahem, flopped quads and decided not to slowplay a bit, completely throwing me off of what he had.  I was certain he had a big pocket pair based on preflop raising, so when the flop came TT3, I figured I had his KK "pwn3d".  I check-raised him on the flop.  He three-bet.  I check-raised him on the turn.  He three-bet again.  C'mon, how does he have a T?  He would ONLY three-bet me preflop with a big pocket pair, and he sure as hell doesn't have TT, right?

I called him down.  Yup, TT.

So a few hands later, Roomie decided to get in on the action.  He limped in late position and, unraised with five players, the flop came J64 with two hearts.  It checked to him and he bet.  Everyone called.

The turn brought (J64)J.  It checked to him.  He bet again.  I figured he had AJ.  One again, everyone called.

The river brought (J64J)9.  It was the 9h, putting a flush on the board.  Once again it checked to roomie, who still bet.  He's a smart cookie, he realizes the chances of someone having a flush with four callers in a full-ring, play-anything-soooted game are pretty good.  Personally, with AJ I'd still bet and then perhaps fold to a raise, but he's quite cautious and would probably check-call, so by betting I figured there's no way he doesn' t have a full house.  He wouldn't play J4 or J6 or J9, so that means he had hit a set on the flop.  He had sixes-full, I was sure. 

Then someone raised.  I had to work hard not to smirk!  Someone just hit their flush, the best thing possible when you have a full house.  I think both of us were counting the chips in the pot already imagining them in his stack.  Everyone else dropped and Roomie three-bet, but then was suddenly four-bet. 

Uh-oh.

"What does she have, quad jacks?" He says to me, not expecting an answer, of course.  No way, I was thinking.  She still most likely just has the flush, almost certainly the nut-flush if so, but she might have J9 and hit her runner-runner full house.  That would absolutey suck if true.  Roomie called and since she was just about all-in, threw in an additional $3 to cover her. 

JJ.

Wha-wha-whaaat??

He of course had 66.   $63 down the drain in one hand, to go from being up a decent amount, to being down $10.   

We left at the end of that round. 

Conclusion

So the trip was definitely not profitable.  I lost a fair amount, even including my tournament take, although I kept the loss in the triple-digits. 

Roomie was down $29 in what was not a bad introduction to poker.  He could have done a lot worse.  Of course he could have done a lot better, and that last hand he had really bit.  His initial reaction was that he would never play poker again, but near the end of the car-ride back he mentioned playing more online to get better.  So we'll see.  Maybe I've created another poker-obsessed degenerate. 

And who knows.  Maybe I'll have to start playing more tournaments. 

 

1/29/2005 - Reasons I Make Lots of Money Online

Reason #174:

People will not fold pocket pairs under any circumstances. 

(And please, don't ask me why I completed.  I can't even remember.  Misclick.)

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with 8d, 7h.
2 folds, Button calls, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (3 SB) 8c, 8s, 5h (3 players)
Hero bets, BB calls, Button calls.

Turn: (3 BB) 7s (3 players)
Hero bets, BB calls, Button calls.

River: (6 BB) Js (3 players)
Hero bets, BB raises, Button calls, Hero 3-bets, BB caps, Button calls, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 18 BB

Results below:
Hero has 8d 7h (full house, eights full of sevens).
BB has 8h 5c (full house, eights full of fives).
Button has 4c 4d (two pair, eights and fours).
Outcome: Hero wins 18 BB.

Reason #53:

I can suck out with the best of them. 

This was the biggest pot I've won so far at 5/10, too.  Heh. 

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is MP with Qc, Qh.
UTG calls, Hero raises, 1 fold, Button calls, 1 fold, BB 3-bets, UTG calls, Hero caps, Button calls, BB calls, UTG calls.

Flop: (16.40 SB) Jh, 9c, 9h (4 players)
BB bets, UTG calls, Hero raises, Button calls, BB 3-bets, UTG calls, Hero caps, Button calls, BB calls, UTG calls.

Turn: (16.20 BB) 7d (4 players)
BB bets, UTG calls, Hero calls, Button calls.

River: (20.20 BB) Qs (4 players)
BB bets, UTG raises, Hero 3-bets, Button folds, BB calls, UTG caps, Hero calls, BB calls $0.50 (All-In).

Final Pot: 31.25 BB

Results below:
BB has Kc Ks (two pair, kings and nines).
UTG has Ts 8h (straight, queen high).
Hero has Qc Qh (full house, queens full of nines).
Outcome: Hero wins 31.25 BB.

1/28/2005 - Weekend Plans

It's Friday, and once again there are thousands of players on Empire ready to hand me their money during the weekend, but once again I am eschewing the online waters for some live-game action.

