game

Blind Tokyoslot88 Defense

Tagged

In hold’em, when you suspect an opponent might be bluffing, what’s the lowest hand with which you can call? In the big blind against a suspected blind steal, it may not be as much as you think.

In a $20-$40 hold’em game in Las Vegas recently, I was in the big blind. An extremely aggressive player sat two seats to my right. Everyone around the table folded to the aggressive player on the button, who made the expected raise to $40. The small blind folded. The next decision was up to me.

Much has been written about what it takes to call (or raise with) in this spot. When facing a suspected blind steal, it’s sometimes necessary to defend your blind, albeit selectively — or you’ll be identified as an easy target and get run over by aggressive players. Something told me the player raising my big blind didn’t really have much of a hand. In fact, the way that he thrust his chips forcefully into the pot convinced me that I wouldn’t need much of a hand to outplay him after the flop. I called.

The flop came rags, 8c 5h 3d. Although I didn’t have a pair, I considered tokyoslot88 betting-out and going for a steal. But I still wasn’t convinced that my opponent didn’t have a real hand. Before I could rap the table signaling my intent to check, the aggressive player reached quickly for his chips. From the way that he seemed to be so eager to bet, I was becoming increasingly more confident in what my first instinct had told me — that he was bluffing.

Then and there, I made a decision based purely on instinct. Barring unforeseen developments, I was going to play my hand all the way to the river. It appeared my opponent was aggressive enough to blast away at the pot all the way to the end in a desperate attempt to recover what he already had invested. If my assessment was correct, I didn’t want him going anywhere. Indeed, I wanted him to continue bluffing, with me hemming and hawing, playing the role of the hayseed tourist as though I was contemplating seriously whether or not to call his bet.

The turn paired the board. This presented some wonderful options for me. In standard game situations, when the board pairs, a bet or check-raise can be a very powerful play (even without three of a kind). However, I suspected my opponent was simply going to continue shoveling his money into the pot, which I would gratuitously accept — if my presumptions proved to be correct. He bet and I called.

The river was a blank.

I checked again, and sat completely still. I didn’t want to give my opponent any indication that I was fully prepared to call. Again, I wanted him to bet. Many players in this spot who are head-up against an opponent who is smooth-calling all the way to the river simply will check behind and reveal a hand. A bet, especially a forceful one coming from a very aggressive player, just screams, “I’m bluffing!” It’s the final act of desperation. The player bet and I called.

“I missed,” the player sadly announced as he turned up Q-10.

Suddenly, I felt like a proud peacock, swelling with pride. “King high,” I said, revealing K-9, which seemed to be a stunningly weak hand with which to be calling in a muscle game like $20-$40 hold’em. The other players at the table were in disbelief. The modest-sized pot was pushed to me. More important than the money won was the table image that I had established for the remainder of the session. The success of my bizarre play accomplished two things: First, the aggressive player on my right now would be neutralized and no longer would threaten to steal my blinds. Second, I had telegraphed mixed messages to the other players — that I was either a complete baffling idiot or a very solid player who shouldn’t be messed with, which — although contradictory — isn’t a bad image to have at any poker table.

Of course, my instincts just as easily could have been incorrect. Critics may even suggest that I was lucky. My decision to call down a pure bluff with K-9 would have been atrocious had I guessed wrong and the player shown me a real hand. Worse, he could have shown me a weak hand (such as a small pair or ace high), and I would have been forced to concede the pot and face embarrassment.

My blind defense raised interesting questions. Afterwards, I was eager to discover the long-term value (if any) of calling suspected steal attempts with relatively weak hands, based purely on mathematical principles. In other words, with how LOW a hand could I have called with in the previous scenario to ensure positive expectation? Could I have called my opponent down with any king high? What about a hand such as Q-J? Or, Q-2? What about J-10? As you are about to discover, hands that are playable in this spot (under the previous assumption, that the opponent is bluffing) may be surprising.

The following examples assume two things: (1) You are playing against a very aggressive opponent, and (2) The player must be capable of raising initially and running a bluff with any two cards. Otherwise, none of this applies. These conclusions do not apply when facing typical players, so-called “tourists,” or tight players. The recommendations apply only when playing against semi-sophisticated players and maniacs who are aggressive enough to consistently blast away at the pot. Since a fair number of middle-limit hold’em games around the country are comprised of players fitting this description precisely, the following recommendations are hardly inconsequential. In fact, calling down a suspected blind steal may be quite profitable if certain guidelines are examined carefully and selectively applied.

