The Digest, August 2014
08-20-2014
, 12:59 PM
Again, three articles this month; a roundup of the news of the poker world from mikes007, a piece about blunders and learning from Bob148, and my own piece about why fish might have it right.
I've committed most of the classic mistakes. I hope this helps someone to avoid the mistakes I have made. This aimed at everyone, though it's not a comprehensive guide by any means. I think new players can benefit by learning from my mistakes and more experienced players, who might be ready to shot take, can take away something as well.
When I turned 18 years old, I played a few $1 and $2 scratch tickets. I won a few bucks here and there over the course of a few years, but I didn't hit any big wins. After a few years of sticking to just the cheap tickets, I bought my first $5 ticket. $500 on my first ticket! I was instantly hooked. Over the next few years, I spent a lot on scratch tickets. I spent so much that it became apparent that I had a problem. One day I learned some numbers regarding the percentage of the prize pool which the state takes. I was shocked and felt ripped off. This happened to be right around the time that I started playing and studying poker. I was learning about expected value. I realized that I had been playing negative sum games. This really helped me reshape my views on gambling games. I quit scratch tickets for years after that.
With my scratch ticket problem in check, I now had money to do more fun things like playing golf and poker once a week. I played in a soft no limit holdem tournament homegame for a few years, and I had friends that were kind enough to transfer $5 at a time to me for online poker. I dabbled in a lot of different games, but I found limit holdem to be my best game.
For the next few years, my online poker career could be described in one statement: I won consistently when sober, only to blow it all on the weekends playing drunk. It wasn't until I separated party time and poker time that I was able to really win consistently.
The homegames that I played in were soft, and I was able to win consistently over the course of a few years. However, there were a few guys that liked to go to the casino after the game. I tagged along more than a few times and I dipped my toes into blackjack and poker. I did ok. Luckily, I managed to not blow my homegame winnings. Instead I chose to blow my winnings on golf, which I was completely obsessed with at the time. It was a lucky time in my life, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned from it.
So now it was ~2006. I had a decent job and an apartment. The first of the month was just days away and I wasn't going to be able to pay the rent with what I had in my pocket. I chose to give poker a try with money that I couldn't afford to lose. I played for about 36 hours before I was down to just gas money for getting home. When I got home, the rent was due, I hadn't eaten in days, and I was out of cat food. Don't let this happen.
Some of you are shot takers, no doubt. This next part is especially for you:
I didn't learn of bankroll management until 2008 when I found 2+2. Before that, I would put big chunks of my bankroll on the line in games that were over my head. I lost consistently. The bankrolls that I built from those $5 transfers seemed to vanish and I found myself playing micro stakes time and time again. I developed this rule for limit holdem because of this overaggressive shot taking: Only take a shot if I have 100 big bets for that limit, and lose no more than 40 big bets. Using this rule, I've played as high as $3/$6 online, but I usually lost.
Without taking all of these shots, I'd have a much better record, and a bigger bankroll. However, I learned a lot and I'm definitely a better player because of shot taking. Now, I play live and whenever the game goes shorthanded, I love it.
This is why it's so important to know the difference between shot taking and playing beyond your means. With online shot taking, that was just my fun online money that I built up playing softer games. If the money is important to you, then shot taking can be a big mistake.
In my opinion, whether or not you should take shots depends entirely on the utility of the money involved and your skill level relative to the other players in the game. If and when you decide to take a shot, have a stop loss and stick to it.
Game selection matters when shot taking. You might have a bankroll big enough to take a shot, but if you haven't scouted the game at all then you may unknowingly be a significant underdog in the game. I've done this, and I paid the price of admission. However, if you do scout the game and you've spotted mistakes that you think you can exploit, then the only thing stopping you is your place on the utility curve.
Let's face it, we're not all created equal in poker. Some of you have lots of money with which you may play any game you choose. The rest of us are limited in our choices because of our place on the utility curve. If taking a shot for you means that you can't go golfing this weekend if you lose, that's fine. Take the shot. If taking a shot for you means that you can't eat for a week if you lose, that's a big problem. Don't take the shot. As recreational players, you probably don't have a dedicated poker bankroll like the more serious players do. This is fine with me. The problem occurs when people gamble with money that they can't afford to lose. For a professional player, this means protecting your bankroll with strict rules for playing. As a recreational player, this means something different. If you have a job and can easily replace your losses, then the only thing stopping you from taking a shot is game quality. The important thing is that you're honest with yourself. If you can't honestly say, "I have $X to invest in this game and if I lose it's no big deal." then you shouldn't take the shot.
Winrate and bankroll both have important effects on shot taking. If you're probably a winner in the higher stakes game, then shot taking can be of huge benefit because of the lower rake. If you're probably a loser in the higher stakes game, then shot taking is just a huge unnecessary risk, especially if you just play for fun. Bankroll matters especially because you need something to fall back on if your shot taking goes badly. The difference in stakes can have an effect as well. If you play in a casino that spreads 4/8 Limit Holdem and 10/20 limit holdem, then a 100 big bet shot for 10/20 would be $2000. Losing 20 big bets would leave you with $1600, which would only leave you with 200 big bets for 4/8. That's not enough unless you have a spectacular winrate at 4/8 over many hours or if the money is easily replaceable. My 100 big bet rule worked for me because I treated it as a hobby, thus it's not going to be right for many of you. This is especially true if the money is not easily replaceable.