As reported earlier in the week, last weekend I won some BS little rebuy tournament at the Harrah's in Lake Charles, LA, which entered me into their month-end WSOP qualifying tournament this weekend.  Top prize for this upcoming tournament is an entry into the WSOP plus about $2500 in cash, or just $12500 in cash.  Were I to win, I'd of course take the cash.  If I really want to play in the WSOP, I can always use the money and buy in at that time.   

I still have a few bonuses to hit before the end of the month, and since I leave for LC early Saturday morning, I'm going to have to cram a lot of hands in tonight.  After an absolutely torrid last month and a half, I've hit a bit of a lull in my online play recently, winning not much at all over the last 5000 hands or so.  My last 2500 hands, in fact, I've lost about $60.  Puting in lots of hours for no money is not fun at all, let me tell you.  Oh well, there are certainly worse runs I could be having. 

My hopes for this weekend are to place in the money in the tournament (top ten pay out, with a very top-heavy payout scale) and make a modest win at the cash games.  In fact, as long as I make $1 overall, I'll be happy.  In poker, I've found keeping one's standards of play high but expectations for results low is the best way to go.

Oh well, that's it.  Boring entry today.  Hopefully on Monday I'll have some interesting results to report. 

PS - To continue with the "this is a poker blog, but here's random baseball stuff as well" trend...There's a great article by John Brattain over at the Hardball Times about MLB owners.  Whether you're a fan of the owners or not, the article should help in understanding what owners mean when they say any one of the litany of cliches at their disposal. 

Sigh...how long again until opening day, so we can concentrate on the game rather than the business?  65? 

Sigh...

1/27/2005 - Shut up, Beavis!

At first it may appear to be just another boring article, but buried within is one classic name.

PartyGaming is owned by a small group of investors, including Ruth Parasol, an American lawyer, and Anarag Dikshit, a software specialist from India.

Heh heh.  Heh heh.

Dikshit.

That's the funniest name I've heard since I was in college and this guy in one of my classes had the name Long Wang.  And to make things worse, the prof would call roll every day, and so I had to sit there trying not to burst out laughing every single day.  Believe me, to my perpetually-juvenile mind it was just as funny the 56th time as it was the first.

Heh heh.  Heh heh.  He said Long.  And Wang.  Heh heh. 

1/25/2005 - Rockets and the Rocket

Rockets

No, not pocket rockets, but simply a rocket, any rocket on a board that has an A.  I've found this to be true in most lower-limit games (10/20 and below): If there is an A on the board, someone has a pair of aces.  If an A is dealt out, it is being played, and so the odds of someone having a pair of aces on a flop that has an A is the same as the odds of one of the remaining three As being among the twenty cards dealt out to the table--in other words, very, very damn likely. 

So why, then, does this always seem to happen?  I have a pocket pair, say 99.  I raise preflop and get a couple of callers.  The flop comes A62 rainbow, or AK5 rainbow or something, an A as the only overcard or an A with one other overcard, and no real strong draws to straights of flushes.  I bet, knowing if no one has an A, they'll probably fold.  I get the same number of callers as I got preflop, so I give up, check-folding just to see at least one but often two people show down aces, often A8o against A4o or some such. 

But when I raise preflop with 99 and instead of AK5 the flop comes AK9 and I bet out, everyone folds.  Am I that readable?  Do I give off "set vibes"?  I don't think so; heck, I don't think most people at 10/20 are doing much besides playing their cards.  Play any A, and if it hits, check-call to the river.  So why is it that whenever I flop a set and there's an A on the board, no one seems to have an A? 

I'm at a loss.  I understand that the more cards on the flop that hit you, the less chance it is that the flop hit anyone else.  But still, an A is an A is an A and whether the 9 flops or not, with an A out there you'd think would hit people just as often as when, intead of a 9, there's a 5 out there. 

Oh well.  Maybe I've just had an extended unlucky streak in this area.  It happens.  I'll wait and see.  But really, this phenomenon has been going on for a really, really long time. 

The Rocket

As people who follow sports have probably heard, Roger Clemens recently signed with the Astros to play another year for $18 million, making him the highest paid pitcher in MLB history.

Roger will turn 43 next season.  The level of performance of 43-year-old starting pitchers is pretty consistent--with a few exceptions, those few who pitch at 43 have been consistently bad, even great pitchers (although that's pretty redundant; the only pitchers who will still be pitching at 43 are the great ones). 

