I apologize for not posting in the last 8 days. A lot has happened, most of which invovles me being under the weather for the last week or so. I haven't played much poker for various reasons, and illness is one of those reasons. I refuse to play when I am too tired, too sick, or otherwise impaired. I slept 11 hours today, and I feel the best that I have in at least a week, so it's time to get this poker thing back on track.
I have played a little in the last week or two, averaging about 1 or 2 online tournaments per day, as well as getting in one live tournament during that time. And my bankroll has done nothing but go down. (Fortunantely not too far down, as I am using proper bankroll management and never spending more than around 2-3% per tournament on entry fees).
I will be putting out several posts on this topic in the next few days. All I'll say for now is that it's not because I'm playing badly. In fact, I can feel myself getting better, getting comfortable playing more hands in more situations, and getting beyond the mathematically correct play to make the right play because I have a read on the other player (yes, you can get reads online, mainly through timing tells and changes in betting patters).
For now, I'll just say that the main problem is structural. I've been using poor game selection, that is, I haven't been picking the type of tournaments that I'm best at. That, in turn, is mostly because I haven't structured my playing time so that I can choose tournaments where I have an edge.
There will be much more on this subject in future posts, and, as always, your comments and questions are welcome.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
#11 My out-of-control schedule
There are always raging debates in the 2+2 poker forums about whether or not poker is a good career choice. That might seem strange, but in fact, many of the very successful players online, who make as much as $100 per hour or more, have a "regular" job and only play poker part-time.
There are many arguments for and against playing poker full-time, but one of the main arguments for being a full-time pro is that you control your own situation--you don't have a boss, you can set your own hours, etc. So far, that isn't working for me.
I understand that my time is not completely my own. I have a wife that wants to actually talk to me about something other than poker once in a while, I have cats that demand their share of attention (including flopping on the mouse pad if they don't get it). I have a son that may again need a ride to work from time to time, and I have grandchildren that are quite eager to help give the cats some attention.
But this week is particulary discouraging. The home office that I will be taking over currently has some computer equipment which belongs to my wife's employer. All I know is that they will be here either sometime this week, on one of two days, to pick up their computers.
That means I can't sleep during the day, nor can I be playing poker tournaments and being doing anything that required a lot of concentration, such as playing multiple tournaments or being heads-up. Since I don't know when they will be here, that's pretty limiting. Maybe I can single-table some satellites to the PokerStars Sunday 1/4 Million--all I have to do to win a ticket is finish in the top 15%, so I won't have to worry about being heads-up. And if there being here blows up that tournament, it's only $2.20 lost.
Well, at least I'll make it to church this week. Since I have to be on a day schedule anyway, I figured I might as well start getting up early. I'll be up for the hospital people when they come over, I'll be up for church, and we wanted to have the grandchilren over on Friday (my wife is off work) so we'll probably do that during the day too.
There are many arguments for and against playing poker full-time, but one of the main arguments for being a full-time pro is that you control your own situation--you don't have a boss, you can set your own hours, etc. So far, that isn't working for me.
I understand that my time is not completely my own. I have a wife that wants to actually talk to me about something other than poker once in a while, I have cats that demand their share of attention (including flopping on the mouse pad if they don't get it). I have a son that may again need a ride to work from time to time, and I have grandchildren that are quite eager to help give the cats some attention.
But this week is particulary discouraging. The home office that I will be taking over currently has some computer equipment which belongs to my wife's employer. All I know is that they will be here either sometime this week, on one of two days, to pick up their computers.
That means I can't sleep during the day, nor can I be playing poker tournaments and being doing anything that required a lot of concentration, such as playing multiple tournaments or being heads-up. Since I don't know when they will be here, that's pretty limiting. Maybe I can single-table some satellites to the PokerStars Sunday 1/4 Million--all I have to do to win a ticket is finish in the top 15%, so I won't have to worry about being heads-up. And if there being here blows up that tournament, it's only $2.20 lost.
Well, at least I'll make it to church this week. Since I have to be on a day schedule anyway, I figured I might as well start getting up early. I'll be up for the hospital people when they come over, I'll be up for church, and we wanted to have the grandchilren over on Friday (my wife is off work) so we'll probably do that during the day too.
#10 My second live tournament of 2010
On Saturday, 2/13/2010, I played my second live tournament of the year. It was a dud. I didn't make any serious mistakes, but I never caught any good cards either. I never had AK. I had AQ twice--one time I lost a coin flip*, the other time the preflop action was very heavy and I was in bad postion (small blind) so I didn't play it. I think I had a pocket pair 3 times, and the best was 88.
After playing very few hands, I made it to the final table (which isn't hard when there are only 14 players) and went out when I lost another coin flop, my AJ against 33.
I can't remember the last time I finished in the bottom half of the field (9th of 14 in a live tournament), but when you're not getting cards, there is only so much you can do.
The one thing I don't like about these live tournaments (other than the cigarette smoke) is that the fields (and thus the prize pools) are so small. When I do cash, I would like to win a halfway decent amount. First prize in this tournament was $200. That would be nice to have, but I have played in local tournaments where the prize pool was much bigger, in fact I won $250 in a local tournament last year.
But for now, where I'm playing is the place with the lowest entry fees, and since I don't even have a live bankroll built yet, I'll keep playing in the cheap ones until I build an independent live bankroll big enough to allow me to play at higher buy-ins. I will handle it the same way as my online bankroll, that is, I won't move up to more expensive tournaments until I have around 50 buy-ins at the new level.
