Poker Wannabe

2/28/2005 - February Recap

Despite not winning a single dollar (more or less) over nearly the last two weeks of the month, February ended up as my second most profitable month ever.  The month started off great--I had my "winningest single day" on Feb 6--and kept getting better until the middle of the month when I had my "best weekend of all time" (surpassing some months in itself).  Since then, it's been a yo-yo ride, up, down, up, down, up, down but going nowhere. 

I continue to play mostly 5/10 six-max with some 3/6 SH and 3/6 and 5/10 full thrown in at the various sites I'm bonus whoring depending on game conditions and availability.  And for the past couple weeks the results have been the same at all sites: I can't go on a sustained winning streak for the life of me.  I've tried everything--I started listening to music, I removed the avatars from the tables, I went to a four-color deck, I played six tables, I played four tables, I bought an ergonomic chair, I stopped listening to music.  I really dunno.  It's all the avatars, damnit.  I took them off and beginning immediately from that first session I haven't won a damn thing. 

Even if I start winning again, I forsee changes on the horizon.  Namely: more live tournaments.  To consistently win at poker one has to stay fresh and alert.  Doing the same thing over and over and over again is not a good way to accomplish said state, however.  I get the feeling that I'm getting a little numb with the whole online limit scene, and so I'm hoping to branch out a bit.  Chris has mentioned that online triple-draw is a good game.  Maybe I should try that.

Finally: don't forget to get your bets in for the next pope.  You know you're getting old when people are already betting on who your successor will be. 

2/25/2005 part II - Funny stuff

This has got to be one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time.  (SFW.)

This is funny to play around with.  (also SFW although it doesn't sound that way.) 

2/25/2005 - Something Fishy

So the last week and a half has seen me treading water.  Anything I win, I lose right back.  But thankfully, anything I lose I win right back.  It is annoying to play 20+ hours of online poker (10,000+ hands) and not win a dime.  My BB/100 at 5/10 six-max has fallen from 4.1 to just under 3 now.  But, as always, it could be worse. 

At least my opponents are giving me a good laugh.  Just today I'm playing five-handed 5/10 on PokerRoom, and this guy open limps on the button.  I'm the BB with AK.  The SB completes and I raise. 

The button folds. 

I' ve seen some bad plays in my life, but jesus.  Open-limp on the button and then fold to a raise??  I mean, wow.  I think David Sklansky's head would blow up if he saw something like that. 

Thankfully, the SB also folded, so it was an easy hand for yours truly. 

At least I know that when the cards finally start coming my way again, there will still be plenty of brainless twits ready to give me their money. 

2/18/2005 - Splat!

Well, it couldn't go on forever.

After running exceedingly well at Party's 5/10 six-max games, I finally hit a bit of a wall.  Over my first 30,000+ hands at the level, I averaged over 4.1BB/100, an amazingly good rate.  Last night I managed to average about -6.7BB/100 over 1500 hands (yes, for those doing the math, that's over $1000 in the red).  That run--just one night, mind you--dropped my BB/100 average to under 3.6. 

I think this goes to show how long the "long run" in poker really is.  I could have another run like that tonight, and suddenly I'm at 3BB/100.  Many very good players have broken even over 20,000, even 30,000 hands.  I could have a run like that, and watch my win rate get sliced in half.  Suddenly I'm at 1.5BB/100. 

Of course, I could go on another hot streak and go back over 4BB/100.  (Guess which scenario I'm rooting for?)

In other words, although I've played over 30,000 hands at this level, I really have no clue how good of a player I really am.  Chances are that I'm a winning player, but as far as determing a reasonable level of monetary expectation for my playing, I have no clue. 

All of this is why, despite being much more than adequately rolled, I'm not even considering moving up to 10/20 (or, God-forbid, 15/30) for quite a while yet.  I'd like to get at least 100,000 hands in at 5/10 SH, plus a fair number more at 5/10 full ring, just to keep my full ring game in shape.  I'd put my ETA at 10/20 at about June. 

Tilting is something I've been good at avoiding, even during crushing downswings.  Examing my play last night, though, I have to admit that I did tilt some.  I think there's often an image some people have of someone on tilt as being some pissed-off guy betting and raising with crap or calling down with very mediocre hands.  Tilt is often more subtle than that.  For example, there were a few times last night when I raised with AK, got a couple callers, flopped an A or a K and was checked-raised on the turn and called down just to be shown A-rag or K-rag that hit their two-pair. 