W    L  G    GS   CG  SHO    IP      H    HR  BB    SO  ERA   *ERA+

3    6   16  16    0    0      87.3   91    7     30   44    3.92     86

0    1   4     1     0     0     9.7     20    5     5      5    16.47   24

8    9   23  23   3      0    150.7 182   9    24    60    3.94    91

6   13   38  25  4      1    173.7  204  23   52   78     5.29   67

0    3     9    3    0     0     21.7   40    5      6     6      9.14    60

7    10   21  20  14   1    163.3  149  0    27   58    2.53    102

(I'm defining age-43 season to mean the player was 43 at some point during the season).

The first guy is Don Sutton, then Steve Carlton,  Gaylord Perry, Warren Spahn, Pete Alexander, and Cy Young.  All stats are from baseball-reference.com, and *ERA+ for those who don't know is a park-adjusted ERA ratio, which is essentially leagueERA/ERA and then multiplied by 100, so 100 is league-average, higher than 100 is better than average (so a 140 would mean the league average ERA was 40% higher than the player's ERA and a 60 would mean the league-average ERA was 40% lower than the guy's ERA). 

These are all hall-of-fame pitchers and as you can see, no one was particularly impressive.  In fact, just about all were downright bad.  No one was able to pitch more than 200 innings, and just about all were below league average at preventing runs, many way below league average.  The only exception was Cy Young, who despite his impressive looking ERA, because it was the "dead-ball" era, was just about league average.

And this list doesn't even include the many great pitchers like Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson,  Lefty Grove, Bob Feller, Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Jim Palmer, Tom Seaver, Fergie Jenkins, and Bert Blyleven who all had simililarly poor seasons at an earlier age and never even made it to 43. 

So what we have is a whole bunch of guys who were either retired or bad.  But who were the effective starting pitchers at 43? 

Nolan Ryan was quite good:

13   9  30  30  5  2  204.0  137  18  74  232  3.44  114

as was Phil Niekro: 

17  4  35  35  4  2  234.3  225  23  73  177  3.61  104

Charlie Hough wasn't bad:

9  10  31  29  4  1  199.3  167  21  94  107  4.02  99

Tommy John was effective even if he didn't pitch much:

5  3  13  10  1  0   70.7   73  8  15  28  2.93  140

And who can forget about Jack Quinn?

10  11  31  21  8  3  163.7  191  4  36  58  3.41  123

So in all of history, there are basically five starting pitchers who were effective at age 43 (six if you count Cy Young, who was about league-average but had lost a lot of his endurance).  Four of those five aren't even comparable to Clemens much at all.

Niekro and Hough were knuckle-ball pitchers, and knuckle-ball pitchers historically have had pretty good longevity, perhaps because it simply isn't that taxing to throw a knuckle-ball, and one doesn't have any velocity to lose--it travels 60MPH anyways. 

Quinn, on the other hand, was a spit-baller.  The spitball was disallowed in 1920 but Quinn, with a few others, was grandfathered in, allowing him to pitch until a week short of his 50th birthday.

John was a classic junk-baller, striking out very few batters, but also allowing few walks and few home runs.  A team has to string together a lot of singles to score many runs without hitting home runs or being given free passes, and John was able to succeed for a very long time on this concept, having one more good season at 44 before sputtering. 

The only pitcher who is comparable to Roger Clemens is, of course, Ryan, who is the classic example of a power pitcher.  Ryan was nowhere near as good as Clemens, but he was able to be a very effective pitcher well into his forties because his control improved some as he aged and he never lost much off his blazing fastball.  Ryan, like John, would have his last truly effective season at age 44.

So what does this mean for Roger and the Astros?  Was it a dumb signing?

Although historically there have been a fair number of pitchers who have fallen off a cliff, so to speak (Gibson and Carlton come to mind), barring injuries, pitchers typically regress a little bit each year until they finally slip below a certain level, at which point they are either released or they retire.

As evidenced by last season, Clemens is still performing at a very high level.  He also has become less reliant on his fastball (which has lost a few MPH), and is depending more on his splitter.  This is a good thing, because what causes many pitchers to become ineffective is they lose their top-flight fastball and have nothing to replace it with.

There are various projection tools out there, and one, ZiPS, projects Roger to start 32 games, going 14-9 with a 3.75 ERA and 196 Ks in 204 IP (the 3.75 ERA would translate into a 115 *ERA+ assuming last year's leagueERA).  That's not a bad line, and were he to be approximately that effective, he would rate comparably with pitchers who are earning in the $8 - 12 million range.  Obviously, were he to repeat his 2004 performance, he'd be in the $13 - $16 million range with Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson.

But.  He's getting paid $18 million.  And no one thinks he'll improve in 2005.  So the Astros overpaid, right?  Not necessarily.