----------------------------
*The poker term "coin flip" usually means a situation where you are facing one opponent for the pot and your chance of winning is around 50%. More commonly it specifically means my situation, where preflop a small pair is against two higher unpaired cards, for example, my situation where my AJ was facing 33 situation. In the overcards vs. small pair "coin flip" the small pair actually wins about 55% of the time.
After playing very few hands, I made it to the final table (which isn't hard when there are only 14 players) and went out when I lost another coin flop, my AJ against 33.
I can't remember the last time I finished in the bottom half of the field (9th of 14 in a live tournament), but when you're not getting cards, there is only so much you can do.
The one thing I don't like about these live tournaments (other than the cigarette smoke) is that the fields (and thus the prize pools) are so small. When I do cash, I would like to win a halfway decent amount. First prize in this tournament was $200. That would be nice to have, but I have played in local tournaments where the prize pool was much bigger, in fact I won $250 in a local tournament last year.
But for now, where I'm playing is the place with the lowest entry fees, and since I don't even have a live bankroll built yet, I'll keep playing in the cheap ones until I build an independent live bankroll big enough to allow me to play at higher buy-ins. I will handle it the same way as my online bankroll, that is, I won't move up to more expensive tournaments until I have around 50 buy-ins at the new level.
----------------------------
*The poker term "coin flip" usually means a situation where you are facing one opponent for the pot and your chance of winning is around 50%. More commonly it specifically means my situation, where preflop a small pair is against two higher unpaired cards, for example, my situation where my AJ was facing 33 situation. In the overcards vs. small pair "coin flip" the small pair actually wins about 55% of the time.
Friday, February 12, 2010
#9 A couple good days
2/11 and 2/12, 4 tournaments, 2 cashes, +$5.80
February to date, +$16.30
I didn't get to play on the 10th, and not much on the 11th. On the 11th and 12th combined I only played 4 total tournaments, but I cashed in two of them, so I still moving in the right direction.
It's annoying winning, and playing for, such small amounts, but I played with a small bankroll once, and it wasn't pretty. I've never going to do that again. When playing on a small bankroll and not moving up without 50 buy-ins, it can take a while to move up. If poker was easy, a lot more people would be doing it.
I had a near miss in a 90-man tournament. I went out 17th (12 players cashed). That was one of those tournaments where one or two better hands could have made a big difference. But those near-misses cause me to think about what I could have done better or differently.
I had a hand where my hole cards were Q5 and the flop was QQ7 (3 suits), there were a couple callers, and everyone folded. Yes I had a big hand in late position, but if I had been thinking I would have realized that since there was only one queen still out there, the flop almost certainly didn't help anyone. I should have tried to check it down until someone hit a card that would help them enough to cause more money to go into the pot.
I won the pot, but I could probably have extracted more chips if I had been more patient. The standard play is often to slowplay a set, but trying to be unreadable, I went against the standard play, and I bet out with top set. It was definitely level 1 thinking--I have a good hand, what I should do?
What I should have been thinking was something like this:
There is only one queen left, and the odds are against someone holding it. Someone could have a pocket pair worth betting, but you are only dealt a pair about 1 time in 12, and someone with a small pair would probably fold to a raise anyway. There was a 7 on the flop, but again, if someone flopped bottom pair, they might fold to a 1/2 pot bet.
The logical conclusion is that my big hand (top set) is probably so far ahead of the field that if I want to get any action, I need to slow down and give someone a chance to hit something. With no flush or straight draws, there isn't really anything that I'm scared of, and I should have waited. That misplayed hand may have been the one that kept me out of the money.
The bottom line is that I've been working on betting in more situations, and putting more pressure on my opponents. But that spot wasn't the time to be strong. I didn't take the time to think about ways that the hand might play out, and I lost a chance to win a bigger pot. Lesson learned.
Tomorrow I'm playing a live tournament, just my second of the year. I'm excited about doing more live playing. I'm definitely getting better at the mechanics of the live game, at least as far as keeping track of stack sized, pot size, etc. I'll probably work on those things again tomorrow, and perhaps try to get a read on one or two players at the table.
Of course, it's fun to get out and play poker against real people. Making my living online, it's not unusual for me to go several days without even leaving the house.
I'll have a report on that tournament, along with my results for the week, early next week.
February to date, +$16.30
I didn't get to play on the 10th, and not much on the 11th. On the 11th and 12th combined I only played 4 total tournaments, but I cashed in two of them, so I still moving in the right direction.
It's annoying winning, and playing for, such small amounts, but I played with a small bankroll once, and it wasn't pretty. I've never going to do that again. When playing on a small bankroll and not moving up without 50 buy-ins, it can take a while to move up. If poker was easy, a lot more people would be doing it.
I had a near miss in a 90-man tournament. I went out 17th (12 players cashed). That was one of those tournaments where one or two better hands could have made a big difference. But those near-misses cause me to think about what I could have done better or differently.
I had a hand where my hole cards were Q5 and the flop was QQ7 (3 suits), there were a couple callers, and everyone folded. Yes I had a big hand in late position, but if I had been thinking I would have realized that since there was only one queen still out there, the flop almost certainly didn't help anyone. I should have tried to check it down until someone hit a card that would help them enough to cause more money to go into the pot.
I won the pot, but I could probably have extracted more chips if I had been more patient. The standard play is often to slowplay a set, but trying to be unreadable, I went against the standard play, and I bet out with top set. It was definitely level 1 thinking--I have a good hand, what I should do?