If you do take a shot, the most important thing you can do is to have a stop loss. It's so easy to say, "I'm going to quit if I lose 20% of my bankroll." It's harder to actually do that, especially when you're losing. When you're losing, it's so easy to tell yourself, "These guys are horrible. I'm going to play some more." Next thing you know you're down to gas money for getting home.
Some of you will commit these blunders in the future. Don't say I didn't warn you. Good luck to all you shot takers!
A lot has been happening in the world of poker over the past two months. The most noteworthy period of the annual poker calender is, of course, the annual World Series of Poker (WSOP), and this year was no exception. We've collected the most important and interesting poker news items from June and July, including WSOP action, and presented them below for your reading pleasure.
Year of Germany?
Image By User Robo on sk.wikipedia [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
On May 24, Dominik Nitsche won the WSOP National Championship in Atlantic City for $352,800. While not part of the summer Series, it counts as a bracelet event. Asked if this was a harbinger of more success during a “Year of Germany” at the 2014 WSOP, Nitsche replied:
Nitsche predicted a three-bracelet year for Deutschland, but reality surpassed his expectations. Not only did Nitsche win the National Championship, he went on to prevail in Event #21: $1,000 No Limit Hold'em on June 10, scoring a $335,659 payday. This was his third career bracelet, and at 23 years old, Dominik became the youngest player to win three, breaking the record of Phil Ivey, who accomplished the feat when he was 24.
Nitsche's fellow countryman George Danzer had been trying to win a WOSP bracelet for 10 years, and he walked away empty-handed each time. But he finally broke that streak this year. He took the gold in the $10,000 razz championship, event #18 on the schedule, on June 8, picking up $294,792. Danzer followed this up on June 19 with a victory in Event #38: $10,000 Stud-8, scoring $352,696.
Adding to Germany's record, Florian Langmann won the $3,000 PLO-8 event on June 29, receiving a $297,650 payday. This gave Germany five bracelets for the year, second only to the United States.
WSOP Notable Tournaments
Every year, there are a few WSOP tournaments that seem to garner more than their fair share of attention from the media and the public at large. These events typically have some sort of gimmick or strange rule that differentiates them from the dozens of events on the yearly schedule. Here are some of the most notable events during the 2014 WSOP:
Event #8: Millionaire Maker
Inaugurated in 2013, the $1,500-buyin NL Hold'em Millionaire Maker guarantees a cool $1 million to the first-place finisher. Last year's event saw 6,343 players participate, but this year's tournament was even larger with 7,977 competitors taking to the felt from May 31 - June 3. This made it the second-largest live poker tournament ever, behind the 2006 Main Event, which saw 8,773 entries. The victor, Jonathan Dimmig from Buffalo, New York, walked away with $1,319,587.
Event #17: Seniors Event
With a buyin of just $1,000, the annual NL Hold'em Seniors Event, which is open only to those 50 years of age or older, has become one of the most popular tournaments at the WSOP. This year was no exception as 4,425 players played from June 6 to June 8. The winner was pro player Dan Heimiller, who earned his second gold bracelet and a prize of $627,462, the largest of his career.
Event #41: Dealer's Choice
A new addition to this year's Series, the $1,500 Six-handed Dealer's Choice event drew 419 players. In addition to the normal dealer button, a special button rotated around the table, allowing whoever possessed it to choose the game to be played for the next round of hands. There was a list of 16 games from which to choose. This event was greeted with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation by the player community, which was excited to see such a fun format but wary of potential dealer errors while trying to deal 16 separate types of poker. However, by most reports, the dealers acted competently and reasonably quickly throughout the event. After the dust had settled, poker veteran Robert Mizarachi – brother of “The Grinder” Michael Mizrachi -- emerged triumphant, collecting $147,092 and his second career bracelet.
Event #46: Poker Players Championship
$10,000 isn't what it used to be. For those elite players who scoff at the bevvy of “championship” events sporting $10,000 buyins and featuring just a single game, there is the $50,000 Poker Players Championship, which consists of a mix of eight different games. With such a large buyin, the number of players who turned up to compete from June 22 – June 26 was a modest 102, but they were some of the biggest names in poker: Vanessa Selbst, Phil Galfond, Phil Hellmuth, Phil Ivey, Daniel Negreanu and other stars. After five days of play, John Hennigan was the champion, collecting $1,517,767. This was John's third WSOP bracelet.
Event #53: Ladies No-Limit Hold'em Championship
The $10,000-buyin WSOP Ladies Event comes with a catch – female players get a 90% discount on the price, paying only $1,000. This strange procedure was inaugurated to discourage the participation of males, who cannot be banned outright from entering due to sexual discrimination laws. This year, 793 women entered and played for three days until Haixia Zhang came out on top. Zhang, a business owner and mother of two, received a prize of $153,470 along with her first WSOP bracelet.
Event #57: The Big One for One Drop
Image (c) WSOP
Instituted in 2012, the Big One for One Drop costs a whopping $1 million to enter, and part of each entry goes to the charitable One Drop Foundation, which works to increase access to safe drinking water around the world. Although there was no Big One in 2013, the event returned this year and drew 42 entrants. Canadian pro Daniel “KidPoker” Negreanu came close to victory, but he had to settle for second place and “only” $8,288,001.
Daniel “mrgr33n13” Colman was the winner, and he received a gargantuan $15,306,668 payout. Controversially, he declined to give interviews or speak to the media after his win. Some have defended his choice to remain laconic; however, the peculiarity of his actions and the strange rationale that he gave for them have caused him to be widely panned within the industry.