If they were paying for just performance, there's no doubt they overpaid, probably by about $6 million.  But Clemens brings a lot more than just performance to the 'Stros.  Last year when he signed, season-ticket sales shot through the roof.  Attendance for the entire year was up about 26%.   Yes, they made the playoffs, but they've been competetive every season and still never matched 2004's attendance, a year for which during two entire months, July and August, people legitimately believed the Astros were out of any postseason races.

The attendance had been on a clear and consistent downward trend ever since the spike when the new stadium was completed for the 2000 season, and the reason that trend turned around was Roger Clemens.  In 2004, Houston had become a baseball town.  So Roger is a major gate attraction, increasing team popularity, ticket sales (and therefore concession sales), team apparel sales and the overal marketability of the franchise. 

This past offseason also saw the Astros lose Carlos Beltran and Jeff Kent, two main contributors to the 2004 season, and so going into the 2005 season, were the Astros to also lose Clemens, who grew up in Houston, not only would they be a non-contender, the fans would have no reason to come out to the ballpark much less follow the team.  It'll still be tough for them to contend, what with Biggio and Bagwell another year older and Berkman out for at least the first month, but at least they have a gate attraction.

So for many teams, perhaps paying Roger Clemens $18 million would be overpaying.  But for Houston, Roger is worth every penny.

1/24/2005 - Lake Charles

Introduction

This past weekend was supposed to be a fun, simple weekend, with a group of guys going off to the casino and having fun.  I figured I'd sit there at 10/20 and hopefully make a few hundred dollars, then call it a weekend and go home.  It was a retro weekend-- just about exclusively a multi-tabling online player, I was going back to the old 30-hand-an-hour grind in live-action games with some old poker buddies to live life like it was early 2004. 

The last thing I was expecting was a large haul.

Well, no.  A large haul was the second-to-last thing I was expecting.  The absolute last thing I was expecting was to be in position to win a tournament.  Heck, I wasn't planning on playing in any tournaments at all. 

Early Returns

The poker frenzy started Thursday night at midnight.  Before even going to the hotel, we went right to the Isle of Capri casino and, tired from the drive, I sat down at 3/6/12 table.  An hour of mindless poker later and $110 up, I said "to hell with this, I'm playing 10/20!"  An hour later and up 20 BB more, I was too tired to continue and the first day of the trip was over with a nice, nondescript win. 

Up early the next day (read: noon), my one buddy wanted to check out Harrah's.  So off we went to sit at 3/6/12 since 1) 10/20 games in the early afternoon aren't all that great anyways and 2) Harrah's doesn't even spread 10/20 anymore, which is unfortunate (Harrah's has an infinitely better cardroom than the Isle). 

While playing the 3/6/12 bingo game, we hear an announcement.  Tournament that night.  Starts at 6:30.  $30 buy-in with up to three $25 rebuys and a $25 add-on.  WSOP qualifier, in fact.  My buddy came specifically to play in some tournaments and so he wanted to play, and the other three guys on the trip were over at the Isle playing in a tournament over there.  Fine, fine, fine, I'll cave to peer pressure.  I'll play.

After a few hours and about $180 of profit against the mindless calling stations, tournament players were called to their tables.  At the last second I started getting some heebie-jeebies.  I was going to buy in and immediately "rebuy" for a $55 total initial outlay.  I was probably going to bust out when someone called my AA all-in with J4o and catch two-pair on the river.  My expectation was that I would play for about two hours and end up losing $55, whereas my expectation from playing 10/20 was much higher.  I rarely play tournaments anyways, so I'm definitely not a strong tournament player.  In short, I felt like I was simply throwing my money away.  I was up nearly $700 already in less than seven hours of play.  Why blow $100+ (counting additional rebuys should I decide to take advantage of them) on a small chance of winning a little bit of money?  Top prize was only going to be about $1100 plus entry into another tournament whose top prize would be a seat into the WSOP.  And if there's one thing I know about multi-table tournaments, it's this: I never finish first.   

So there I was, about to go up and ask for my buy-in back so I could just go play cash games, something I was good at.  But for some reason, I still don't know why, I relented and sat down to play.

Tournament

The tournament started badly in every which way.  There were between 50 and 60 players to start.  Players who rebought immediately got T8000 to start (T3000 initial buy-in plus T5000 rebuy), but the blinds started at 100/200.  Aiee.