I consulted with J.P. Massar, who made the final table at the 1999 Tournament of Champions and has won and placed high in a number major events. Massar has as solid math credentials as any poker player I know. Massar noted that the calling requirements on the turn are stricter than those on the river (which is no surprise, since you will have to call two big bets to get a showdown). Therefore, Massar had to construct his examples in terms of calling on the turn, assuming a call on the river, instead of just in terms of a call on the river. Given the anecdote above, Massar reached some interesting conclusions:

The effective odds of calling a bet on the turn (assuming that my opponent will bet and I will call on the river 100 percent of the time) are $80 to win what’s in the pot now — which is $170, plus my opponent’s bet on the river of $40, or $210 total. The math says that one needs to win at least 28 percent of the time at the showdown to make a profit.

Suppose that the board on the turn is 8-5-3-5 (rainbow). Computer analysis shows that J-9 is enough of a hand to win at least 28 percent of the time!

Instead, suppose that the board on the turn is Q-8-7-3 (rainbow). Now, analysis shows that K-2 (that is, any king high) is good enough.

Suppose that my opponent is not a total maniac and will raise only initially with the best 70 percent of his hands instead of every single one. How does this affect the quality of hand that you need to make the call? In the 8-5-3-5 example, one needs a Q-7 (as opposed to J-9) to call him down. In the later Q-8-7-3 example, a K-9 (as opposed to any K) is good enough.

Note once again that these results are valid only when using the assumptions listed above. Furthermore, any particular board may present flush possibilities; the examples above use boards with no flushes possible on the river. If flushes are possible and you cannot make a flush, the quality of hand with which you need to call down will go up. Also, there are hands such as low straight draws with which it would be correct to call the turn but not the river if you miss.

Finally, I don’t claim that calling down with hands at least as good as the threshold hands given above is always the most profitable play, only that it is “profitable.” Betting or check-raising the turn or the river with some of the hands might turn out to be a better play than simply check-calling.

When it comes to giving or taking poker advice, every situation is unique. There is certainly no such thing as a situation in which it is 100 percent correct to make a “blind defense.” In most cases, when the bet is raised before the flop, it’s proper to give up the blind and wait for a better opportunity later, since you are placing money at risk and will be out of position throughout the hand.

But as you can see from my K-9 story, and probably from your own playing experience, you should be able to recognize the signs of a blind steal. It’s easy to run a bluff. It takes quite a bit more sophistication to call down a bluff and make the correct decision, based on good instincts combined with sound mathematical principles.

 

 …

READ MORE

Updates

THE ACTUAL sbobet TOURNAMENT

Tagged

 

I HAVEN’T EVEN GOTTEN TO THE PARTY YET SO JUST BEAR WITH ME

Let’s just skip to the final table shall we. It’s the main event, the part we all came to see. Actually very few of us came here to play poker, but this is the best of it and it certainly deserves a telling.

10 players remained and 5 were sbobet Palmetto proud (This is a South Carolina expression meaning they’re homeboys). In fact, 40% of the final table was comprised of members of the Smith family. I’ve tried all afternoon to think of any event where a single family has shown so much dominance and the closest I can come up with is the Corleones.

The entire table looked like this :

Double As

Dr. Pauly

Wes Nile Virus

Shep Tiltstein

Team Scott Smith

Debbie Smith

The Wolverine (also a Smith)

Lefty

Daddy

Uncle Brian (who knocked me out)

Honorary Feature Table bubble and 11th place finisher = Al Can’t Hang

At the start DoubleAs held a massive chip advantage and Daddy was close behind. The Wolverine cut into both stacks with some very crafty plays. Then shortly after Uncle Brian (Stupid pocket Kings) busted out we had the hand of the century….******* For Much Greater Detail on this hand you must read the END of this post a future post [ed’s correction], but here’s the short version:

Only two players, Daddy and The Wolverine see the flop :

It’s A-7-7.

The turn is a rag.

The river is a 7.