What I should have been thinking was something like this:
There is only one queen left, and the odds are against someone holding it. Someone could have a pocket pair worth betting, but you are only dealt a pair about 1 time in 12, and someone with a small pair would probably fold to a raise anyway. There was a 7 on the flop, but again, if someone flopped bottom pair, they might fold to a 1/2 pot bet.
The logical conclusion is that my big hand (top set) is probably so far ahead of the field that if I want to get any action, I need to slow down and give someone a chance to hit something. With no flush or straight draws, there isn't really anything that I'm scared of, and I should have waited. That misplayed hand may have been the one that kept me out of the money.
The bottom line is that I've been working on betting in more situations, and putting more pressure on my opponents. But that spot wasn't the time to be strong. I didn't take the time to think about ways that the hand might play out, and I lost a chance to win a bigger pot. Lesson learned.
Tomorrow I'm playing a live tournament, just my second of the year. I'm excited about doing more live playing. I'm definitely getting better at the mechanics of the live game, at least as far as keeping track of stack sized, pot size, etc. I'll probably work on those things again tomorrow, and perhaps try to get a read on one or two players at the table.
Of course, it's fun to get out and play poker against real people. Making my living online, it's not unusual for me to go several days without even leaving the house.
I'll have a report on that tournament, along with my results for the week, early next week.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
#8 The church problem
I go to church, or at least, I used to until the beginning of this year. And no, I'm not worried about how the people at my church feel about me playing poker (most of them don't know yet, but I'm gradually telling some key people). I know some won't be happy that I'm "gambling", but I've let a few key people in on my new profession, including my pastor, and so I far I haven't been excommunicated. And because of the circumstances outlined in my first two posts, it's my best, and perhaps, only choice.
The problem is what I have to sacrifice to go to church in the morning.
As every serious poker player knows, the best times to play are nights, weekends, and holidays. Saturday night has the most players (and therefore the best choice of games), and a larger percentage of the weaker players are on at that time as well. The other thing to consider is that the biggest tournaments, with prize pools up to a million dollars, are on Sunday afternoon. In the poker forums, aspiring pros are always warned that one of the toughest things about playing for a living is getting your family to understand that you have to work nights and weekends.
Now, add to this that there are already restrictions on when I can play. My wife and I have one computer and one television, and they are both in the living room. I have attention deficit disorder, which I have pretty much under control--but short of noise-canceling headphones (which are expensive) there is no way that I can play poker while the TV is on 10 feet away from me--that's too much of a distraction.
Now add to this some other restrictions on my schedule. Until recently, I was giving my son a ride to work, two or three times a week, at either 4 or 5 A.M. I am getting a break from that, but I might have to do it again soon. Add to that that I have a problem with insomnia--not staying asleep, just getting there.
So, the bottom line: I am naturally a night person anyway. Because I have ADD, the best time for me to play is late at night, when both the house and the neighborhood are the most quiet. I am not yet playing in the big Sunday afternoon tournaments, but I will as soon as my bankroll allows it. For now, I am cashing out the satellites to the major tournaments whenever I win a ticket. And since all of this is true, when I have to take my son to work again, the best thing to do will be to play until 3:30 A.M. or so, then go to pick up my son.
Sunday morning church is really hard to fit in. If I had a "real job" and had to work Sunday, it wouldn't be an issue. But I have the choice, sort of. I can give up some of the prime poker hours and go to church, if I choose. My wife and I have talked about that, and there have been times when I was about to go, but then she would decide that she would rather have me play when I need to, so I can make as much money as possible until my bankroll and career are more established.
The last time I went to church I was fighting to stay awake the whole time, and as much as my wife liked having me there (and I wanted to be there as well), we decided that it wasn't going to work.
But now, we have a reprieve from taking my son to work, and I decided this week to start gradually getting up earlier each day so that I would be ready for an early start on Sunday morning. It was a disaster. I had trouble getting to sleep, but I got up early anyway, and wound up so tired that I decided not to play poker while I was impaired--and I wound up missing two days of work.
That can't happen again. There is some urgency in running my bankroll up so that I can play higher and make a decent income, and it's hard enough to get in my 35 hours at the tables each week (plus time for study and administrative matters).
So here I am, making a new blog entry at 3 :30 A.M. on Friday. I will play for a few more hours, then take a break while my wife catches the morning news and weather on TV before she goes to work. Then I will play a few more hours, unless I think I will be able to sleep.
At one time I had a schedule that seemed to work pretty well. I got up around noon every day, and that gave me time to play while my wife was at work, and to play some more after she went to bed. And keeping on the same schedule seemed to work pretty well--I was up during business hours if anything needed to be taken care of, and I had quite a few hours that I could play while I was the only one up. But trying to shift back and forth between a "poker schedule" and a "church schedule" doesn't seem to work at all.
The plan was to go to church every other week, but that's not going to work. I would be too tired and my poker hours would take a huge hit. I have suggested to my wife that maybe I should try a month on the church schedule, then a month on the poker schedule, so I don't have to make constant changes to my sleep patterns. In biblical terminology, it would mean alternating lean months and fat months for poker. She agreed that it sounded like a workable solution.
I will probably do that once I am more established, but for now, while I have a limited time to build my bankroll (I have to be a contributor to the family finances sooner rather that later), I'm not sure if I should make that move yet or not. I guess that my wife and I have a few things to figure out.
The problem is what I have to sacrifice to go to church in the morning.