My very first hand I got AdQs in early position and raised to T800.  The button called, everyone else folded.  Flop came Ah8c3c with two clubs.  I made a larger-than-pot-sized bet and the button went all-in.  Thinking he most likely had an A with a worse kicker, I called.  He flipped over Kc5c for the flush draw.  Turn was the 2d but the river was the Ac giving him the nut flush. 

Rebuy!

A hand soon after, I got AQ again.  I made a big raise and got two callers.  Flop came AJ4.  Short-stacked a little bit, I pushed all-in on the flop.  A guy who obviously had no idea how to play (but of course had me well covered) sat there agonizing.  He was the type for whom folding is the absolute last option possible.  He knew he should fold, but I could see him trying to convince himself that he should call.  Finally, he stood up and said something like "all right, let's do this!" and pushed his chips in to call.  The other player folded.

Agonizer-guy flipped over J9o.  He then promptly caught a J on the turn to take the pot. 

Rebuy!

Once again short-stacked and about five minutes before the end of the rebuy period, I caught KQo.  The blinds were 500/1000 and I had T7500 in front of me.  I raised to 3000, hoping just to take the blinds, which were now a sizable portion of my stack.  I got two callers, however.  Flop came Q92 and I went all-in.  Both players called.  Caller #1 had QTo, Caller #2 had A6s, but no flush draw (???--obviously this tournament did not attract the highest caliber player around). 

The turn was a J, giving #1 an open-ended straight draw to go along with her three full-house outs and I had visions of going home, having expended all of my rebuys.

The river was another Q, however, giving us both trips but me the better kicker, and so in one fell swoop I tripled up to become about an average stack.  Whew!  After one more hand, it was time for the break.

Add-on!

Yes, this "$30 buy-in" tournament was really, really, really starting to cost me a lot.  After the break, though, I finally caught a string of hands. 

With the blinds at 1000/2000 and a stack of about 23,000, I got dealt 44 on the button and limped along with about five other players.  Flop came T42, giving me my set.  It checked to me and I bet the minimum, 2000.  I got one caller, a lady that seemed to have just learned to play poker that afternoon (no exaggeration; but of course, she had me covered).  The turn was a 9, and suddenly she bet 2000.  I thought, figuring that maybe she caught two-pair or something.  I raised to 7000, wanting to extract as much from her as possible.  She then reraised to 12,000.  A turned set of 9s?  If so, than screw it, I'm going home.  I went all in and she called.

J9o, for a turned pair of nines, and no straight or flush draws.  She was drawing dead.  Suddenly I had more than doubled up and was now the second largest stack at the table.

Soon after I was dealt A6s in the cutoff and it folded around to me.  I raised to 8000 hoping just to get the blinds or at least bust the SB who was a shortstack and I had a hand with a decent chance of holding up against his random hand should he call.  However, the BB was agonizer-guy.  SB called for his total of 3000 and Agonizer-guy called as well.  Flop came 752, so no real help for me.  But there was 10,000 in the side pot, 10,000 that I wanted.  Agonizer guy checked and so I bet 10,000, knowing he would have bet with any pair or any draw.  He agonized, of course, but folded.  I got the side pot, but unfortunately didn't improve and the SB got the main pot with a turned pair of 3s (he had A3). 

The river was an 8 and agonizer guy went off.  "I had A8, I would have won!  You bluffed me!  I'm never doing that again!"  Which I took to mean he's never folding again.  At least to me.   

Muahahahaha.

Soon after I got JJ and raised.  Agonizer guy called and the flop came JT9.  I went all-in, knowing he would call no matter what.  He did.  He actually had AQ so he had straight outs.  My set held up and so agonizer guy finally busted, giving me the tournament chip lead with nearly 90,000. 

Soon after, the second-largest stack in the tournament was moved over to my table, with nearly 80,000.  With blinds of 2000/4000 I was dealt AK and raised to 15,000.  #2 chip-stack called from the BB.  Ugh.  I was worried.  That is, until the flop came AK2.  He checked.  I bet 5,000 as a feeler bet.  I wanted some action.  He called immediately with a sneaky look.  He hit something.  Besides a set of deuces, though, I was pretty much safe.  A2 maybe?  The turn was a 6 and he checked again.  Well, if he really hit something, he won't fold, right?  I moved all-in.  He called immediately, and flipped over AQ.  Heh.  Drawing dead.  I showed my AK and he was crushed, literally sent reeling.  Once again I doubled up, and was now the commanding chip leader with over 160,000, as the previous #2 stack went off to his friends loudly describing the hand in amazement.  This really was a tournament filled with inexperienced players. 

With four good hands, I went from being near the bottom of the chip race to the very tip-top of the totem pole, with no one else even at half my chip count.  We were now down to under 15 players, and I could easily cruise into the money.