Notable Players at the WSOP
One of the charms of poker is that relative unknowns, through skill and luck, can be catapulted to the first ranks of fame and ballerhood. Nevertheless, most of us have a few favorite famous players for whom we cheer every time they go deep in a major event. Many notable players indeed achieved success at the 2014 WSOP.
Image (c) WSOP
Phil Ivey captured his 10th WSOP bracelet on June 27 for winning Event #50: Eight Game Mix. Phil won $166,986 for besting the 485-strong field, and it's rumored that he won hundreds of thousands more in bracelet bets. Phil Ivey is now tied with Doyle Brunson and Johnny Chan for second on the list of most bracelets won, behind Phil Hellmuth's 13.
Ted Forrest had already won $6 million during a poker career stretching back to the early '90s before winning this year's $1,500 Razz tournament, which was Event #7 on the schedule. He collected $121,196 and his sixth gold bracelet on May 30. The runner-up was Phil Hellmuth, who was looking to earn his 14th career bracelet.
Former Main Event winner Joe Cada proved that his 2009 victory was not just a fluke when he triumphed in the $10,000 NL Hold'em Six-max tournament (Event #32), earning $670,041 and his second bracelet. Cada's live tournament winnings now surpass $10 million.
Dan “djk123” Kelly also won his second bracelet in 2014. He placed first in Event #43: $1,500 LHE for a $195,167 payday. Making the victory especially sweet for Kelly was the fact that his parents were in attendance – they had never before watched their son play poker.
Belgian Davidi Kitai picked up his third career bracelet in Event #15: $3,000 Six-max NL Hold'em. There are only two other non-American players who have won three bracelets: Aussie Jeff Lisandro and Canadian Daniel Negreanu. Kitai defeated a field of 810 entrants over four days of play to claim the top prize of $508,640 on June 8.
Image (c) WSOP
Another player also achieved his third bracelet in 2014, but this player is unlikely to be a favorite of almost anyone: Russell Aaron “Dutch” Boyd. He is the former owner of PokerSpot, an online poker site that went busto in 2001, causing the loss of more than $400,000 of players' account balances. Boyd prevailed in Event #33: $1,000 NL Hold'em after besting the field of 1,688 from June 15 - 17. Dutch received $288,744.
Justin “ZeeJustin” Bonomo picked up his first bracelet in Event #11: $1,500 Six-Handed NL Hold'em. He had earlier been a runner-up in WSOP events three separate times, so in a certain sense, he was “due” to win one. Justin beat 1,587 entrants to receive the jewelry and $449,980 on June 4.
Doug “WCGRider” Polk is known as one of the best online high-stakes cash game regulars, but live tournament success had eluded him until June 9, in Event #23 of the WSOP. This was a $1,000-buyin Turbo NL Hold'em event with 30- and 40-minute levels rather than the WSOP-standard 60 minutes. Polk triumphed over the 1,473 players who entered, picking up $251,969 in his first WSOP win as well as his first win in any major live poker tournament.
WSOP Main Event
Image (c) WSOP
This year's WSOP Main Event guarantees $10 million to the winner. A total of 6,683 players entered over the course of three starting days for their chance at the seven-figure payday. This was the fifth-largest Main Event in WSOP history.
Some notable players took turns holding the chip lead during the seven days of play, including Phil Ivey, 2013 November Niner Mark Newhouse and Sweden's Martin Jacobson. Ivey busted out in 430th place for $25,756, but Newhouse and Jacobson made it to the final table. Mark Newhouse became the first player to make back-to-back Main Event final tables since Dan Harrington did it in 2003 and 2004. The tournament is now paused and the final table will resume on November 10. Here's how the final nine competitors stack up against each other:
Jorryt van Hoof (Netherlands) – 38,375,000
Felix Stephensen (Norway) – 32,775,000
Mark Newhouse (USA) – 26,000,000
Andoni Larrabe (Spain) – 22,550,000
Dan Sindelar (USA) – 21,200,000
William Pappaconstantinou (USA) – 17,500,000
William Tonking (USA) – 15,050,000
Martin Jacobson (Sweden) – 14,900,000
Bruno Politano (Brazil) – 12,125,000
And the prizes they will be playing for are as follows:
1. $10,000,000
2. $5,145,968
3. $3,806,402
4. $2,848,833
5. $2,143,174
6. $1,622,080
7. $1,235,862
8. $947,077
9. $730,725
Chad Brown Dies
Image by Photos by flipchip / LasVegasVegas.com [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
A beloved poker player and member of Team PokerStars, Chad Brown passed away on July 2 from cancer at the age of 52. Brown was considered one of the best mixed-game poker players, and he cashed at the WSOP 38 times. Chad was also known for his pleasant and calm demeanor at the tables and away from them. Many in the world of poker mourn his passing and expressed their condolences on Twitter, including Barry Greenstein and Doyle Brunson.
Amaya Gaming Group to Purchase PokerStars
Canada-based online gambling firm Amaya Gaming Group announced, on June 13, its intentions to purchase the Oldford Group for $4.9 billion. While the Oldford Group is almost unknown, it is the owner of Rational Group, which is itself the owner of both PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker.
The deal has received regulatory approval from both financial and gaming authorities in many jurisdictions around the world. Amaya shareholders OKed the transaction at a special meeting on July 30. The deal is expected to be completed some time in September.