As every serious poker player knows, the best times to play are nights, weekends, and holidays. Saturday night has the most players (and therefore the best choice of games), and a larger percentage of the weaker players are on at that time as well. The other thing to consider is that the biggest tournaments, with prize pools up to a million dollars, are on Sunday afternoon. In the poker forums, aspiring pros are always warned that one of the toughest things about playing for a living is getting your family to understand that you have to work nights and weekends.
Now, add to this that there are already restrictions on when I can play. My wife and I have one computer and one television, and they are both in the living room. I have attention deficit disorder, which I have pretty much under control--but short of noise-canceling headphones (which are expensive) there is no way that I can play poker while the TV is on 10 feet away from me--that's too much of a distraction.
Now add to this some other restrictions on my schedule. Until recently, I was giving my son a ride to work, two or three times a week, at either 4 or 5 A.M. I am getting a break from that, but I might have to do it again soon. Add to that that I have a problem with insomnia--not staying asleep, just getting there.
So, the bottom line: I am naturally a night person anyway. Because I have ADD, the best time for me to play is late at night, when both the house and the neighborhood are the most quiet. I am not yet playing in the big Sunday afternoon tournaments, but I will as soon as my bankroll allows it. For now, I am cashing out the satellites to the major tournaments whenever I win a ticket. And since all of this is true, when I have to take my son to work again, the best thing to do will be to play until 3:30 A.M. or so, then go to pick up my son.
Sunday morning church is really hard to fit in. If I had a "real job" and had to work Sunday, it wouldn't be an issue. But I have the choice, sort of. I can give up some of the prime poker hours and go to church, if I choose. My wife and I have talked about that, and there have been times when I was about to go, but then she would decide that she would rather have me play when I need to, so I can make as much money as possible until my bankroll and career are more established.
The last time I went to church I was fighting to stay awake the whole time, and as much as my wife liked having me there (and I wanted to be there as well), we decided that it wasn't going to work.
But now, we have a reprieve from taking my son to work, and I decided this week to start gradually getting up earlier each day so that I would be ready for an early start on Sunday morning. It was a disaster. I had trouble getting to sleep, but I got up early anyway, and wound up so tired that I decided not to play poker while I was impaired--and I wound up missing two days of work.
That can't happen again. There is some urgency in running my bankroll up so that I can play higher and make a decent income, and it's hard enough to get in my 35 hours at the tables each week (plus time for study and administrative matters).
So here I am, making a new blog entry at 3 :30 A.M. on Friday. I will play for a few more hours, then take a break while my wife catches the morning news and weather on TV before she goes to work. Then I will play a few more hours, unless I think I will be able to sleep.
At one time I had a schedule that seemed to work pretty well. I got up around noon every day, and that gave me time to play while my wife was at work, and to play some more after she went to bed. And keeping on the same schedule seemed to work pretty well--I was up during business hours if anything needed to be taken care of, and I had quite a few hours that I could play while I was the only one up. But trying to shift back and forth between a "poker schedule" and a "church schedule" doesn't seem to work at all.
The plan was to go to church every other week, but that's not going to work. I would be too tired and my poker hours would take a huge hit. I have suggested to my wife that maybe I should try a month on the church schedule, then a month on the poker schedule, so I don't have to make constant changes to my sleep patterns. In biblical terminology, it would mean alternating lean months and fat months for poker. She agreed that it sounded like a workable solution.
I will probably do that once I am more established, but for now, while I have a limited time to build my bankroll (I have to be a contributor to the family finances sooner rather that later), I'm not sure if I should make that move yet or not. I guess that my wife and I have a few things to figure out.
Friday, February 5, 2010
#7 Update; Is there a stereotypical poker personality?
2/1/2010 bankroll, $156.59
2/8/2008 bankroll, $178.79
+$22.20 for February.
Now that's more like it!
First, I must apologize for my previous post. It was poorly written, and in spots didn't make much sense. So if you're confused, reread it sometime. Sorry about that. Writing is like playing poker--I shouldn't do it when I'm tired.
After my first post my father posted a comment, asking if there was such a thing as a typical or stereotypical poker personality. He also wondered if others might post about how they got started as poker players.
For now at least, since almost none of my friends are poker players, this blog isn't really aimed at other players. I'm mainly describing my poker journey to my friends who don't play, so those kinds of things don't really come up, and I don't make posts that talk about what I was thinking when I had a medium strength hand against two callers and I had to decide whether to call or raise.
After a few months of playing almost exclusively online, I'm starting to play live poker again, and as I tell people about my blog my posts, and the comments, might change to reflect that.
As to the different poker personalities, I suppose that I could break this down a lot of different ways, but in my opinion there are two main categories: gamblers and nerds. I also see a third, increasingly important group that might at some point be its own category--the competitors. Let's deal with that one first.
1. The Competitor
More and more in televised tournaments I am seeing retired professional athletes. Watch day one of the World Series of Poker Main Event, and you'll hear the announcers saying things like, "Look, there's the former heavyweight boxing champion on table three, and a few tables away, there's a World Series [baseball] most valuable player."
Like a professional athelete struggling with whether to retire at age 40, these recently retired athletes are very competive, and their whole life has been about competing and winning. And some are now carrying that to the poker tables. And having already been succesful athletes, they now have the freedom and time to get good at the game, and the money to buy into $10,000 tournaments and compete against the pros. Also, those retired athletes can use their resources to hire pros to coach them, accelerating the process of becoming competitive against the top players.