Now, anyone who's played the 5/10 SH knows that the turn C-R is as often a semi-bluff or all-out bluff as it is a real hand.  However, with an A or a K on the board against a pre-flop raiser it is much less likely that the turn C-R is a bluff simply because the C-Rer has to imagine the preflop raiser made a hand and will call him down.  Yet there I was, calling down and basically throwing chips away.  That's tilt.  Often I'm good at throwing hands away if I'm beat, but after a long series of always having the worst of it (my AK on a K-high board against AA, my AQ against AK on an A-high board, etc) I stopped playing each hand individually and started thinking "damnit, they can't ALWAYS have it." 

I think another contributor was that I changed my playing environment fairly drastically.  I started using the four-color deck, for better or worse.  I also moded my tables to remove the dealer, avatars and chairs so that every player is simply a box next to the table with his screen name and chip-stack information.  I think I might like the four-color deck.  However, I'm unsure how I feel about removing the avatars--I got used to using them for identification purposes, which is important when one is trying to play six tables at once.  If someone was tilting or just really wild (regardless of previous information I had on him) then I could easily remember that by remembering the table and avatar.  Without the avatars, I've lost a key identification element.  Remembering the table seat or screen name just isn't as effective as the more immediate-recall inherent in having a face to put with the player (even if it's the same face as at the other five tables).  I may have to put the avatars back.

Of course, in order to start winning again, I'll have to once again be able to win with my sets, flushes and full houses, too.  Heh. 

2/16/2005 - Linky Dinky

Uh, oh, looks like I need to try and get a refund. 

Really, really cool.  I think so at least.  Reminds me somewhat of this classic European Honda commercial (yes, I know 90% of you have already seen it.  Humor the other 10%.  And it was done using two shots spliced together). 

This is why my official stance on my day job is always "it exists," no matter how much I might like to complain (which, of course I don't because the job is absolutely perfect). 

Let's see, struggling-but-still-profitable league can't decide how to divy up millions and millions of dollars.  Solution?  Cancel the season!  That'll increase their popularity.  Moral: rich, greedy bastards would rather get no money than allow other rich greedy bastards to have slightly more of the millions than it is believed they deserve.  Classic game theory: individuals acting completely in their own self-interest results in an inefficient outcome for the society. 

Eh...who cares about hockey anyways? 

Finally, an excellent article about what being an online poker "semi-pro" is like.  It's nice to finally read an article about online poker that doesn't talk about gambling problems, how much money people lose per year gambling and how we need to keep our impressionable teens away from poker, yadda, yadda, yadda.  The author watches a winning player for an evening and reports what he saw and was told.  Just the facts, ma'am.  Good stuff.  (Thankfully, I think I enjoy playing online more than the subject of the article does.) 

2/15/2005 - Flashy Thingies

I added a bunch of poker site banners along the left-hand side.  I figured if someone came here and heard about a site and decided to play there, I might as well get a little something for it.  So please, if you decide you do want an account at one of those sites, please use those banners.  This is the last time I'll ask, I promise. 

They're all sites I've not only played at, but I continue to play at regularly.  They're reputable, trustworthy, and they all offer bonuses (Will Hill's banner doesn't specify, but they pay 5GBP/hr, or about $9.50/hr, up to your first five table hours of play every month, which comes out to about a $47 bonus every month).  One of these days I'll get around to writing up a review of various online sites just to help people decide. 

2/14/2005 - Uh, What Holiday? (XM Review)

So after about a week off due a little bit to my being busy but mostly to indifference, I'm back since I have absolutely nothing better to do, given that it's Valentine's Day and all. 

As I mentioned a little while ago, I was planning on getting XM Radio.  I have in fact gotten XM Radio and have been enjoying it almost practically non-stop for over a week now.  Since I don't have much in the way of poker thoughts right now, I figured I'd give a little review.  (Although I doubt I could do a better job reviewing XM than this guy, I do think I have a few things to add.)

For those who don't know, XM radio is satellite radio for which you pay a monthly subscription (there's also its competitor Sirius).  For the cost of hardware, installation, a small activation fee and a $9.99 monthly fee you get about 70 commercial-free music channels, about 40-50 channels dedicated to news, sports, talk or comedy and about 20 traffic and weather stations for various major metropolitan areas (full channel lineup).  In fact, there's even a "premium" playboy channel for those so inclined, although a playboy channel without visuals seems to me to be of, well, limited value. 

For an additional $3.99/month on top of regular service (or $7.99 alone) one can also get XM online.  One cool feature of the online feed is that you get to choose from a list that displays every station and the song and artist that's currently playing.  It's very snazzy. 