Daddy bets the river and The Wolverine pushes all in. Daddy says, “You have quads don’t you?” Then he lays down, FOLDS, pocket aces.

The Wolverine shows the hammer, Quad 7s.

AN APOLOGY

Meanwhile, the party was rockin’ outside. Four pretty girls dressed, oddly, as Hooter’s girls arrived. They brought dozens of their closest friends. My buddy Ted and his parents arrived and his mother who has very nice Hooters herself begged me to touch the muscles of her thigh. She’d been working out and, while I was uncomfortable, I hate to be rude.

Eva’d made me another LIT and a coupla carbombs too. I’d started tinkering with SoCo and had a head full of beer. After the previous night, it was easy to get the stupid flowing. Dr. Jeff calls it the “shampoo effect”.

THE SHAMPOO EFFECT

You know how when you lather your hair and then rinse, you get a pretty mild lather of bubbles on the hair.

But…

If you follow the directions and actually REPEAT the process you almost instantly get a full head of giant bubbles. The previous wash made the second one quicker.

Likewise, if you still feel last night’s booze, today’s is coming FAST.

Friends my buzz was moving like my Head and Shoulders and Al Can’t Hang is a lousy conditioner. Therefore, I’m a bit sketchy on the EXACT tournament details but I can tell what I remember. Most of my memories begin at the DRUNK OLYMPICS…

SANS CHEESE BALLS

WHAT I REMEMBER

Pauly beat Wes (The Big Pirate). They chopped the pot and then had one had to determine a champion. It was Pauly.

Within moments the gospel spread and the great game was over. Millions of devout Pauly fans shed tears of joy, millions of pirates returned to their jobs at Capital One. Better still, the DRUNK OLYMPICS were ready to begin.

Otis, Al and I dragged a PA system with two speakers to the upper corner of the driveway, Otis plugged it in, and said, “Hello” to the crowd. They were all there by then, and even the Hooters girls perked up.

CJ and BG were the referees.…

READ MORE

game

The 2011 Comeback Kids

Tagged

 

Down on your poker luck, who doesn’t think of the famous Jack Straus maxim “a chip and a chair”? Twenty-nine years ago, in the 1982 World Series of bandar judi pulsa tournament, Jack Strauss was reduced to nothing but a $500 chip and his chair. Days later, creating the legend of one of the most amazing comebacks in the history of poker, Jack Strauss won the tournament, and a $500,000 purse.

“A chip and a chair” is all you need to make your comeback. And in 2011, there are already some serious underdogs writing their own comeback stories …

Chris Moneymaker

The one-time-lucky, seven-year-bust, comeback-accountant

Who doesn’t know the story of Chris Moneymaker? He is likely the single greatest reason for poker’s popularity boom in the last 8 years. As a total unknown in 2003, and working as an accountant in Tennessee, Moneymaker bought into a $39 satellite tournament on PokerStars. He ended up winning a seat a the World Series of Poker Main Event, the most revered and coveted tournament in the world, and became a legend.

Moneymaker bested a field of 838 players. In the final heads-up match, he faced Sammy Farha, a well-known and highly successful poker celebrity. Moneymaker took first place, and the enormous $2.5 million grand prize. He quit his job to become a professional poker player, and went on to live the dream!

But, Moneymaker was a total bust.

From 2005 through most of 2008, Moneymaker didn’t record just about any live tournament cash worth talking about. In 2008, he recorded two cashes for just over $150k. In 2009, he recorded one cash for $15k. Considering living expenses, and regular poker losses, these types of cashes after 4 years of running dry were nothing but blips on the radar. (2010? No real cashes.) People have looked at Moneymaker as an amateur who got lucky once, and just didn’t have what it takes to be a regular winner. Generating mostly losses for seven years (not like he couldn’t afford to) does not earn you respect.

Enter 2011… Moneymaker hired a mental coach. He began leaning on his experience of 8 years of regular play. He developed strategies, and studies regularly. Moneymaker has decided to stop being a lucky player, and start being a smart one. The result? 2011 is only three months in, and he won second place in the National Heads up Championship (to the tune of a cool $300,000) and 11th place in the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure Main Event (for a respectable $130,000). In these three short months, he has pulled in more significant tournament money than in the entire seven years prior.