2. The Gambler
Some of these are social gamblers, people that you might see at a bingo hall, or at the casino playing roulette before they wander over to the poker tables. Gambling is something to do, a way to socialize or to get out for an evening or a weekend. You won't find these people playing poker online, and you probably won't find them reading a poker book. (One noteable exception is Phil Ivey, who some consider the best poker player in a world. His massively losing craps sessions are as legandary as his poker results.)
Of course, there is the dark side of gambling, those that are addicted. To be honest, I struggle with how to think about that. I know someone (a family member) who has struggled with gambling addiction, and disconnection from the internet seems to have largely solved that problem (there is no casinso within 100 miles of where I live).
But I worked at a rescue mission for 12 years, and I also know that there are addictive personalities out there, to the extent that they will search for any kind of rush, thrill, or danger to feed their addiction. These are people that will use drugs to get high, drink alcohol to lose their inhibitions, or do just about anything to live dangerously or avoid conforming to societal norms. for example, making their money by running a con or selling drugs. Punching a time clock just isn't exciting enough.
To me and many other poker players, a skill game such as poker (more about definitions at the end of the post) doesn't seem like a reasonable spot to feed an addiction. I don't know to what kind of gambling games my family member was addicted, but I'm guessing that poker wasn't the primary problem.
3. The nerd.
This is my group. I love to read, and study, and learn. I am a former member of MENSA (I stopped paying my dues as there is no local group). But I'm a piker compared to some of the ubernerds at the top levels of poker.
On the TV show Poker After Dark, the usual format is to have a table of pros playing a week-long winner-take-all tournament. There was one notable episode that half the poker community seemed to love, and the other half hated it. The title was "Great Minds of Poker". There were nine players at the table. Eight of them had Ph.D.s. The ninth, David Sklansky, wrote Theory of Poker, the book which completely changed the theoretical and mathematical concept of being a winning player. They basically spent most of the episode talking about math--theorems, proofs, applications, etc.
These guys had their Ph.Ds in areas such as computer science, mathematics, and artificial intelligence. Some that have been full-time poker pros for many years are still published in academic journals. One was, as a student, a leader of the infamous MIT blackjack team profiled in the the movie, "21".
One of the most interesing members of this nerd group is Vanessa Russo, who was recently featured in the Sports Illustrated magazine swimsuit issue. Although as a touring pro she loved to talked about game theory and her mathematical approach to the game, until recently, she wasn't always taken seriously. That was a mistake.
Vanessa Russo graduated from high school early. She got an economics degree from Duke in 2 1/2 years. Then she fell in love with the study of game theory, and applied it to poker. The 2+2 poker podcast recently named her their female player of the year.
There is one interesting subgroup of nerds that I should include here--the gamers.
There has been a migration of players who are very successful playing other, less lucrative games, who wind up as professional poker players. In the last few years players who have made a career of playing video games such as Starcraft or World of Warcraft are now in the top echelon of poker players.
From the "About Dan Harrington" preface of the Harrington on Holdem series of books, here is a little about another player who has migrated to poker:
"Dan began his serious game-playing with chess, where he quickly became a master and one of the strongest players in the New England area. In 1972 he won the Massachusetts Chess Championship . . . "
"In 1976 he started playing backgammon . . . and in 1981 he won the World Cup of backgammon . . . "
"He first played in the $10,000 No-Limit Hold 'em Championship Event of the World Series of Poker in 1987. He has played in the championship a total of 13 times and has reached the final table in four of those tournaments, an amazing record."
Those are what the nerds of poker are like. I don't know if I will ever be on that level, but I am much better at managing my learning disability (ADD) now that I know what I'm dealing with. Poker is my job, I love my job, and with proper investment of time spent playing, studying, and improving, it will be the source of a very nice living.
2/8/2008 bankroll, $178.79
+$22.20 for February.
Now that's more like it!
First, I must apologize for my previous post. It was poorly written, and in spots didn't make much sense. So if you're confused, reread it sometime. Sorry about that. Writing is like playing poker--I shouldn't do it when I'm tired.
After my first post my father posted a comment, asking if there was such a thing as a typical or stereotypical poker personality. He also wondered if others might post about how they got started as poker players.
For now at least, since almost none of my friends are poker players, this blog isn't really aimed at other players. I'm mainly describing my poker journey to my friends who don't play, so those kinds of things don't really come up, and I don't make posts that talk about what I was thinking when I had a medium strength hand against two callers and I had to decide whether to call or raise.
After a few months of playing almost exclusively online, I'm starting to play live poker again, and as I tell people about my blog my posts, and the comments, might change to reflect that.
As to the different poker personalities, I suppose that I could break this down a lot of different ways, but in my opinion there are two main categories: gamblers and nerds. I also see a third, increasingly important group that might at some point be its own category--the competitors. Let's deal with that one first.
1. The Competitor
More and more in televised tournaments I am seeing retired professional athletes. Watch day one of the World Series of Poker Main Event, and you'll hear the announcers saying things like, "Look, there's the former heavyweight boxing champion on table three, and a few tables away, there's a World Series [baseball] most valuable player."
Like a professional athelete struggling with whether to retire at age 40, these recently retired athletes are very competive, and their whole life has been about competing and winning. And some are now carrying that to the poker tables. And having already been succesful athletes, they now have the freedom and time to get good at the game, and the money to buy into $10,000 tournaments and compete against the pros. Also, those retired athletes can use their resources to hire pros to coach them, accelerating the process of becoming competitive against the top players.