The equipment can get a little costly.  My car stereo was already XM compatible, so the tuner, antenna, adapter and installation ran me about $175.  There's also $10 activation fee, and so with tax that's about a $200 one time charge.  For someone without an XM compatible stereo, there are other options that could cost anywhere from an addition $50 on top of that charge (so about $250 total) to going out and buying a XM compatible stereo (probably at least $150 in itself...although maybe worth it if it also plays MP3s and has more power).  Obviously, there's no hardware costs for someone who just wants the online feed. 

Anyways, to make a long story short, I love it!  XM has skyrocketed into the top echelon of my "indispensables" list, along with food, sleep and poker (not necessarily in that order).  Whether I'm in my car, at work, or on my computer at home, I have a constant stream of commercial-free music right there, er, at my, uh, fingertips.  (Okay, at this point I'd like to say that as much as an advertisement as I sound like right now, I SWEAR that XM is not paying me a dime for this review.  Seriously, I couldn't think of any better way to phrase that last sentence, full of advertisement cliches and sentence structure and all). 

Some might say, well gee, I can download all the MP3s I want for free and store them on my iPod/desktop/whatever, and I get to listen to only the songs I want to hear.  Why should I actually have to pay for satellite radio? 

My answer is damnit, I'm not trying to sell it to you, I don't care what you do.  However, for me, the reasons I chose satellite radio over just downloading music (which I've done, ahem, legally of course)  are:

1) Opportunity cost.  I spent hours searching for and downloading enough music to fill about three CDs.  Even though that's 24 hours of music or so, that's still not enough music to keep ones sanity after a few replays without getting a lot more options available, ie, spending a lot more time searching for and downloading more music on a pretty regular basis.  I'd rather spend all that spare time playing poker and making money--believe me, it'll be more money than the monthly XM charge (and the one time hardware/installation cost). 

2) My own music exposure has been limited.  The simple matter is that I really don't know about a whole bunch of music that I'm sure I'd like but haven't been exposed to yet.  All I can do online is search for songs I know, but I'm not learning new music.  And unfortunately, regular radio only has the "hits" stations that play the top twenty or ten or two songs, or whatever, of the moment or the "classic rock" station that plays what seems to be the best 30 songs of the 1965-1985 period (seriously, Blinded By the Light, Stairway to Heaven and Sweet Home Alabama are good songs and all, but let's get something different already!).  And I just don't have the time nor inclination to go researching new bands or go out to shows regularly to learn about new music.  XM gives me a cheap and readily accessible way to reach out to many new bands and new genres that I never would have known about (for example, the Latin Jazz station, Luna 95, is now my personal fave and I'd never even thought the phrase "Latin Jazz" before hearing XM for the first time). 

It's also helpful that I enjoy a variety of musical genres, pretty much anything except country or rap.  Rock?  Love it.  Metal?  Bring it.  Pop?  Sure.  Alternative, Jazz, Classical?  Yup, yup, yup. 

When I got satellite radio, I had to decide between XM and Sirius.  Both seemed solid options--XM is more established with the bigger customer base, but Sirius is growing rapidly with its aggressive marketing.  Neither seemed to be in danger of failing any time soon.  Sirius was $12.99 a month and that included online listening, while XM would be $13.98/month with their online package (or $9.99 without online).  So the costs were about the same.  Sirius had the NBA, NFL and NHL, but XM just got MLB, and everyone knows that MLB >> NBA+NFL+NHL.  Also XM had the Latin Jazz station which I had the pleasure of listening to all the one summer that I worked at Circuit City (back in my single-digit-dollar-per-hour days).  So it ended up being no contest, for me at least.  MLB+Latin Jazz = case closed. 

It's not all roses, though.  I've found that during peak times the online feed gets a little dicey, sometimes with reduced sound quality, sometimes the feed cuts out for brief instances, and on occasion it stops with no explanation forcing me to restart the applet.  Non-peak times, like when I'm at work, it generally works with nary a hiccup.  I'm guessing increased bandwitdth would solve this problem--hopefully they're working on it. 

Another small problem is that although the music stations are commercial free, they aren't DJ free.  Well over 95% of airtime is still dedicated to music, but most stations still have the brief station ID spots, and some have DJs that talk a little more than they should (which for me means at all).  The problem is rather slight, however. 

Ultimately, I believe XM was a great purchase for me.  It makes work, commuting and even playing poker a lot more enjoyable.  It comes highly recommended from this humble blogger. 

2/5/2005 - Uh....

Come again?

A Colorado judge ordered two teen-age girls to pay about $900 for the distress a neighbor said they caused by giving her home-made cookies adorned with paper hearts.

And, no, there isn't more to the story. 

2/4/2005 - Nothing Interesing: Sex, Politics and Religion

So I found this post by Tony on "How to Blog."