His rate of winning far exceeds anything he has ever accomplished to date, and his consistent performances suggest a totally new style of play. With determination, and the willingness to invest in developing his skill, Moneymaker has taken a whole new tack and completely upended all the negative opinions. Moneymaker is on the comeback trail, and just might be earning the respect of poker professionals by the end of 2011.

Patrik Antonius

The Finnish Rollercoaster

2009 was the year of Patrik Antonius. Up $9 million, almost all of it in online winnings, the Finnish pro put up a stellar performance. But later that year, he admitted in an interview that he “lost millions, millions, millions of dollars with other stuff last year.”

2010 didn’t get any better. He lost $3.6 million in the year from high stakes cash games alone, going nowhere about as fast as you can go. In addition to his poker losses, Antonius reportedly lost millions in sports bets, and millions on the golf course. To cap it all off, Antonius began suffering seriously from his back problems, and was forced to attend rehabilitation sessions twice a day. Antonius summed it all up pretty simply: “I hate these moments when everything just goes bad.”

That’s what they call a tailspin.

Enter 2010… Antonius plays Draw Poker. A lot of Draw Poker. It’s March, and he’s won more almost $2 million at this game alone. With his other online poker efforts, he pulled in by the end of February a huge $3 million in profit. That’s more than Moneymaker made in one of the world’s largest tournaments in 2003!

Let’s put this in perspective: last year in March, Antonius was negative $3 million. That is a $6 million difference year-to-date. That is more money than most people will earn in two lifetimes! Antonius credits his intense focus and work ethic for his ability to create such a turnaround. But come on Patrik, what poker secret do you know that we don’t? Regardless, we’ve only got respect for a player who can comeback like this.

Just remember poker players: no matter how bad it gets (losing $3 million in three months is pretty bad!), there is always another comeback story waiting to be written. All you need is a chip and a chair……

READ MORE

Updates

Danger, Otis slot hoki Robinson!

Tagged

 

It shoves a poorly-manicured thumbnail in your navel and twists. It drags you by your nose into dark corners where ne’er-do-wells skulk and rodents feed on trash. Perhaps more dangerous, it hangs you from a mountain summit and says, “So, you wanna play, huh? Well, then let’s play.”

Limit Hold’em has been boring me recently. I usually play slot hoki limit on Empire. The variance has been a little high recently. That was of little concern to me. Variance is variance. I was getting a little tired, though, of playing perfect poker and losing. And, of course, even the most disciplined among us tend to tilt a little when the bad run runs too long. When that happens, I’ll be the first to admit, I’m not playing perfect poker.

I was on the verge of something we all do from time to time. I was about to take a break. I was going to try to wrap my head around the game without playing it. Bobby Baldwin’s chapter in Super System was about to get some serious work. I like to call myself a a limit player who dabbles in no-limit tourneys. If I was going to talk like that, I needed to back it up.

In the spirit of Al Can’t Hang, Pauly, and Iggy, perhaps a drinking analogy is appropriate here.

I see Limit Hold’em as a beer drinker’s game. It’s a steady game, well-paced, with little room for disaster unless you choose otherwise. Sure, it’s possible to have a few too many and wake up wicked hungover. But there’s little doubt, you made the choice to do that, and the hangover usually isn’t that bad.

No-limit, as we all know, is for people who like to ride the lightning. It’s a shot-drinker’s game. If you choose to have one drink and wait for the nuts, you’re going to be okay. But if you’re really committed to playing the game, you’ve got to be willing to be hungover for three days. You’ve got to be willing to go broke.

As a semi-professional drinker, I know both games pretty well. I’ve suffered the victories. I’ve suffered the hangovers. I’ve made some decent money and I’ve almost gone broke a couple of times.

Simply put, those are the devils I know. And, frankly, I’ve been a little bored.

A bored poker player can be as dangerous as a bored drinker. When one gets bored, he starts to experiment. That brings us to Otis’ latest experiment in chasing the high.

Two-hundred dollar buy-in Pot Limit.

After a recent final table finish in Empire’s $25,000 guarantee Sunday night tourney, my bankroll was such that I could afford to lose $200. On a bored evening, I recently sat down at the $200 PL and decided to play.

I won $350 in a 45 minute session.