2. The Gambler
Some of these are social gamblers, people that you might see at a bingo hall, or at the casino playing roulette before they wander over to the poker tables. Gambling is something to do, a way to socialize or to get out for an evening or a weekend. You won't find these people playing poker online, and you probably won't find them reading a poker book. (One noteable exception is Phil Ivey, who some consider the best poker player in a world. His massively losing craps sessions are as legandary as his poker results.)
Of course, there is the dark side of gambling, those that are addicted. To be honest, I struggle with how to think about that. I know someone (a family member) who has struggled with gambling addiction, and disconnection from the internet seems to have largely solved that problem (there is no casinso within 100 miles of where I live).
But I worked at a rescue mission for 12 years, and I also know that there are addictive personalities out there, to the extent that they will search for any kind of rush, thrill, or danger to feed their addiction. These are people that will use drugs to get high, drink alcohol to lose their inhibitions, or do just about anything to live dangerously or avoid conforming to societal norms. for example, making their money by running a con or selling drugs. Punching a time clock just isn't exciting enough.
To me and many other poker players, a skill game such as poker (more about definitions at the end of the post) doesn't seem like a reasonable spot to feed an addiction. I don't know to what kind of gambling games my family member was addicted, but I'm guessing that poker wasn't the primary problem.
3. The nerd.
This is my group. I love to read, and study, and learn. I am a former member of MENSA (I stopped paying my dues as there is no local group). But I'm a piker compared to some of the ubernerds at the top levels of poker.
On the TV show Poker After Dark, the usual format is to have a table of pros playing a week-long winner-take-all tournament. There was one notable episode that half the poker community seemed to love, and the other half hated it. The title was "Great Minds of Poker". There were nine players at the table. Eight of them had Ph.D.s. The ninth, David Sklansky, wrote Theory of Poker, the book which completely changed the theoretical and mathematical concept of being a winning player. They basically spent most of the episode talking about math--theorems, proofs, applications, etc.
These guys had their Ph.Ds in areas such as computer science, mathematics, and artificial intelligence. Some that have been full-time poker pros for many years are still published in academic journals. One was, as a student, a leader of the infamous MIT blackjack team profiled in the the movie, "21".
One of the most interesing members of this nerd group is Vanessa Russo, who was recently featured in the Sports Illustrated magazine swimsuit issue. Although as a touring pro she loved to talked about game theory and her mathematical approach to the game, until recently, she wasn't always taken seriously. That was a mistake.
Vanessa Russo graduated from high school early. She got an economics degree from Duke in 2 1/2 years. Then she fell in love with the study of game theory, and applied it to poker. The 2+2 poker podcast recently named her their female player of the year.
There is one interesting subgroup of nerds that I should include here--the gamers.
There has been a migration of players who are very successful playing other, less lucrative games, who wind up as professional poker players. In the last few years players who have made a career of playing video games such as Starcraft or World of Warcraft are now in the top echelon of poker players.
From the "About Dan Harrington" preface of the Harrington on Holdem series of books, here is a little about another player who has migrated to poker:
"Dan began his serious game-playing with chess, where he quickly became a master and one of the strongest players in the New England area. In 1972 he won the Massachusetts Chess Championship . . . "
"In 1976 he started playing backgammon . . . and in 1981 he won the World Cup of backgammon . . . "
"He first played in the $10,000 No-Limit Hold 'em Championship Event of the World Series of Poker in 1987. He has played in the championship a total of 13 times and has reached the final table in four of those tournaments, an amazing record."
Those are what the nerds of poker are like. I don't know if I will ever be on that level, but I am much better at managing my learning disability (ADD) now that I know what I'm dealing with. Poker is my job, I love my job, and with proper investment of time spent playing, studying, and improving, it will be the source of a very nice living.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
#6 January 2009 results; the implications of tournament prize structures
I put this post up yesterday, just reread it, and found several mistakes. I said in this post that I don't play poker when I'm too tired. I guess I also should refrain from posting when I'm too tired. I fixed all of the mistakes I think. Mea culpa.
The taxes are done, I'm actually playing poker again! For the first time in several months, I'm planning on playing a live tournament this weekend. I'm actually going to be playing with real people from Michigan, instead of against avatars from Russia or Argentina!
Bankroll 1/1, $147.33
Bankroll 1/31 $156.59
No deposits to, or withdrawls from PokerStars account
January profit, $9.26
Well, I said that one of my major goals for the year is to have zero losing months, and that if I can do that, everything else will fall into place. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
A lot of people who don't play tournament poker don't realize how slim the margin can be between not cashing and making some real money. Let's take the example of a tournament that I often play: 27 players, $3.40 entry fee, 5 players cash.
If I finish just out of the money, in 7th place for example, I lose $3.40, the amount of my entry fee. But if at the one-hour mark I could magically change just one bad hand into a good one (or of course leave the hands the same but have myself play just one of them a little better), that might put me in the money.
The prize structure for that $3.40, 27-man tournament is:
5th place, $6.60
4th place, $8.40
3rd place, $14.40
2nd place, $21.60
1st place, $30.00
So, if I had got just a few better hands, or played just a little better, you can see that the swing to the positve side would have been pretty big for that tournament.
Now, a thought experiment. Let's multiply everything by 10. Instead of playing $3 tournaments, I'm playing at the $30 level. Think about how big those swings can be. Oh, by the way, I just checked PokerStars and there is a $530 18-man tournament open for registration.