My buddy busted 13th.  A few players busted in rapid succession after that, and we were quickly down to 9 for the final table.  The last 10 spots paid, but the payout structure was rather peculiar (numbers approximate):

5th - 10th: $100 each

4th:  $220 

3rd: $330

2nd: $1050 ($550 + $500 entry)

1st: $1600 ($1100 + $500 entry)

The top two places got entries into the monthly WSOP qualifier, whose winner gets a seat into the WSOP.  Approx value: $500. 

But basically, I would need to finish fourth just to recoup the money I put into the the damn tournament.  I could probably coast that far, but ugh. 

The final table saw me going heads up against the other large chip stack on a regular basis.  He was a very new player, this being his first live tournament, and he was obviously riding high on his good fortune.  He was bluffing anything and everything, pushing people off hands on a whim.  So basically, he was unwittingly playing his large stack very effectively, as most of the table was weak-tight players who would just keep folding, even though it was obvious he had nothing.  I let him push me off a hand when there were seven of us left simply because, even though I was pretty sure I was probably best (I had 77 on a K832 board), it was not worth severly damaging my chances at the money in that small chance I was wrong.  I still had a large stack and could coast for a while.  I gave up  a fairly substantial pot--and the chip lead--in what I felt was a prudent fold.

It worked, as between him and I, we picked off each of the remaining players.  I had AJ against 88 and hit a J.  I had KJ against 33 and actually hit both a K and a J.  I had A8s against 66 and hit a flush.  Like Greg Raymer in last year's WSOP, I was winning every coin flip.   

Suddenly we were down to just the two of us, him with the 2:1 chip lead.  Since that meant we each got our seats into next week's invitation-only tournament, the floor mentioned that we could make a deal.

Other guy: "Deal?"

Me: "Yeah, sometimes people at the end of the tournament just split the money rather than playing it out."

Him: "Well, I dunno, this is my first tournament, I kind of want to play."

Me, knowing I could outplay him without even looking at my cards, "Yeah, certainly, let's play."

I noticed during the final table that what Other Guy did was he responded to people's actions in kind.  If someone raised, then damnit, he reraised big!  But if someone limped, he would limp.  So rather than get into a preflop raising war with him, I decided to play very passively, and let him continually try to bluff at me--there was no doubt he would bet if checked to every single time. 

I wasn't getting particularly strong hands, but I would regardless check on my BB and simply complete on my SB, even once with ATo.  If I hit a pair, I'd check call, as he would always, always, always bet.  If I didn't hit a pair, I folded.  I slowly bled him this way by hitting bottom or mid pair and letting him keep putting money into the pot with absolutely nothing (raising would either make him fold, or make me make a tough decision by calling an all-in with mid-pair...ugh).

Soon we were dead even in chips. 

Finally, I picked up a real hand, JJ in the BB.  Obviously flustered, he finally decided to do something different and for the first time after about twenty heads-up hands he raised preflop.  In what was probably a poor play, I moved all in (maybe I should have seen a flop first and then decided to either push or fold, since JJ is dangerous here--often enough it'll be a coin flip). 

He called and turned over, to my surprise, Td6d.  I was a huge favorite.  Then the flop came 5s3d2d, giving him a flush draw and a gut-shot.  Ugh, he had a million outs.  The turn was a black J, giving me a set, but still leaving him with all his outs intact.

He was standing up, just like on TV.  I was sitting down, stone-faced, just watching the board.  Watching and waiting for my fate.

The dealer laid down the river.  A diamond?  No.  A four? 

No.

I have no idea what it was--I can't remember for the life of me--but it didn't help him.  I had won the hand, and after counting it was determined that we had had precisely the exact same number of chips.   

I had won the tournament.

Aftermath

After taxes, dealer tip and what I had invested were discounted, I ended up profiting by a little over $800.  Plus I had the tournament entry which I could either keep and play or sell for about $400-500.

I decided to keep the entry and play in the tournament.  Top prize, a seat into the WSOP plus $2,500 travel/spending money or $12,500 cash.  Second prize, $6000.  And so on and so forth.  Another 50ish player tournament, so my chances aren't all that bad.

It's next Sunday, six days away now.  We'll see what happens.

The Grind

The rest of the trip was back to cash games.  The Isle recently started spreading 15/30 in addition to 10/20 and 20/40 and so I played in that game some (with it's interesting $5 and $15 blinds rather than the standard $10 and $15).  I didn't get the cajones up to play 20/40 just yet.  I spent the rest of Friday night playing 15/30 and then 10/20 and I spent all day Saturday playing 10/20.  I did fabulously well, making the trip the second most profitable casino trip I've ever had (or #1 if you count my tournament entry at it's full value). 