I stood up, and rightly, went out for a drink or ten. I ruminated over the possibilities for most of the evening. It seemed way too easy. I had hit and run the table for a sizable chunk of cash. There was a part of me that thought I had just found a poker utopia. Like anyone who buys a lottery ticket, I had visions of grandeur. The 45 minute session had just crowned me king of the poker world.

Of course, when I was thinking, I was drinking. I was no king. I was a guy sitting at a bar and trying to negotiate with the bartender. The Bait Shack had recently increased its draft price by 50%. I argued that since I had been drinking there since they opened, I should be grandfathered. I should get every third beer free. They didn’t see things my way.

The next day, I sat back down and lost every bit if my winnings in two hands. Most of it left my stack when a guy called $150 against my king-high spade flush with AJo. He held the ace of spades and the fourth spade came on the river.

I considered myself no worse for the wear. It was an experiment in riding the lightning. I survived and vowed to return to $3/$6 limit as soon as I stopped cursing.

Had it not been for Pauly asking me to write a little something for his blog-zine, I might never have ventured back into the world of $200 PL. But since he asked, and I was writing, I thought I’d sit and play a little more. I entered a $20+$2 multi and sat at a $200 PL table.

It became a four-hour session. I wrote the piece (hopefully to be featured in an upcoming edition of Truckin’) and played steady poker.

When I stood up, I had placed 9th in the tourney. What’s more, my $200 buy-in had turned into $733.

So, here I sit, 12 hours after a very nice winning session. It was not a hit and run. It was steady poker, played well. I remember laying down top two pair to a $90 bet when there was a possible straight on the board and two to a flush as well. I had my head wrapped around the game and didn’t feel like I was riding the lightning. I felt confident and sober.

Still, as the title of this post suggests, I know I’m walking a fine line. While my bankroll could stand a slight correction, I don’t know that I’m qualified or wealthy enough to play at that level.

Here I sit, sober and staring at an open bar. I ask myself, what would the great experimenter Pauly do? What would pro-drinkerAl Can’t Hang do? What would tee-totalling poker pro Felicia do?

More interesting, however…what is Otis going to do?…

READ MORE

blog

Insider Secrets To Building A Sales Funnel

Tagged

 

Have you finally got your small business off the ground, at least to the point where you’re starting to see a modest profit, but you’re still struggling to generate solid new sales leads to help build a reliable customer base? If this sounds like you then look no further than the “funneling money into your pockets.” Sales funnel creation course. This unique and interesting academic course will teach you everything you need to know about creating a successful and reliable sales funnel so that your business can constantly generate new sales leads and keep traffic funneling to your website or store. This course will teach you how to use a sales funnel for everything from affiliate marketing campaigns and email marketing campaigns and even how to use a sales file off-line and much more. By the time you have completed this course you will have all the information and skills necessary to create a sales funnel that will allow you to take your business to the next level.

What you will learn:

1) You will learn the definition of a sales funnel and how they are used to generate customer leads.

2) You will learn how to use an automated sales funnel to help your business grow.

3) You will learn how to use and build a sales from foreign email marketing campaign.

4) You will learn how to create and use funded proposals for your sales funnel.

5) You will learn how to build a successful off-line sales funnel.

6) You will learn how to conduct proper market research so as much of your market demographic gets sucked into your funnel as possible.

7) You will learn how to construct a sales funnel from scratch.

8) You will learn how to capture emails and other necessary information for your customer database and so much more.

Who this class is for: this class is expressly designed to help those individuals running a small business, whether they are housewives students or entrepreneurs that are looking to understand how to generate more sales leads as well as traffic to their website or store for the purposes of building and maintaining a healthy customer base so that they can generate as much profit within their given market niche as possible. While it is not expressly necessary for a student to have an extensive background in business before registering for this course. A basic understanding of small business organization would be considered advantageous.

This class is NOT designed to teach students or readers how to start a business. This is not a turnkey business course. This course is expressly designed to teach students and readers how to set up, use and maintain various types of sales funnels for their business so that they can attract a reliable customer base. This course in no way teaches students how to start a small business. If this is what you’re looking for. It is suggested that you take some business 101 or other entrepreneurial courses before registering for this class. To translate this content in other language, contact Translation Companies UK

READ MORE