It's highly likely that the purpose behind the sale was to enable PokerStars to enter markets in the United States. The continued association of PokerStars founder Isai Scheinberg with the Rational Group has been a cause of concern for regulators because Scheinberg was indicted as part of the “Black Friday” actions against online poker operators in the United States. As part of the deal, Isai Scheinberg and his son Mark would sell all their shares and have nothing to do with the running of the company, but the rest of the management team at Rational Group would remain unchanged.
Lottery SNGs Gain Popularity
A new type of Sit and Go (SNG) tournament is taking the online poker world by storm. Often referred to as “lottery SNGs,” these hyper-turbo tourneys start when three players have registered. At the beginning of the SNG, a multiplier is chosen randomly, and the prize pool is equal to that many buyins. The most common multiple is 2, and the rarest multiple is typically 1,000.
Winamax was the first to introduce this type of game in late 2013 under the name “Expresso.” iPoker quickly followed with its “Twister Poker.” The effective rake in these types of games is usually around 7% but this rate is only achieved over the long term since the prize pools vary wildly.
On June 24, Full Tilt released its own lottery SNG offering: Jackpot SNGs. Full Tilt bumped up the top prize to 2,000 times the buyin. These tournaments are currently running at the $1, $2, $5, $10 and $50 levels.
Meanwhile, PokerStars is currently working on its own format, called “Spin & Go.” Spin & Gos have been available in the Spanish market for a while, and management intends to roll them out for the .com player pool in the near future, perhaps as early as August. Spanish players have complained that these new SNGs are drawing traffic away from traditional SNGs, but PokerStars doesn't agree.
Lottery SNGs take only a few minutes to complete, which makes them perfect for mobile devices. Many poker sites are targeting mobile users as a growth market. With the chance elements incorporated in the distribution of the prize pool, they may appeal to players who enjoy casino games as well as poker players.
Johannes Strassmann Dead in Slovenia
German poker professional Johannes Strassmann went to visit some friends in Slovenia in June, but he was reported missing on June 22. Apparently, he was in the company of friends in Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, when he suddenly walked away and was never seen again.
Strassmann's body was found next to the Ljubljanica River on June 27. He had been drowned, but the police ruled out criminal foul play. Testing of his body revealed that he had been under the influence of hallucinogenic substances at the time of his death.
A few days later, the German newspaper Bild reported that a witness saw Johannes on the night of his disappearance in a cafe with a known drug dealer and a couple of other people. They consumed psilocybin mushrooms – also known as magic mushrooms for their hallucinogenic properties. After eating these mushroom, Johannes suddenly rushed from the table and ran away from his friends.
Atlantic City Woes
Image by autiscy [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
The US East Coast gambling hotspot of Atlantic City is in a dire economic situation. The Atlantic Club Casino shut its doors in January, and there are now three other casinos that are likely to go out of business: the Trump Plaza, the Showboat and Revel Casino. The Showboat will close August 31 while the Trump Plaza intends to shut down on September 16. Revel did not announce plans to shutter its doors, but it is involved in bankruptcy proceedings, and if a buyer isn't found, it will have to be liquidated although there have been rumors that six parties are interested in purchasing it.
Paul “MalACEsia” Phua Arrested
Mayasian high-roller and businessman Paul Phua, who plays on Full Tilt under the account “MalACEsia,” was arrested during an FBI raid on July 13. According to the authorities, Phua was running an illegal operation which was taking bets on World Cup match outcomes. He was allegedly operating the enterprise out of several suites at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas. The betting ring was discovered after Phua and his associates requested that hotel staff install many computers, DSL connections and big-screen TVs in their rooms. The hotel then tipped off the FBI that something strange was going on.
There were seven other individuals arrested at the same time, including Paul Phua's son, Darren. Andrew Robl and Phil Ivey coughed up $2.5 million to help the pair post bail. All the defendants were charged with illegal transmission of wagering information and operation of an illegal gambling business. The FBI contends that Phua is a member of the notorious 14K Triad, which has connections to illegal gambling, prostitution, drug dealing and other criminal activities. Phua's lawyer, David Chesnoff, denied that his client is involved with the 14K Triad.
So I'm writing this article to make a point which is rather nit-picky, but one which is often overlooked in poker, and in game theory in general. Although 'whoever has the most fun wins' sounds like something corny your primary school teacher might've said, it is true to some extent. Let me explain.
Traditionally in the poker world, one's payoffs from the game have been linearly scaled with monetary payoffs. This might be for a good reason; poker is unlikely to have a positive effect on any net long-term losers' lives, but the fact remains that it could for some. I'd like to submit here that this is too simple. It is certainly possible to think of someone who knows they lose at poker, but they really enjoy playing. To illustrate this point, I'm going to adopt two hypothetical players for the rest of this essay, Jim and Bob. Now, Jim and Bob both enjoy poker anyway; they enjoy the thrill of chips hitting the felt and really like dragging a massive pot. But what Jim and Bob love more than anything else, to the extent that they are immune to monetary gain or loss, is to risk everything. Jim and Bob love going all-in more than anything else in life. Let's illustrate that with a small payoff matrix for one game node where X represents any strategy other than all-in, and let's also assume that this is a heads-up game between Jim and Bob:
Let's note some things about this game:
I've committed most of the classic mistakes. I hope this helps someone to avoid the mistakes I have made. This aimed at everyone, though it's not a comprehensive guide by any means. I think new players can benefit by learning from my mistakes and more experienced players, who might be ready to shot take, can take away something as well.