There are of course tournament that are much larger, and much more expensive, so you can see how massive the swings in poker can be. There are several implications to consider:
1. You have to have the bankroll to deal with the swings. You aren't going to make money every day, or every week. A lot of good players make money every month, but where the variance is high enough, there is no guarantee of a good player doing even that.
There are players on the twoplustwo.com forums who insist that unless you're talking about playing a million hands or more, results mean nothing. I won't go that far, and as it would take me years at my current rate to play that many hands, I certainly hope it's not true. Other players won't discuss someone's results unless they have at least 10,000 hands, and I think that's a much more realistic number. To tell a new player that you can't assess his results until he's played for 5 or 10 or 15 years is absurd.
2. If you're not even-tempered, with a long-term perspective, you're probably playing the wrong game. A couple weeks ago, my wife wanted to see what it feels like to play online. She has never played poker (plus it is considered cheating, under PokerStars' terms of service, to play under someone else's name), so she sat down and I told her what bets to make. I wasn't getting very good cards, so I told her to fold the first four hands, whereupon she announced, "This is boring!", and gave me back my seat. I don't think she will be playing at the World Series of Poker anytime soon.
3. Practice good table selection. Don't let your ego get the best of you. Whenever possible, avoid players that are better than you. If you check out two tournaments that are registering and one of them has a couple sharks, choose the other one.
4. Practice good game selection. All tournaments are not created equal. They can have as few as 2 players (this is called a "heads-up" tournament). At the other extreme, I helped to set a world record (verification pending) by playing an online tournament with over 60,000 players. Some tournaments play faster (the blinds go up faster) and some play slower. There are many other forms of poker beside no limit hold 'em. Some tournaments (usually called "satellites" or "steps") are a chance to win a seat in a more expensive tournament. Like most players, I am better at some formats than others.
5. Don't tilt. Intimidation, trickery and worse can go on in a poker tournament, and you have to be able to keep your composure and not let it change the way you play. 11-time World Series of Poker bracelet winner Phil Hellmuth, in one of his trademark rants, once informed an opponent who took a pot from him, "You're so stupid you don't even know how to spell poker!" But my favorite comes from Australian pro Tony G. who, after taking a big pot from someone who had pictures of his family at the table, yelled, "I'll take all your money, and your children will starve!" Another heartwarming TV moment.
Those guys have no class, but in some places that sort of thing is part of the game, and you better be prepared. When new management took over the bowling alley where I play my live tournaments, they told me that they are clamping down on the rude players to make it more fun for everyone.
I was actually disappointed to hear that. It's about the Benjamins, and I'm not a player that lets that kind of thing get to me. If other players go on tilt and I don't, then I have an edge, and poker is all about looking for small edges that add up to a lot of money over time. If you tilt, you're burning money.
6. Don't play while impaired. I don't drink alcohol, which is definitely an advantage for me. I don't play when I'm tired. If I'm starting to get a little tired, I might wrap up with a short tournament, but I won't play a long one.
I didn't intend to write a book here. It's 7:30 A.M, and I want to play a little longer before I get some sleep. As always, questions or comments are welcome.
In my next post, I will answer the reader question after post #1, "Is there a stereotypical poker personality?"
The taxes are done, I'm actually playing poker again! For the first time in several months, I'm planning on playing a live tournament this weekend. I'm actually going to be playing with real people from Michigan, instead of against avatars from Russia or Argentina!
Bankroll 1/1, $147.33
Bankroll 1/31 $156.59
No deposits to, or withdrawls from PokerStars account
January profit, $9.26
Well, I said that one of my major goals for the year is to have zero losing months, and that if I can do that, everything else will fall into place. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
A lot of people who don't play tournament poker don't realize how slim the margin can be between not cashing and making some real money. Let's take the example of a tournament that I often play: 27 players, $3.40 entry fee, 5 players cash.
If I finish just out of the money, in 7th place for example, I lose $3.40, the amount of my entry fee. But if at the one-hour mark I could magically change just one bad hand into a good one (or of course leave the hands the same but have myself play just one of them a little better), that might put me in the money.
The prize structure for that $3.40, 27-man tournament is:
5th place, $6.60
4th place, $8.40
3rd place, $14.40
2nd place, $21.60
1st place, $30.00
So, if I had got just a few better hands, or played just a little better, you can see that the swing to the positve side would have been pretty big for that tournament.
Now, a thought experiment. Let's multiply everything by 10. Instead of playing $3 tournaments, I'm playing at the $30 level. Think about how big those swings can be. Oh, by the way, I just checked PokerStars and there is a $530 18-man tournament open for registration.
There are of course tournament that are much larger, and much more expensive, so you can see how massive the swings in poker can be. There are several implications to consider:
1. You have to have the bankroll to deal with the swings. You aren't going to make money every day, or every week. A lot of good players make money every month, but where the variance is high enough, there is no guarantee of a good player doing even that.
There are players on the twoplustwo.com forums who insist that unless you're talking about playing a million hands or more, results mean nothing. I won't go that far, and as it would take me years at my current rate to play that many hands, I certainly hope it's not true. Other players won't discuss someone's results unless they have at least 10,000 hands, and I think that's a much more realistic number. To tell a new player that you can't assess his results until he's played for 5 or 10 or 15 years is absurd.