It's a very good read.  I won't bore everyone by going through all 30 items one by one, but I did adminster a little "self-test" to see how I was doing.  I passed most, didn't pass some.  Yes, I was extremely bored.

What I found funny was this:

5. dont tell your mom, your work, your friends, the people you want to date, or the people you want to work for about your blog. if they find out and you'd rather they didnt read it, ask them nicely to grant you your privacy.

...

13. if you havent written about sex, religion, and politics in a week youre probably playing it too safe, which means you probably fucked up on #5, in which case start a second blog and keep your big mouth shut about it this time.

Heh.

Well, yes, #5 was one of those that I failed, but that hasn't been what's keeping me from talking about sex, religion or politics pretty much ever.  Mostly, what's kept me from talking about them is the fact that 1) There is depressingly little sex going on in my life right now, and 2) I absolutely despise politics and religion. 

"1" is pretty much self explanatory (and believe me, if it changes, it'll be obvious), but "2" might need a little more explanation.  Or maybe it doesn't, but what the hell, I'm bored, I'll explain anyways.

I hate politics.  I hate that people get so polarized and emotionally wrapped up in what is essentially bullshit fed to them by rich suits with their own selfish agenda on their mind. 

I don't like Bush.  But then I didn't like Kerry either.  If Bush was 72 offsuit, Kerry was 73 offsuit.  (Nader was 54 suited....a tempting hand for some that just ends up costing a lot in the long run).

Ugh, but then I hate even discussing it.  You have my promise--this is the extent to which I'll ever, ever, ever talk about politics on this blog.

Religion is even worse.  Reading Paul Phillips' webjournal, I found a term that appropriately sums up my thoughts.  Apatheist.  I was raised Christian or Catholic or some such.  I then went through a period of Agnosticism, and then somewhere around 4th grade I realized that it was all BS and became an Atheist.  And an Atheist I was (and I guess still am deep down) until recently, when I really just stopped caring and wished everyone would just shut up on the matter.

Unfortunately, discussions about religion or politics are not always avoidable, and so when I'm drawn into one I usually approach it completely tongue-in-cheek.  I'll play devil's advocate, always apparently supporting a position that I know will piss the other guy off.  My roommate, for example, is big on politics and hugely anti-Bush.  Believe me, he hears nothing but pro-Bush sentiments from me. 

My only problem is when talking with an atheist.  The arguments for religion are so ridiculously illogical and, for lack of a better term, stupid, that I can't even keep a straight face when I say stuff like "Don't question the will of God," or "You'll go to Hell for believing that!"  I mean, really, there aren't many other arguments out there than those, besides the fallacious "tornado making an airplane" arguments and various manifestations thereof (I always liked how people enjoy pointing out the unlikelihood--if that's a word--of life evolving by chance, but don't want to apply the same analysis to the liklihood of some cosmic, omnipotent being having always existed; as if that's more likely).   

But anyways, now that I've alienated half the people who read this, I can only promise to never, ever, ever directly discuss religion or politics again.  This is a poker/baseball/I-have-no-life blog, and that it will remain. 

And believe me, I wish I could be talking more about sex. 

2/3/2005 - You Talkin' to Me?

So I was on my way to the gym last night, walking, when I hear someone yell from a passing car,

"Your life has no meaning and I hope you rot in hell!"

Well, geez, I thought, that first part may be true but you don't have to be so mean about it.  But as it turned out the comment wasn't directed at me, but at a fairly large middle-aged man who was in the process of writing up a parking ticket for a nearby illegally parked car. 

Now, I have to admit thinking similar thoughts whenever I see someone else getting a parking ticket, or (more often) when I'm on the receiving end of a parking ticket.  That's not an opinion I'd actually voice to the Parking Ticket Guy's face, however.  Especially when the guy is large and when the vehicle you are in is approximately 20 feet from a stop sign, one that has a line of cars already waiting.

So, yes, after the front seat passenger yelled his comment, just to make things interesting, the driver was then forced to go about 10 feet and stop, thereby allowing Parking Ticket Guy to come running up next to the vehicle and voice his own loud opinion to the kid in the passenger seat. 

Unfortunately I couldn't make out what was said--despite being quite loud, it was very deep and garbled--but I imagine it wasn't along the lines of "Thanks for your opinion, I'll take it under consideration."

It was a tense moment.  I was half expecting the door to open and have large Parking Ticket Guy facing down two or three Asshole College Kids.  However, the vehicle just kept going, and Parking Ticket Guy stood there in the middle of the street and...made a note of the license plate.

I'd hate to be the owner of that car.  I'm sure if Parking Ticket Guy ever runs across the vehicle again, he's getting a ticket if he so much as parks slightly off-center.

But overall, it made for an entertaining 30 seconds.