When I turned 18 years old, I played a few $1 and $2 scratch tickets. I won a few bucks here and there over the course of a few years, but I didn't hit any big wins. After a few years of sticking to just the cheap tickets, I bought my first $5 ticket. $500 on my first ticket! I was instantly hooked. Over the next few years, I spent a lot on scratch tickets. I spent so much that it became apparent that I had a problem. One day I learned some numbers regarding the percentage of the prize pool which the state takes. I was shocked and felt ripped off. This happened to be right around the time that I started playing and studying poker. I was learning about expected value. I realized that I had been playing negative sum games. This really helped me reshape my views on gambling games. I quit scratch tickets for years after that.
With my scratch ticket problem in check, I now had money to do more fun things like playing golf and poker once a week. I played in a soft no limit holdem tournament homegame for a few years, and I had friends that were kind enough to transfer $5 at a time to me for online poker. I dabbled in a lot of different games, but I found limit holdem to be my best game.
For the next few years, my online poker career could be described in one statement: I won consistently when sober, only to blow it all on the weekends playing drunk. It wasn't until I separated party time and poker time that I was able to really win consistently.
The homegames that I played in were soft, and I was able to win consistently over the course of a few years. However, there were a few guys that liked to go to the casino after the game. I tagged along more than a few times and I dipped my toes into blackjack and poker. I did ok. Luckily, I managed to not blow my homegame winnings. Instead I chose to blow my winnings on golf, which I was completely obsessed with at the time. It was a lucky time in my life, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned from it.
So now it was ~2006. I had a decent job and an apartment. The first of the month was just days away and I wasn't going to be able to pay the rent with what I had in my pocket. I chose to give poker a try with money that I couldn't afford to lose. I played for about 36 hours before I was down to just gas money for getting home. When I got home, the rent was due, I hadn't eaten in days, and I was out of cat food. Don't let this happen.
Some of you are shot takers, no doubt. This next part is especially for you:
I didn't learn of bankroll management until 2008 when I found 2+2. Before that, I would put big chunks of my bankroll on the line in games that were over my head. I lost consistently. The bankrolls that I built from those $5 transfers seemed to vanish and I found myself playing micro stakes time and time again. I developed this rule for limit holdem because of this overaggressive shot taking: Only take a shot if I have 100 big bets for that limit, and lose no more than 40 big bets. Using this rule, I've played as high as $3/$6 online, but I usually lost.
Without taking all of these shots, I'd have a much better record, and a bigger bankroll. However, I learned a lot and I'm definitely a better player because of shot taking. Now, I play live and whenever the game goes shorthanded, I love it.
This is why it's so important to know the difference between shot taking and playing beyond your means. With online shot taking, that was just my fun online money that I built up playing softer games. If the money is important to you, then shot taking can be a big mistake.
In my opinion, whether or not you should take shots depends entirely on the utility of the money involved and your skill level relative to the other players in the game. If and when you decide to take a shot, have a stop loss and stick to it.
Game selection matters when shot taking. You might have a bankroll big enough to take a shot, but if you haven't scouted the game at all then you may unknowingly be a significant underdog in the game. I've done this, and I paid the price of admission. However, if you do scout the game and you've spotted mistakes that you think you can exploit, then the only thing stopping you is your place on the utility curve.
Let's face it, we're not all created equal in poker. Some of you have lots of money with which you may play any game you choose. The rest of us are limited in our choices because of our place on the utility curve. If taking a shot for you means that you can't go golfing this weekend if you lose, that's fine. Take the shot. If taking a shot for you means that you can't eat for a week if you lose, that's a big problem. Don't take the shot. As recreational players, you probably don't have a dedicated poker bankroll like the more serious players do. This is fine with me. The problem occurs when people gamble with money that they can't afford to lose. For a professional player, this means protecting your bankroll with strict rules for playing. As a recreational player, this means something different. If you have a job and can easily replace your losses, then the only thing stopping you from taking a shot is game quality. The important thing is that you're honest with yourself. If you can't honestly say, "I have $X to invest in this game and if I lose it's no big deal." then you shouldn't take the shot.
Winrate and bankroll both have important effects on shot taking. If you're probably a winner in the higher stakes game, then shot taking can be of huge benefit because of the lower rake. If you're probably a loser in the higher stakes game, then shot taking is just a huge unnecessary risk, especially if you just play for fun. Bankroll matters especially because you need something to fall back on if your shot taking goes badly. The difference in stakes can have an effect as well. If you play in a casino that spreads 4/8 Limit Holdem and 10/20 limit holdem, then a 100 big bet shot for 10/20 would be $2000. Losing 20 big bets would leave you with $1600, which would only leave you with 200 big bets for 4/8. That's not enough unless you have a spectacular winrate at 4/8 over many hours or if the money is easily replaceable. My 100 big bet rule worked for me because I treated it as a hobby, thus it's not going to be right for many of you. This is especially true if the money is not easily replaceable.
If you do take a shot, the most important thing you can do is to have a stop loss. It's so easy to say, "I'm going to quit if I lose 20% of my bankroll." It's harder to actually do that, especially when you're losing. When you're losing, it's so easy to tell yourself, "These guys are horrible. I'm going to play some more." Next thing you know you're down to gas money for getting home.
Some of you will commit these blunders in the future. Don't say I didn't warn you. Good luck to all you shot takers!
