Posted by Johnnymac | January 31, 2005 7:18 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

I am currently catching up on episodes 2 and 3 of Tilt that I had saved on the Tivo. My opinion of the show has improved quite a lot – the acting still sucks, the writing is poor, and the story is quite contrived and cliched…

So why do I say the show is better? Because the Matador’s daughter is F*CKING HOT!

Posted by Dr Fro | January 30, 2005 12:07 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

This is great. According to the bad-beat-o-meter, the wet noodle I beat up on a co-blogger with was a 5,742.

Posted by Dr Fro | January 29, 2005 2:04 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

The company that owns PartyPoker is going public. Surely the conspiracy theorists that think the site cheats or in any way manipulates the deck can now realize that PP has much more to gain by being honest.

Here’s a calculator that fits on your screen while PP is open.

I think Johh should buy this shirt since he is a peace loving hippie poker freak.

If you want to impress Dutch with your chip tricks, check this site out.

Posted by Junelli | January 28, 2005 12:42 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

7 more cashouts since my last post. That’s $3,350 in less than 3 weeks.

I’ve finally started to figure this stuff out.

All my winnings have come from the Limit tables and an occasional sit-n-go. I keep $1,000 in the account so I can weather the swings, and I only withdraw the “cheese” over $1,000. I primarily play $5-$10 limit, but have jumped into a $10-$20 game once and a $15-$30 twice. I sometimes play the $30 and $50 SNGs, but primarily limit poker. I’ll write a post later about my strategy.

Posted by Junelli | January 27, 2005 5:00 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

Stealing the Blinds

by Dave Rogers

from Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

There are players, very good ones, who make many final tables using a very simple approach. They accumulate a decent amount of chips and then use them like a club to keep hammering the blinds once the blinds get meaningful. You’ll see them steal blind after blind, then sooner or later someone will call or raise. The blind stealer may fire out a shot on the flop or just look to see as many free cards as possible. They might fold if raised before the flop or bet out into the flop if checked to. The cards don’t really matter for them, because they’re just playing their stacks and position. Yet they succeed even though you and most of the other players know what they are doing, because for every time they are thwarted, they steal enough to cover. And then, just as the table is collectively trying to get the nerve together to put a stop to them, they get a legitimate hand, someone plays back at them and gets knocked out. That will usually be enough to put the table back in line.

That is the trick to the blind stealer’s game. Sometimes they have the cards and are essentially playing them just like the standard ABC player. Sometimes they have rags but then hit the flop. Sometimes they’ve got nothing but pick up the blinds because of their aggression. Then at times they have nothing and have to lay down to a resteal or missed flop. Unlike the typical opponent, it is much more difficult to put the blind stealer on a range of hands. No one wants to be the one to look them up and find that they picked the wrong time to defend. So the blind stealer’s aggression wins many uncontested small pots.

What lets them get away with this is the steady stream of chips they pick up. When they get played back at, they can either get away from their hands if they need to or see the flop as a significant dog because the pot is still laying them odds. Even as a 4-to-1 dog, a skilled blind stealer knows when he has either the odds or the implied odds to try to suck out. If he doesn’t, he just folds.

Most players who study the game in order to improve know all of this, but aren’t able to put it into practice successfully because it goes against the very first thing they learned once they decided to stop playing their “lucky hands” and actually think about their game. It is counter-intuitive to the starting hand requirements they’ve learned. It seemingly risks chips without the goods. Yet it works.

Here’s why: Lets assume blinds of T200/T400 with a T50 ante 9 handed. Each pot starts out with T1050 in it. Obviously, you can’t steal every blind. That becomes too obvious and you will get defended too often. What if you try to steal 3 blinds in a round and get caught once? Two times you make it T1,200 to go and take down the pot. So you’re up T2,100. The third time your opponent pushes and you have to fold. You’re still up T900. It’s costing you T1,050 a round yourself, so even if you have both your blinds stolen, each round is now only costing you T150. Some times though, you’ll actually get a hand or see a flop when you get called or raised. This is where you’ll earn chips. You’re essentially free rolling for the times that you hit your hand. The other players are simply waiting for good cards, so most rounds cost them the full T1,050. Sometimes they’ll catch their hands, earn some chips and continue on. Other times they’ll bust out because they haven’t padded their stacks with other player’s blinds.

Online, you can take it further. If you play a lot of tournaments at a particular level, you’ll notice the same people playing the same way. You can create notes on those players who will play back at you, what they defend with and also who you can just push over. Armed with just this information you’ll find yourself going much further into the money in the tournaments you play.

For many ABC type players, players who are probably earning money in tournaments, but not making it deep into the money often enough, this can be a tough transition. There is risk involved and there will be tournaments were everyone seems to call your steal attempts, or you finally hit a ragged flop only to lose all your chips to a better hand. If you keep at it, though, you’ll find it works very well in the long run, especially when you’ve had more practice at it. This may be a very drastic transition from your normal game. You might want to try dropping down to lower buy in tournaments until you feel comfortable with moving back up to your normal level and beyond. You’ll also start to see others using this style and understand what they are doing. You’ll notice that these people who used to prey on you, now leave you alone and that you’ll start to see them at your final table often.

Posted by Dr Fro | January 25, 2005 5:04 PM
Filed Under Uncategorized

The link from last night got me thinking. He made a good point that the “rule of thumb” to call a pot-sized bet on the flop with 9 outs is bad advice. It is good advice if you or your opponent is going all in. That is, since you won’t have to make an additional call on the turn, the pot odds on the flop are the only consideration. While this is good advice, I think it is incomplete. What we need to know is, “What sized bet is ok to call?” See this chart below for your answer:


The third column is the one that bad players refer to when they incorrectly call a pot-sized bet. If you make the assumption that your opponent will bet the bejezzus out of the pot on the turn, then your only consideration in pot odds is the likelihood of turning your card (Column 1). Based on the above chart, a bet of $31 to a $100 pot is worth a call. Always. Can you call a bet > $31? Yup, if:

1. There is a possibility that you could get a free (or very cheap) river. However, this is so rare, that I would only factor this in if you are last to act and you know your opponent very well and have seen him check (or under bet) on the turn, or

2. You think that if you make a bet once you make your hand, you might get a call.

Items 1&2 involve a lot of speculation, so I would not raise the bar of what sized bet you may call significantly above $31.

If you find yourself on the turn needing a draw, then it becomes a bit simpler. Use column 2 and only consider the following for calling greater than $32:

- You think that if you make a bet once you make your hand, you might get a call.

The below chart is for open-ended straights:

Next Page »