2. If you're not even-tempered, with a long-term perspective, you're probably playing the wrong game. A couple weeks ago, my wife wanted to see what it feels like to play online. She has never played poker (plus it is considered cheating, under PokerStars' terms of service, to play under someone else's name), so she sat down and I told her what bets to make. I wasn't getting very good cards, so I told her to fold the first four hands, whereupon she announced, "This is boring!", and gave me back my seat. I don't think she will be playing at the World Series of Poker anytime soon.
3. Practice good table selection. Don't let your ego get the best of you. Whenever possible, avoid players that are better than you. If you check out two tournaments that are registering and one of them has a couple sharks, choose the other one.
4. Practice good game selection. All tournaments are not created equal. They can have as few as 2 players (this is called a "heads-up" tournament). At the other extreme, I helped to set a world record (verification pending) by playing an online tournament with over 60,000 players. Some tournaments play faster (the blinds go up faster) and some play slower. There are many other forms of poker beside no limit hold 'em. Some tournaments (usually called "satellites" or "steps") are a chance to win a seat in a more expensive tournament. Like most players, I am better at some formats than others.
5. Don't tilt. Intimidation, trickery and worse can go on in a poker tournament, and you have to be able to keep your composure and not let it change the way you play. 11-time World Series of Poker bracelet winner Phil Hellmuth, in one of his trademark rants, once informed an opponent who took a pot from him, "You're so stupid you don't even know how to spell poker!" But my favorite comes from Australian pro Tony G. who, after taking a big pot from someone who had pictures of his family at the table, yelled, "I'll take all your money, and your children will starve!" Another heartwarming TV moment.
Those guys have no class, but in some places that sort of thing is part of the game, and you better be prepared. When new management took over the bowling alley where I play my live tournaments, they told me that they are clamping down on the rude players to make it more fun for everyone.
I was actually disappointed to hear that. It's about the Benjamins, and I'm not a player that lets that kind of thing get to me. If other players go on tilt and I don't, then I have an edge, and poker is all about looking for small edges that add up to a lot of money over time. If you tilt, you're burning money.
6. Don't play while impaired. I don't drink alcohol, which is definitely an advantage for me. I don't play when I'm tired. If I'm starting to get a little tired, I might wrap up with a short tournament, but I won't play a long one.
I didn't intend to write a book here. It's 7:30 A.M, and I want to play a little longer before I get some sleep. As always, questions or comments are welcome.
In my next post, I will answer the reader question after post #1, "Is there a stereotypical poker personality?"
Monday, February 1, 2010
No poker update--it's tax time
Nothing upsets US poker players more than the income tax laws and regulations. I'll probably go into more detail in a future post. But I'll give you one example.
A professional poker player may be asked to prove that poker is actually his profession, and to prove that poker in fact takes up most of his work time and/or provides most of his income.
Poker pros basically file the same tax forms as any other person who is self-employed. That is, they file Form 1040, Schedule SE (self-employment) and Schedule C (business income and expenses). In most cases we also play quarterly estimated tax payments.
So, a poker player has to be pretty much that--a poker player, and nothing else. However, I could theoretically have a lawn care business, a pet grooming business, be a performing musician, and tutor high school students. All I would have to do is file a Schedule C for each business.
It's tax time now, so there is no poker update. I've spent much of the last two days getting everything together for my taxes. I have a large spreadsheet*, about 5,500 lines worth, that I ordered from PokerStars, so I have all of my tournament records--sort of. On schedule C I have to list my tournament net wins as business income. My tournament net losses (when I paid a tournament entry fee and didn't cash), are business expenses.
So now I'm going through that spreadsheet, line by line, separating the net wins from net losses, and filtering out the cashouts and deposits (money moved in or out of my PokerStars account), which aren't relevant to my tax return.
Should the IRS in fact ask me to prove my professional status, I also keep a lot of other records, including the weekly tracking of my work hours, broken down by adminstrative, study, and playing).
A national sales tax is looking better every day.
--------------------------------------------------
*The word "large" is relative here. I have never attempted to play more than 6 tables, and I usually play 2-4 at a time. But there are players out there playing 24 or more tables at a time. On the twoplustwo.com poker forums, one player reports playing 50.
A professional poker player may be asked to prove that poker is actually his profession, and to prove that poker in fact takes up most of his work time and/or provides most of his income.
Poker pros basically file the same tax forms as any other person who is self-employed. That is, they file Form 1040, Schedule SE (self-employment) and Schedule C (business income and expenses). In most cases we also play quarterly estimated tax payments.
So, a poker player has to be pretty much that--a poker player, and nothing else. However, I could theoretically have a lawn care business, a pet grooming business, be a performing musician, and tutor high school students. All I would have to do is file a Schedule C for each business.
It's tax time now, so there is no poker update. I've spent much of the last two days getting everything together for my taxes. I have a large spreadsheet*, about 5,500 lines worth, that I ordered from PokerStars, so I have all of my tournament records--sort of. On schedule C I have to list my tournament net wins as business income. My tournament net losses (when I paid a tournament entry fee and didn't cash), are business expenses.
So now I'm going through that spreadsheet, line by line, separating the net wins from net losses, and filtering out the cashouts and deposits (money moved in or out of my PokerStars account), which aren't relevant to my tax return.
Should the IRS in fact ask me to prove my professional status, I also keep a lot of other records, including the weekly tracking of my work hours, broken down by adminstrative, study, and playing).
A national sales tax is looking better every day.
--------------------------------------------------
*The word "large" is relative here. I have never attempted to play more than 6 tables, and I usually play 2-4 at a time. But there are players out there playing 24 or more tables at a time. On the twoplustwo.com poker forums, one player reports playing 50.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)