A lot has been happening in the world of poker over the past two months. The most noteworthy period of the annual poker calender is, of course, the annual World Series of Poker (WSOP), and this year was no exception. We've collected the most important and interesting poker news items from June and July, including WSOP action, and presented them below for your reading pleasure.
Year of Germany?
Image By User Robo on sk.wikipedia [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
On May 24, Dominik Nitsche won the WSOP National Championship in Atlantic City for $352,800. While not part of the summer Series, it counts as a bracelet event. Asked if this was a harbinger of more success during a “Year of Germany” at the 2014 WSOP, Nitsche replied:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominik Nitsche
It's not exactly The Year of Germany, because we just win everything anyways. It's not a weird thing...we just own poker in general.
Nitsche's fellow countryman George Danzer had been trying to win a WOSP bracelet for 10 years, and he walked away empty-handed each time. But he finally broke that streak this year. He took the gold in the $10,000 razz championship, event #18 on the schedule, on June 8, picking up $294,792. Danzer followed this up on June 19 with a victory in Event #38: $10,000 Stud-8, scoring $352,696.
Adding to Germany's record, Florian Langmann won the $3,000 PLO-8 event on June 29, receiving a $297,650 payday. This gave Germany five bracelets for the year, second only to the United States.
WSOP Notable Tournaments
Every year, there are a few WSOP tournaments that seem to garner more than their fair share of attention from the media and the public at large. These events typically have some sort of gimmick or strange rule that differentiates them from the dozens of events on the yearly schedule. Here are some of the most notable events during the 2014 WSOP:
Event #8: Millionaire Maker
Inaugurated in 2013, the $1,500-buyin NL Hold'em Millionaire Maker guarantees a cool $1 million to the first-place finisher. Last year's event saw 6,343 players participate, but this year's tournament was even larger with 7,977 competitors taking to the felt from May 31 - June 3. This made it the second-largest live poker tournament ever, behind the 2006 Main Event, which saw 8,773 entries. The victor, Jonathan Dimmig from Buffalo, New York, walked away with $1,319,587.
Event #17: Seniors Event
With a buyin of just $1,000, the annual NL Hold'em Seniors Event, which is open only to those 50 years of age or older, has become one of the most popular tournaments at the WSOP. This year was no exception as 4,425 players played from June 6 to June 8. The winner was pro player Dan Heimiller, who earned his second gold bracelet and a prize of $627,462, the largest of his career.
Event #41: Dealer's Choice
A new addition to this year's Series, the $1,500 Six-handed Dealer's Choice event drew 419 players. In addition to the normal dealer button, a special button rotated around the table, allowing whoever possessed it to choose the game to be played for the next round of hands. There was a list of 16 games from which to choose. This event was greeted with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation by the player community, which was excited to see such a fun format but wary of potential dealer errors while trying to deal 16 separate types of poker. However, by most reports, the dealers acted competently and reasonably quickly throughout the event. After the dust had settled, poker veteran Robert Mizarachi – brother of “The Grinder” Michael Mizrachi -- emerged triumphant, collecting $147,092 and his second career bracelet.
Event #46: Poker Players Championship
$10,000 isn't what it used to be. For those elite players who scoff at the bevvy of “championship” events sporting $10,000 buyins and featuring just a single game, there is the $50,000 Poker Players Championship, which consists of a mix of eight different games. With such a large buyin, the number of players who turned up to compete from June 22 – June 26 was a modest 102, but they were some of the biggest names in poker: Vanessa Selbst, Phil Galfond, Phil Hellmuth, Phil Ivey, Daniel Negreanu and other stars. After five days of play, John Hennigan was the champion, collecting $1,517,767. This was John's third WSOP bracelet.
Event #53: Ladies No-Limit Hold'em Championship
The $10,000-buyin WSOP Ladies Event comes with a catch – female players get a 90% discount on the price, paying only $1,000. This strange procedure was inaugurated to discourage the participation of males, who cannot be banned outright from entering due to sexual discrimination laws. This year, 793 women entered and played for three days until Haixia Zhang came out on top. Zhang, a business owner and mother of two, received a prize of $153,470 along with her first WSOP bracelet.
Event #57: The Big One for One Drop
Image (c) WSOP
Instituted in 2012, the Big One for One Drop costs a whopping $1 million to enter, and part of each entry goes to the charitable One Drop Foundation, which works to increase access to safe drinking water around the world. Although there was no Big One in 2013, the event returned this year and drew 42 entrants. Canadian pro Daniel “KidPoker” Negreanu came close to victory, but he had to settle for second place and “only” $8,288,001.
Daniel “mrgr33n13” Colman was the winner, and he received a gargantuan $15,306,668 payout. Controversially, he declined to give interviews or speak to the media after his win. Some have defended his choice to remain laconic; however, the peculiarity of his actions and the strange rationale that he gave for them have caused him to be widely panned within the industry.
Notable Players at the WSOP
One of the charms of poker is that relative unknowns, through skill and luck, can be catapulted to the first ranks of fame and ballerhood. Nevertheless, most of us have a few favorite famous players for whom we cheer every time they go deep in a major event. Many notable players indeed achieved success at the 2014 WSOP.
Image (c) WSOP
Phil Ivey captured his 10th WSOP bracelet on June 27 for winning Event #50: Eight Game Mix. Phil won $166,986 for besting the 485-strong field, and it's rumored that he won hundreds of thousands more in bracelet bets. Phil Ivey is now tied with Doyle Brunson and Johnny Chan for second on the list of most bracelets won, behind Phil Hellmuth's 13.