Conclusion

Between arriving at midnight on Thursday night and playing my final hand at 4am early Sunday morning, I spent 26.5 of the 52 hours playing poker.  And by the end of it, I could once again remember what being a live player was like.  Live play is 1/10th or even 1/15th as fast as online play, but on a per-hand basis, it's much, much, much more interesting.  I think I'll have to go back to incorporating at least some live casino play into my monthly schedule.

So overall the trip was great.  And, quite unexpectedly, I now find myself having to turn right around and drive right back out there next weekend.  I just hope my tournament summary ends just like this one did. 

1/20/2005 - Back to the Grind

In a few hours, I leave for Lake Charles, LA for the weekend on what will be my first dedicated casino trip in nearly three months.  It will be five of us going this time.  Lake Charles is hardly Vegas, but the casinos offer 10/20 and 20/40 with loose-passive play, so it can still be fun. 

I hope I can stay sane.  Recently, I've been six-tabling six-max tables online, thereby seeing 400ish hands an hour.  Going back to 30ish hands an hour in a smoke filled casino with twice the rake will probably take some adjusting.  This trip has a good chance (>95%) of being less profitable than simply playing online all weekend would be, but it gets me out and about, lets me hang out with some poker buddies I haven't seen much of since I started focusing on my online play, and gives me a little refresher on live play, which is always useful.  So what the heck. 

Wish me luck!

1/18/2005 - Mario Kart Blues

It's been a few days since I've written anything.  I can't explain it.  Sometimes I'm just bursting at the seams with things I want to write about, and other times I have to literally force myself to post something else people think I've abandoned the blog (okay, maybe "abandoned" is too strong a word to describe four days of inactivity, but still). 

And of course this period of writer's block comes right when this blog's traffic has shot through the roof, thanks to being linked to from a fair number of popular poker blogs like Iggy's, and Pauly's and April's.  Let me say "hi!" to all the new readers.  I hope we'll have a lot to learn from one another as we try to navigate the world of poker.

I think one of the reasons for my general inactivity on the poker-writing front is that some new competition for my time has entered my life.  Yes, poker is no longer the only mistress for me.  Not since my roommate bought a Gamecube and the latest incarnation of Mario Kart, the absolute best console game ever conceived (c'mon, did you think I'd gotten a girlfriend?).  Much of the free time that I would spend thinking/writing about poker is now spent yelling at the TV and trying to beat 150cc special cup.   

But don't worry, it's only a fling, only temporary.  It doesn't mean a thing. 

1/14/2005 - Image

In poker, like in life, image is a particularly important.  In any game except perhaps the lowest limits, how people perceive you is a big influence on how they play a hand against you.  A raise from someone who believes you to be a tight player who only bets ultra-good hands means something quite different than a raise from someone who thinks you'll bet anything.  With the exact same hand on the exact same board you could therefore have two completely different reactions to these two players--namely fold in the first case, re-raise in the latter.  When the cards run well enough, one can even create an image and then exploit it, bluffing more often with a tight image or waiting for a big hand if one has a wild image.      

This is not a new idea to most people reading this blog.

I've found the idea of "image" extends beyond the poker table to other aspects of an avid poker player's life.  If you tell someone you're are a serious poker player (or, if they find out through the grapevine) than often enough, it seems, they develop a mental image of you as a person.  This idea, also, is not new as most people develop images of most other people and most people know this.

The image developed of a poker player, though, seems to elicit more emotional (and/or, perhaps, engrained) responses.  When I was a student and told people thusly, the information was usually received by the listener with bored politeness.  "Oh yeah?" (Everyone's a student or was at one point)  "What do you study?" (Polite conversation starter) "That's interesting." (you're only the 543,678th person I've met in my lifeteme who studied that). 

When I work at a boring ol' 9-to-5, the conversation is almost exactly like the student conversation verbatim.  Everyone works; everyone's job is in some specific field; 99.7% of jobs are boring.

Poker, however, is interesting.  At least, it's interesting enough that during my six-month stint supporting myself solely through poker, any time I answered the question "what do you do?" with "I play poker," I invariably got dragged into a long conversation about "what it's like."  At first I couldn't wait to divulge--I mean, heck, I love to talk about poker--but I soon realized that most people weren't listening to what I was saying; rather, they were waiting for me to say something to reconfirm their preconceived beliefs.

