The Diagnosis?

Existential musings

I enjoy reading the existential musings of Short-Stacked Shamus, replete with interesting material and quality writing which I highly recommend. In a recent post, Shamus discusses the new blind structure for the 2007 Main Event:

However, once WSOP officials released the structure sheets for the events, everyone learned that along with doubling the starting stacks, the blinds would start out doubled as well, rendering the change less meaningful. I don't say "meaningless" because having twice the chips does make a difference, even if the blinds have been doubled, because we are talking about a no limit tournament. For the limit tournaments, doubling the starting stacks and blinds/betting limits makes no difference whatsoever. But when we're talking NL, having twice the stack there in Level 1 will most certainly influence how (some) players will approach the start of the tournament.

What puzzles me is why Shamus differentiates between limit and no-limit. I can't see why this new structure would influence the approach of some players at the start of the tournament.

Sunday $500K

This morning I decided to use up 5,000 Full Tilt Points by playing in a SNG where the winner gets an entry into Sunday's $500K. As luck would have it, I took it down and now face the prospect of playing in my first "big" online MTT.

ROI

lightning36 asks :

I saw your Waffles vs Chad ROI comment. Is there an explanation for the math that even a former social sciences major can understand??

We multiply each month's (1+ROI) as seen below. As a point of reference, I experienced my last positive ROI month in March, 2004 (8.35%).

The Myth of the Huge Field - Part II

Thanks to TripJax for his cogent comments. The next step is to set up a model and run some simulations, so that we can dispel this myth forever. The model is simplistic and does not take into account increasing blind structures, chip stacks or any other idiosyncrasies of a tournament. Nevertheless, I believe the results are just as valid.

I used the following assumptions :

1. For each hand on each table there is a 0.001 probability that one player will be eliminated.

2. There are 10 players per table and the tables are kept as equal as possible.

3. Play is hand for hand.

4. As per WSOP practice, 10% of the field gets paid.

5. Play is halted when the bubble is eliminated.

The results are that the expected number of hands played till the bubble is eliminated is independent of the size of the field. So cashing in a WSOP event is just as impressive if the field is 800 or 8,000. As for winning the bracelet, now that's a different story.

The Myth of the Huge Field - Part I

In a recent article in Card Player, we read about an online player who finished 812th (out of a field of 8773) in the 2006 WSOP main event, or just in the money, for a prize of $15k.

Last year he plowed through nearly 8,000 players and cashed for a respectable $15,000 while taking his first shot at the coveted world championship crown.

Now I'm sure that there's no better feeling than making the money in a WSOP event. But what's this about "plowing through nearly 8,000 players"? Did he really plow through 8,000 players? Is there any significant difference between finishing 812th out of a field of 8,773 or 406th out of 4,386 players? Or 203rd out of 2,193 for that matter? How does the increasing field size translate into actual extra play?

Note that I'm talking about finishing just in the money, not making the final table.

Worst beat ever

It was the worst bad beat I have ever witnessed. Doris McFuddle, a 26-year-old lab assistant from Wichita, Kansas, busted out of the WSOP Ladies' Event when her quad queens were taken down by a royal flush. A distraught McFuddle is pictured below as she scurries from the Rio in tears.

Results not good

May started off with a modicum of promise and it looked like the long awaited breakthrough that my backers were praying for would eventuate. Alas, it was not to be. Variance kicked me in the junk once again. I really feel despondent, but my backers still have confidence in my weak tight trapping style. Can things get any worse?

5 cases when it's OK to use the "f" word

For a good cause

PokerStars is running the Ocean's Thirteen Darfur Charity Tournament this Sunday afternoon at 3:30pm ET.

Date: May 27th 2007, 15:30 ET
Buy-in: $10 plus rebuys.
Prizes: Top 4 receive tickets to June 5th premiere in Los Angeles plus 2 nights hotel and $2k for travel/spending. Top 18 receive autographed copy of "Oceans 13" DVD. Total prize pool will go to charity. PokerStars will match the donation.

The tournament is open to all players. Good luck!

Mother of all heaters

Saw this on FTP last night. I have no idea how long it took Lommasasa to win his 8 buy-ins, but it is an impressive feat nevertheless.

Poker Hall of Shame II

If you ever happen to run into Gudaehan, know that you are facing one of the biggest scumbags to ever sit at a table.

A pox on you

Matt Q has tagged me with this "Seven Random Things" meme. While I view this as a total disregard for my privacy, I will not risk possible ostracism by my fellow bloggers and proffer the following snippets :

1. fuel55 raves on and on about presto being gold. Wait till he turns presto like I did this year.

2. I haven't drunk any alcohol since 1987. I still have pangs of guilt that I declined Al's generous offer of a Soco shot at the 2005 WPBT in Vegas without explaining why.

3. Of all instruments, I learned to play the piano accordion as a kid. I would've preferred the guitar.

4. I can juggle 3 balls with one hand in my pocket. I can also juggle 3 balls with no hands in my pocket.

5. My favorite sport is soccer. A close second is Aussie rules football.

6. I have lived on 4 continents and speak 4 languages.

7. I have memorized the first 200 digits of Pi and can recite them both forwards and backwards. Also, my good memory is only surpassed by my fertile imagination.

