Adam and I have been compiling a list of stupid things people do at the poker table. Some are common. Some are not, but they are things we have actually seen. Here is what we have so far (in no particular order):

1. Failing to bet/raise with the nuts in last position. This one just kills me. It is rare asituation in poker that a decision is 100% wrong, all of the time.
2. Calling a bet “just to see what he had” OK, you think this is bad in the base case, but get this….ARH saw a guy be the SECOND CALLER and make this statement. That is terrible.
3. Saying “You called with THAT” when you bluff and get called by a person holding bottom pair or maybe Ace-High. HELLO…the call was becase they put you on a bluff, not because of “THAT” Somebody (was it Tiffany Michelle?) did this on Tuesday night on ESPN.
4. Calling trips a set It isn’t that stupid, it is just semantics. However, it is evidence that you probably don’t read many poker books
5. Cardrooms that force you to post a blind when you join a table Really? I just waited 45 minutes on a waitlist to sit and play 3 hands for free before I jet when the BB comes around. The rule makes sense online, but who is going to go through all that trouble in a B&M cardroom?
6. Misapplication of the show-one, show-all rule The rule is intended to disallow showing your hand to one person only, not to disallow showing one card only
7. Bluffing into a dry side pot Refer to earlier discusssions
8. A home game that has a no-check-raise rule This is rare, but it is blasphemy
9. Limits on buy-ins in a NL game This didn’t exist 10 years ago. It first existed in online poker. It spread to B&M games post-Moneymaker because it was beneficial to the cardrooms to fleece the sheep rather than skin them. I understand the cardroom’s motivation in putting in this paternalistic rule. But why do players and home games support this blasphemy? If you have $132 in your stack, what is the difference between me having $133 or $1,000,000,000,000? None. None. None. The confusion comes from a mentality that is born in tournament poker (which, due to TV, is many people’s primary perspective on poker). In a cash game, it doesn’t matter. And when Person A does not want Person B and C to buy in for more money, it just means that B and C can’t get a juicy side pot going. In the ultimate irony, the side pot just might get B or C to fold, which would help B win the main pot. But we aren’t dealing in reality here, just in stupidity rooted in ignorance.
10. Asking for a new deck
11. Telling me I didn’t have the pot odds to call when you failed to count all of my outs
12. Calling time on yourself This is so great. The obvious cause of this is the confusion over what saying “time” means. In most sports, it buys you time. In poker, it limits your time. God, I find this one funny.
13. “Who’s turn is it?”

Your thoughts?

“Think about it. Those Hollywood types are a lot smarter than me. That’s why I listen to them!”

Look everybody, a typical Obama supporter! (for what it’s worth, I don’t like paying for my gas or my mortgage, either)

KTL can tell me if I got this right:

Game 5, had it been a regular season game, would have been counted as a win for the Phillies if it were a regular season game. This is because:
- the game lasted at least 5 innings
- the 1/2 inning played does not count
- Philly was winning at the end of the last complete inning

I do not know if I got that right.

I also understand that there was an acual, written rule change a few years ago that made a special case for the playoffs that if the game was tied EVEN if the tie came in the middle of an inning, that game would be continued on another day. Additionally, Selig and the Stonecutters others had some sort of gentlemen’s agreement to continue the game even if Tampa failed to tie it up.

Did I get that right, too?

What I do know for sure is that Mike and Mike reported yesterday that Vegas paid out the game as if Philly had won because, I believe, Vegas’ rules reflect the regular season rules and there is no special rule for the playoffs. Regardinng futures bets (e.g., “Phillies to win it in 5), you would really have 8 possible “games” and how would you count that? Surely, you would throw out the partial game 5 and just look to the winner of the “real” game 5. Of course, Philly won, so no-harm, no-foul. I also managed to turn $8 into $10 by taking them to win the series.

My friend, Little Pony, bet on game 5 on intertops, and they refunded his bet as a “no-play”. He is curious if anybody bet on the Rays and, if so, did they also get a refund?

I had mixed emotions about my old friend, Brad Lidge, but in the end, I was happy for him. We can all relate to his quote after the game that the trials and tribulations leading up to this victory made him appreciate it all the more. Dr. Fro felt the same when he won the Rose Bowl in January 2006.

Can somebody explain one more thing to me? Why did the Dallas Morning News not put the World Series on the front page this morning? Since when did the Mav’s season opener become bigger news than the championship in one of America’s 3 biggest sports?

I think I dislike Tiffany Michelle more than I dislike Hellmuth. So do these guys. It isn’t so much what she says or does as much as how she says it. She really seems to have a higher opinion of herself than Hellmuth does. A few weeks ago when she was bouncing around the Rio every time a woman got eliminated seemed wiered, but last night’s antics with calling the clock on the guy, bitching about petty stuff, snide comments like “just keep doing that” and her bitchy refusal to count her chip stack show her true colors.

Several players that previously exhibited poor behavior (Hevad Kahn, Scotty, heck, even Hellmuth and Matusow) were on much improved behavior this year. I wonder if she will regret her actions and behave more professionally next time we see her on TV.

That, and she is not hot.

And if you have no idea what I am talking about, you need to Tivo the WSOP.