Monday March 14, 2005

SnGs in RL and padugi I dropped by the Reno Hilton on Saturday evening to check out the side game action during the first week of the World Poker Challenge. It was somewhat weak. There were a couple 20-40 HE games and a couple of 3-5 NLHE games with some smaller action. But they also had some 110+10 10 handed SnGs (15 minute rounds). I played one of them and ended up busting on a coin flip in 5th. Oh well. The strange thing was that I felt really distracted not playing multiple of these simultaneously. Early on Sunday morning I was playing in the last (but full) 3-5 NLHE game. The 20-40 HE game was starting to break and somebody suggested they play padugi triple draw. The game started to fill. If it wouldn't have been slow I would have jumped in but most of the players were new and were taking a while to make decisions. Its good to see people excited about a new game. Much of the TV generation I run into doesn't seem interested in playing poker but rather hold'em. ( Mar 14 2005, 09:55:45 AM PST ) Permalink Comments [0]

Tuesday October 26, 2004

Casino Internet access Last time I was picking up an drink in the Horizon's Starbucks I overheard a conversation in which the teller told another patron that they had free wireless Internet access. So far I hadn't seen any wireless Internet access in a casino. It would have been very useful if the GN Starbucks had access during the WSOP this year. I had guessed that the maybe the NGC made it difficult to provide such a service? Or maybe I was unlucky in the establishments I had canvased.

Anyways I went back to check out the claim this evening. Sure enought I picked up not one but two networks. One was open and the other appeared to be the casino's security network⁰. But alas, the service wasn't free. Upon trying to surf I learned that some company named "Hot Spot Kiosks"¹ wanted some money for access. 2 hours was a blistering $4.95 with a day at $9.95 not to far behind² (thats how much most hotel rooms charge for wired access which is available for the 24 hours you are in the room). A week was $29.95 and a month was $49.95.

⁰Yea, broadcasting its SSID. Makes you wonder if they secure their applications.

¹I thought T-Mobile had an exclusive with Starbucks?

²Of course then the typical drink at Starbucks isn't priced to shave margins too thin. ( Oct 26 2004, 09:12:02 PM PDT ) Permalink

Tuesday September 21, 2004

AK passiveness

The question of what to do with AK (big slick) comes up fairly frequently. For many a newbie who has a hard time laying a hand down after the flop raising with AK can be a trying experience.

Recently (July 5, 2004 and September 20, 2004) George Epstein took up this question in Poker Player (back issues). His advice was to not raise AK preflop under all but one case. He goes over this at a high level in the July 5th, 2004 article. The first thing the reader should notice is that George forgets there are two ways to win a poker hand: 1) have the best hand at showdown or 2) get everybody else to fold. Raising preflop with AK and then betting many flops will get the money. And when its not such a flop its often checked to you allowing you to either bet on the cheaper round and thus buy seeing the turn and river or checking the flop to see the turn. Being able to pull these off is dependent on your image and the game, but given George never specified either we have to believe he thinks giving up these opportunities is always worthwhile.

In the September 20th article George goes on further (prompted by unstated questions from readers) to give reasons why he doesn't raise preflop with AK. He gives 4 reasons why he doesn't raise preflop with big slick.

The first reason he gives is that by raising with AK you will force out dominated hands (Ax, Kx). This isn't such a bad idea. If you could get dominated hands to call and everything else to fold life would be great. Unfortunately he has already stated that the one time you should raise is when you are isolating an early position limper and (relevant to this point) that if you raise after multiple limpers they will just call. Its not such a bad thing to gain the button nor is it a bad thing (as this point makes) to get dominated hands to put more money in. This point is in contradiction with his earlier statement that the hands you raise will just call. Furthermore its generally true that you want limpers to call your raise. Your are a favorite or a small dog to each individuall and often getting more then your fair share against the crowd. [Note a classic Card Player mistake was to talk about how good AK had it in a matchup against a small pair but how bad it was when it was against two small pairs. Note in the first case you are usually getting 0-2% less then your fair share where in the second case you are getting on the order of 10% more then your fair share. Funny, I like the second case better.]

The second reason he gives is that you will warn dominated hands that they are against a better hand. If you properly balance what you are raising with this isn't too much of a problem. You wouldn't mind them putting more money in the pot as 3:1 dogs. Its true you have to balace this against future profits but in my experience (esp. in the looser low limit games that George seems to be talking about) is that they are not going to let go of a pair post flop very often.

The third reason he gives is that by raising you are giving away information about your hand (he is saying the same thing as #2 but using a more general argument). He states that "It's always best to give out the least information -unless you are being deceptive." If you are so tight that an early position raise _means_ AK, AA, or KK then the problem isn't that you are raising but the set of hands you are raising with. He is right you should strive not to indicate your hand to the table. If you don't raise AK and an early position raise means AA or KK then you have given away a lot of information about hands which make up a far bigget chunk of your profit then AK. Thats far worse then raising with AK and then having to throw it away.

The forth reason he gives is that by limping preflop the pot will be smaller and when you make a pair that you it will be easier to force your opponents off the pot. His statement is that "there will be fewer opponents who could draw out on you; and hence your chance of taking the pot is substantially higher". Controlling the size of the pot is a technique which can be used to profit. But using it to be able to win more pots is a fallacy. The goal of poker is to win more money, not pots. Driving people off a pot when they don't have the right price to draw isn't the goal. You want them to draw incorrectly thus increasing your equity.

Overall I think the problem with George's approach to AK is that he ignores how it plays post flop. That is really where the money is to be won. Once you realize that then it becomes an issue of understanding the game dynamics, your opponents, and how to play poker. And thats a topic for another day. ( Sep 21 2004, 06:15:25 PM PDT ) Permalink

Tuesday June 15, 2004

real poker analysis

Most of the analysis I've seen online of poker hands is silly. Much of it involves some hand waveing and chest banging. An attempt at correct analysis of the last hand from the B101 WPT event (Shooting Stars) is given on Paul Phillips blog. Note that Jacksup refines the analysis in the discussion. Paul's "abortive" analysis is better then most of what you will see online.

During the same event one of the two friends gets to the turn (maybe just the flop?) against Phil Gordon, fingers his chips in a menacing way, and then checks, followed by Phil quickly betting second or worse pair. In an amazing moment of silliness Mike Sexton calls this a very tough bet or some such. In reality when an unsophisticated player acts strong and then checks in this situation Phil should bet anything. Mike acted like a routine play was tough. I guess its good for TV but its another example of poor analysis. ( Jun 15 2004, 05:22:14 PM PDT ) Permalink

Tuesday June 08, 2004

unrealized equity I played in a small (~200 people) tournament at the Reno Hilton this last weekend. I got to the last table with the biggest stack (~69K) by a small amount. I then was doubled through from a medium sized stack (~20K) when he came over the top of an earlier position opener with AA and I couldn't lay down QQ. I'd been playing with him most of the day and knew he could make psycho all-ins when he thought he could get the blinds and antes but probably should have laid down since he was raising an opener. Later he busted trying the same move with QJs. Oh well. The person two to my right (after the previous person mentioned busted) had been stealing fairly frequently. I restole once and picked up blinds, antes, and his steal. I had rebuilt my stack into the #2 spot. A short time later I was in the small blind when the stealer raised from the cutoff. I looked down to see AA and moved in. He called _immediately_. He had KK. I was a 4.5:1 favorite. Alas he caught a King on the river. I was left crippled and exited in 8th a short time later happy with my performance but not so happy with the result ;) ( Jun 08 2004, 01:58:28 PM PDT ) Permalink Comments [1]