Ted Forrest had already won $6 million during a poker career stretching back to the early '90s before winning this year's $1,500 Razz tournament, which was Event #7 on the schedule. He collected $121,196 and his sixth gold bracelet on May 30. The runner-up was Phil Hellmuth, who was looking to earn his 14th career bracelet.
Former Main Event winner Joe Cada proved that his 2009 victory was not just a fluke when he triumphed in the $10,000 NL Hold'em Six-max tournament (Event #32), earning $670,041 and his second bracelet. Cada's live tournament winnings now surpass $10 million.
Dan “djk123” Kelly also won his second bracelet in 2014. He placed first in Event #43: $1,500 LHE for a $195,167 payday. Making the victory especially sweet for Kelly was the fact that his parents were in attendance – they had never before watched their son play poker.
Belgian Davidi Kitai picked up his third career bracelet in Event #15: $3,000 Six-max NL Hold'em. There are only two other non-American players who have won three bracelets: Aussie Jeff Lisandro and Canadian Daniel Negreanu. Kitai defeated a field of 810 entrants over four days of play to claim the top prize of $508,640 on June 8.
Image (c) WSOP
Another player also achieved his third bracelet in 2014, but this player is unlikely to be a favorite of almost anyone: Russell Aaron “Dutch” Boyd. He is the former owner of PokerSpot, an online poker site that went busto in 2001, causing the loss of more than $400,000 of players' account balances. Boyd prevailed in Event #33: $1,000 NL Hold'em after besting the field of 1,688 from June 15 - 17. Dutch received $288,744.
Justin “ZeeJustin” Bonomo picked up his first bracelet in Event #11: $1,500 Six-Handed NL Hold'em. He had earlier been a runner-up in WSOP events three separate times, so in a certain sense, he was “due” to win one. Justin beat 1,587 entrants to receive the jewelry and $449,980 on June 4.
Doug “WCGRider” Polk is known as one of the best online high-stakes cash game regulars, but live tournament success had eluded him until June 9, in Event #23 of the WSOP. This was a $1,000-buyin Turbo NL Hold'em event with 30- and 40-minute levels rather than the WSOP-standard 60 minutes. Polk triumphed over the 1,473 players who entered, picking up $251,969 in his first WSOP win as well as his first win in any major live poker tournament.
WSOP Main Event
Image (c) WSOP
This year's WSOP Main Event guarantees $10 million to the winner. A total of 6,683 players entered over the course of three starting days for their chance at the seven-figure payday. This was the fifth-largest Main Event in WSOP history.
Some notable players took turns holding the chip lead during the seven days of play, including Phil Ivey, 2013 November Niner Mark Newhouse and Sweden's Martin Jacobson. Ivey busted out in 430th place for $25,756, but Newhouse and Jacobson made it to the final table. Mark Newhouse became the first player to make back-to-back Main Event final tables since Dan Harrington did it in 2003 and 2004. The tournament is now paused and the final table will resume on November 10. Here's how the final nine competitors stack up against each other:
Jorryt van Hoof (Netherlands) – 38,375,000
Felix Stephensen (Norway) – 32,775,000
Mark Newhouse (USA) – 26,000,000
Andoni Larrabe (Spain) – 22,550,000
Dan Sindelar (USA) – 21,200,000
William Pappaconstantinou (USA) – 17,500,000
William Tonking (USA) – 15,050,000
Martin Jacobson (Sweden) – 14,900,000
Bruno Politano (Brazil) – 12,125,000
And the prizes they will be playing for are as follows:
1. $10,000,000
2. $5,145,968
3. $3,806,402
4. $2,848,833
5. $2,143,174
6. $1,622,080
7. $1,235,862
8. $947,077
9. $730,725
Chad Brown Dies
Image by Photos by flipchip / LasVegasVegas.com [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
A beloved poker player and member of Team PokerStars, Chad Brown passed away on July 2 from cancer at the age of 52. Brown was considered one of the best mixed-game poker players, and he cashed at the WSOP 38 times. Chad was also known for his pleasant and calm demeanor at the tables and away from them. Many in the world of poker mourn his passing and expressed their condolences on Twitter, including Barry Greenstein and Doyle Brunson.
Amaya Gaming Group to Purchase PokerStars
Canada-based online gambling firm Amaya Gaming Group announced, on June 13, its intentions to purchase the Oldford Group for $4.9 billion. While the Oldford Group is almost unknown, it is the owner of Rational Group, which is itself the owner of both PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker.
The deal has received regulatory approval from both financial and gaming authorities in many jurisdictions around the world. Amaya shareholders OKed the transaction at a special meeting on July 30. The deal is expected to be completed some time in September.
It's highly likely that the purpose behind the sale was to enable PokerStars to enter markets in the United States. The continued association of PokerStars founder Isai Scheinberg with the Rational Group has been a cause of concern for regulators because Scheinberg was indicted as part of the “Black Friday” actions against online poker operators in the United States. As part of the deal, Isai Scheinberg and his son Mark would sell all their shares and have nothing to do with the running of the company, but the rest of the management team at Rational Group would remain unchanged.
Lottery SNGs Gain Popularity
A new type of Sit and Go (SNG) tournament is taking the online poker world by storm. Often referred to as “lottery SNGs,” these hyper-turbo tourneys start when three players have registered. At the beginning of the SNG, a multiplier is chosen randomly, and the prize pool is equal to that many buyins. The most common multiple is 2, and the rarest multiple is typically 1,000.