I've had these exact same two conversations:

1) Me: "Yeah, poker can be boring.  There's a lot of just sitting around and folding, sometimes for hours, waiting for a decent hand.  Then you can sit there and play flawless poker for days, even weeks, and do nothing but lose money as the cards don't go your way.  There are no benefits, no pension plan, no sick or vacation time.  You show up, put in your slow hours at the tables and then go home."

Other person: "Yes, but isn't playing poker for a living so exciting and romantic?"

2) Me: "I win at poker by taking advantage of other people's mistakes.  First is only playing hands that have a reasonable chance of winning, and only continuing on in hands with a (often mathematically determined) reasonable chance of having the best hand or making the best hand.  If, compared to the average player, per hour, I make one fewer call than that average person would make when I'm beat, then I'm saving that one bet per hour over the average person.  Conversely, if I bet one more time per hour when I have the best hand, getting called, that's another bet I make per hour over the average player.  It's a small edge to have--we're talking about one or two bets per hour, if that--but it adds up, and so in the long run, I'll be up that much more over the average player."   

Other person: "So, when you're losing at your gambling, do you go max out your credit cards and keep playing thinking that you're going to win eventually?"

Those two conversations are the polar extremes, but most conversations I've had fit the pattern: people's responses are rarely to what I've said, if they've even heard it, and mostly to what they believe to be true, even if what I've said completely contradicted what their belief is.  Maybe the problem is with me, but never have I changed a mind and rarely have I enlightened. 

The first conversation is an obvious result of the other person sensationalizing and romanticizing--and any other -"izing"s you want--poker and the poker life.  The second conversation highlights the other reason many people have such a strong feeling about poker: it's gambling.  And gambling is bad.  Gamblers are  addicts, always, and they always lose.  If I had a dime for every time someone worried that I was a gambling addict (this is while I was playing 20-30 hours a week to support myself, mind you), I'd be a rich man.  Are you addicted to your 40-hour-a-week job? 

It's hard, even, to to present a positive image to those few open-minded newcomers I run across.  After a casino trip, I talked about how I did to a family member, who knew next to nothing about poker and had only recently learned of my poker career.

FM: "How'd you do?"

Me: "I lost a little." 

FM: "But you said you win."

Me: "I do, but it's impossible to win every time.  You win some, you lose some, and, if you're good, you win more than you lose.  Over time it can add up to quite a bit."

FM: "But you lost."

Grrr. 

Playing at a casual home game with friends, this one person who knew I was a "professional" player, but had never before played a hand of poker innocently but seriously remarked, "I'd think the professional would have more chips." 

These other conversations reveal another downside to having poker as a "known" skill.  In, say, basketball, if player A is clearly superior to player B, then player A will beat player B just about 100% of the time.  The skill is obvious and almost immediately quantifiable.  In poker, if player A is clearly superior to player B, then, well, player A can still easily lose ten hands in a row to player B.  Where the skill is, is that player A will win more in the hands he wins to player B than player B would win, and will lose less in his hands he loses to Player B than player B would lose.  The skill is very subtle and can only be measured over a quite long sequence of hands, so it can pass completely under the radar of someone without much or any poker experience to draw upon.  Often, how they see you do in the 15 minute snippet of your life to which they were privy can very well determine how they view you as a poker player and poker in general. 

So what does all this mean?  Simply put, that talking about poker with someone who isn't already into the game on some level seems to be much more trouble than it's worth.  You'll create an image for yourself in their head--often inaccurate--and, unlike at the poker table, it's an image you just can't control. 

1/9/2005 - Lucky Me

Great situation for me to be in, but I did make one mistake. 

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is BB with Ac, As.
UTG raises, MP calls, CO folds, Button calls, SB folds, Hero 3-bets, UTG caps, MP calls, Button calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (16.40 SB) 5h, 3c, Qh (4 players)
Hero checks, UTG bets, MP calls, Button calls, Hero raises, UTG 3-bets, MP calls, Button calls, Hero caps, UTG calls, MP calls, Button calls.

Turn: (16.20 BB) 5s (4 players)
Hero bets, UTG calls, MP calls, Button calls.

River: (20.20 BB) 8h (4 players)
Hero bets, UTG calls, MP calls, Button calls.

Final Pot: 24.20 BB

Results below:
Hero has Ac As (two pair, aces and fives).
UTG has Kd Kc (two pair, kings and fives).
MP has Ad Qd (two pair, queens and fives).
Button has Qc Ah (two pair, queens and fives).
Outcome: Hero wins 24.20 BB.

I should have check-raised the turn.  Hindsight is always 20/20, but I had to figure one of the guys tagging along had a Q which meant that the chances of the other aggressor, UTG, having QQ were miniscule. 

Pretty crazy hand, nonetheless.