And if you think I have the temerity to tag anyone, think again.

Set over set

In the March 28 issue of Card Player, Phil Hellmuth discusses a hand featuring set over set. In a sidebar entitled Poker Odds, presumably written by CP staff, the following is stated:

In a 10-handed game in which two players have been dealt pocket pairs, the chance of both players flopping sets is less than 0.1 percent.

I have no desire in calculating this probability and will accept their 0.1 percent. What I do find particularly funny is the redundant pre-condition of "in a 10-handed game". It doesn't matter if it's 10-handed, 5-handed or heads-up; if two players have been dealt pocket pairs, the chance of both players flopping sets is the same.

Disappointing April

After an encouraging start which had me positive for the first 3 days, I couldn't fend off a brutal onslaught of bad beats and second best hands. Despite several attempts at mounting a comeback, I finally succumbed to the fickle whims of variance, and my backers took another severe hit.

Who's the bigger donk?

I needn't remind anyone about the dangers of a paired board. But what can prove deceptively perilous is when the river card pairs the turn card. Following is a hand in which I played worse than the donkey I was up against.

Full Tilt Poker Game #2177715576: Table Antigua (6 max) - $0.25/$0.50 - No Limit Hold'em
Seat 1: jaballthehut2 ($49.75)
Seat 2: HomelessShelter ($97.40)
Seat 4: beavrliquor ($76.50)
Seat 5: k4750 ($19.45)
Seat 6: ALP-TOR ($73.65)
k4750 posts the small blind of $0.25
ALP-TOR posts the big blind of $0.50
The button is in seat #4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HomelessShelter [3c Kc]
jaballthehut2 calls $0.50
HomelessShelter calls $0.50
beavrliquor calls $0.50
k4750 folds
ALP-TOR checks
*** FLOP *** [3h Ks 9d]
ALP-TOR checks
jaballthehut2 bets $2.25
HomelessShelter calls $2.25
beavrliquor has 15 seconds left to act
beavrliquor folds
ALP-TOR folds
*** TURN *** [3h Ks 9d] [5d]
jaballthehut2 bets $6.75
HomelessShelter calls $6.75
*** RIVER *** [3h Ks 9d 5d] [5h]
jaballthehut2 bets $20.25
HomelessShelter calls $20.25
*** SHOW DOWN ***
jaballthehut2 shows [Kd Jc] (two pair, Kings and Fives)
HomelessShelter mucks
jaballthehut2 wins the pot ($57.75) with two pair, Kings and Fives
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $60.75 | Rake $3
Board: [3h Ks 9d 5d 5h]
Seat 1: jaballthehut2 showed [Kd Jc] and won ($57.75) with two pair, Kings and Fives
Seat 2: HomelessShelter mucked [3c Kc] - two pair, Kings and Fives

There was no point in calling the $20 river bet, since I had to give him credit for at least a king. Once the 2 fives popped up and my 2 pair were counterfeited, there was a good chance his higher kicker would come into play. As for the flop and turn betting, I believe that he thought he had the best hand throughout and I wouldn't have been able to raise him out of the hand. I still should have raised though.

My, my, you bloggers have been busy

I log into Bloglines and find I have 32,994 unread posts. I check my pulse and pinch myself. What year is it? What if each post is of Hoyazian proportions? Oh well, let's get it over with - should only take a couple of days...... Hello, what's this?

Forewarned is forearmed

The importance of making player notes cannot be overemphasized. Anything that can help me is annotated for future reference. I am meticulous and thorough, trying to encapsulate every facet of my opponent's game in a summary that will be of invaluable assistance when we next meet.

Apparel maketh the man

It looks like I'm finally getting a wardrobe together. Following on from my recent jersey win, I had the good fortune yesterday of taking down Maudie's dorky prize of a matching hat and scarf. All I need now is a decent pair of trousers and I'll be good to go for live games.

KK quandary revisited

In a recent article in Card Player magazine, noted poker authority Bob Ciaffone writes about adjustments for playing deep-stack no-limit hold'em. Especially interesting is the following excerpt:

Do not be overconfident in building or playing second-best hands. I suggest that you be particularly leery when considering whether or not to play a suited king. The second nuts is a very expensive holding when deep in chips. You will win quite a few pots with it, but when the big dough is put into the pot with strong betting, it is seldom the third nuts that is in your opponent's hand. Of course, two kings is a far better hand than a suited king, but the same type of thinking should be applied. I have seen good players tell you in print that you should be willing to play two kings for all of your money, and if you run into two aces, you were just unlucky. I believe that to be good advice under normal circumstances; that is, when you have 100 times the big blind, or less, in your stack. For at least 200 times the big blind, the only preflop through-ticket for your entire stack is pocket aces. If you're not looking at 'em preflop, you soon will be at the end of the hand.

I could not agree more. In fact, this validates my contention in the KK Quandary, where I was in the minority.