Winamax was the first to introduce this type of game in late 2013 under the name “Expresso.” iPoker quickly followed with its “Twister Poker.” The effective rake in these types of games is usually around 7% but this rate is only achieved over the long term since the prize pools vary wildly.
On June 24, Full Tilt released its own lottery SNG offering: Jackpot SNGs. Full Tilt bumped up the top prize to 2,000 times the buyin. These tournaments are currently running at the $1, $2, $5, $10 and $50 levels.
Meanwhile, PokerStars is currently working on its own format, called “Spin & Go.” Spin & Gos have been available in the Spanish market for a while, and management intends to roll them out for the .com player pool in the near future, perhaps as early as August. Spanish players have complained that these new SNGs are drawing traffic away from traditional SNGs, but PokerStars doesn't agree.
Lottery SNGs take only a few minutes to complete, which makes them perfect for mobile devices. Many poker sites are targeting mobile users as a growth market. With the chance elements incorporated in the distribution of the prize pool, they may appeal to players who enjoy casino games as well as poker players.
Johannes Strassmann Dead in Slovenia
German poker professional Johannes Strassmann went to visit some friends in Slovenia in June, but he was reported missing on June 22. Apparently, he was in the company of friends in Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, when he suddenly walked away and was never seen again.
Strassmann's body was found next to the Ljubljanica River on June 27. He had been drowned, but the police ruled out criminal foul play. Testing of his body revealed that he had been under the influence of hallucinogenic substances at the time of his death.
A few days later, the German newspaper Bild reported that a witness saw Johannes on the night of his disappearance in a cafe with a known drug dealer and a couple of other people. They consumed psilocybin mushrooms – also known as magic mushrooms for their hallucinogenic properties. After eating these mushroom, Johannes suddenly rushed from the table and ran away from his friends.
Atlantic City Woes
Image by autiscy [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
The US East Coast gambling hotspot of Atlantic City is in a dire economic situation. The Atlantic Club Casino shut its doors in January, and there are now three other casinos that are likely to go out of business: the Trump Plaza, the Showboat and Revel Casino. The Showboat will close August 31 while the Trump Plaza intends to shut down on September 16. Revel did not announce plans to shutter its doors, but it is involved in bankruptcy proceedings, and if a buyer isn't found, it will have to be liquidated although there have been rumors that six parties are interested in purchasing it.
Paul “MalACEsia” Phua Arrested
Mayasian high-roller and businessman Paul Phua, who plays on Full Tilt under the account “MalACEsia,” was arrested during an FBI raid on July 13. According to the authorities, Phua was running an illegal operation which was taking bets on World Cup match outcomes. He was allegedly operating the enterprise out of several suites at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas. The betting ring was discovered after Phua and his associates requested that hotel staff install many computers, DSL connections and big-screen TVs in their rooms. The hotel then tipped off the FBI that something strange was going on.
There were seven other individuals arrested at the same time, including Paul Phua's son, Darren. Andrew Robl and Phil Ivey coughed up $2.5 million to help the pair post bail. All the defendants were charged with illegal transmission of wagering information and operation of an illegal gambling business. The FBI contends that Phua is a member of the notorious 14K Triad, which has connections to illegal gambling, prostitution, drug dealing and other criminal activities. Phua's lawyer, David Chesnoff, denied that his client is involved with the 14K Triad.
So I'm writing this article to make a point which is rather nit-picky, but one which is often overlooked in poker, and in game theory in general. Although 'whoever has the most fun wins' sounds like something corny your primary school teacher might've said, it is true to some extent. Let me explain.
Traditionally in the poker world, one's payoffs from the game have been linearly scaled with monetary payoffs. This might be for a good reason; poker is unlikely to have a positive effect on any net long-term losers' lives, but the fact remains that it could for some. I'd like to submit here that this is too simple. It is certainly possible to think of someone who knows they lose at poker, but they really enjoy playing. To illustrate this point, I'm going to adopt two hypothetical players for the rest of this essay, Jim and Bob. Now, Jim and Bob both enjoy poker anyway; they enjoy the thrill of chips hitting the felt and really like dragging a massive pot. But what Jim and Bob love more than anything else, to the extent that they are immune to monetary gain or loss, is to risk everything. Jim and Bob love going all-in more than anything else in life. Let's illustrate that with a small payoff matrix for one game node where X represents any strategy other than all-in, and let's also assume that this is a heads-up game between Jim and Bob:
Let's note some things about this game:
- If we assume that this node is replicated at every point in the game tree, it is clear that the sole Nash equilibrium is for both players to go all-in at every possible opportunity.
- 'ARRRRRRRRIN' strictly dominates every other possible strategy for every other player, a situation which doesn't happen in a traditional payoff matrix for poker (or else the game would probably have been solved long ago), ruling out finding a dominating strategy as a solution concept for full-scale poker (n.b. Iterated elimination of dominated strategies is also impossible due to the fact that at this stage, we can only conclusively prove that one strategy is strictly dominated in NLHE cash – any strategy which contains folding AA preflop).
Last edited by AlienSpaceBat; 08-27-2014 at 05:42 PM.
Reason: iveyments
08-21-2014
, 06:48 PM
09-01-2014
, 01:31 PM
We can if you make them Dunna. 
09-01-2014
, 04:22 PM
09-02-2014
, 07:36 AM
I'll come bumhunt all your tables if you don't. 
12-25-2014
, 10:40 PM
