You ever hear the theory that your name determines your future? There was an old Bloom County cartoon where Opus opined if John Kennedy would have had the same career path if he'd been born Mortimer Dipthong.
Apparently, there's some truth to this notion.
Ricki Rockett, the drummer for the band Poison, was arrested yesterday on rape charges. Mr. Rockett's real name? Richard Ream.
That's right. Dick Ream was arrested for rape. Seriously, you can't make this shit up.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Poker situations
W and I had a conversation last night where I gave her some advice. I'm not entirely positive, however, that it was correct. I *think* it was correct but I'd like to hear more opinions.
The situation is this: W has been bubbling an awful lot in her tournaments, for whatever reason. She has also been admittedly frustrated because she has been "running bad" (her words). We were playing in a Wall Street sit n' go last night where there were still 9 players in at the third blind level. Blinds are 75/150. W has about 1500 in front of her in EP. She limps and possibly one other player limps as well. Matty Ebs, on the button, raises to 600 in his usual nonchalant style. When it gets back to W, she goes into the tank for a while then shoves all in. The other player folds and Matty calls saying, "you're behind", before flipping over AA. W has 77. A 7 flops but an Ace turns and it's all over for W.
My call on this is that it was too early in the tourney to shove all in with a middle pair. W's contention was that the blinds were swinging around, chopping 1/3 of her stack and that Matty Eb's range was so wide that she could easily have been leading with 77. I maintained that it was early enough that even with only 1000 chips, she could see another 20 hands before being forced to shove and that 77 is too easily beaten, either by overcards or a counterfeited two pair or, in this case, an overpair.
What do you think?
On another note, I was also running low on chips (about 1800) in a later blind level (200/400). I picked up QJo on the button and faced a min-raise from Matty Ebs. I shoved and he called with the same AA and the same speech about me needing to catch! I nearly cracked him but he held up. Now as a corollary, I think my move was more warranted than W's in this situation. My stack was shorter in comparison to the blinds even though my hand was weaker. However, I'm dominated by a much shorter range of hands. AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, AQ, AJ, KJ, KQ are the hands which kill me. But I'm 60/40 to hands like AT, A9, A8, KT, K9 and even money with hands like TT, 99, 88, 77. Matty had an enormous stack at that point, so he could very well try to pick me off with a less than premium hand, given that it was only 1000 to call a pot of nearly 3000.
Discuss...
The situation is this: W has been bubbling an awful lot in her tournaments, for whatever reason. She has also been admittedly frustrated because she has been "running bad" (her words). We were playing in a Wall Street sit n' go last night where there were still 9 players in at the third blind level. Blinds are 75/150. W has about 1500 in front of her in EP. She limps and possibly one other player limps as well. Matty Ebs, on the button, raises to 600 in his usual nonchalant style. When it gets back to W, she goes into the tank for a while then shoves all in. The other player folds and Matty calls saying, "you're behind", before flipping over AA. W has 77. A 7 flops but an Ace turns and it's all over for W.
My call on this is that it was too early in the tourney to shove all in with a middle pair. W's contention was that the blinds were swinging around, chopping 1/3 of her stack and that Matty Eb's range was so wide that she could easily have been leading with 77. I maintained that it was early enough that even with only 1000 chips, she could see another 20 hands before being forced to shove and that 77 is too easily beaten, either by overcards or a counterfeited two pair or, in this case, an overpair.
What do you think?
On another note, I was also running low on chips (about 1800) in a later blind level (200/400). I picked up QJo on the button and faced a min-raise from Matty Ebs. I shoved and he called with the same AA and the same speech about me needing to catch! I nearly cracked him but he held up. Now as a corollary, I think my move was more warranted than W's in this situation. My stack was shorter in comparison to the blinds even though my hand was weaker. However, I'm dominated by a much shorter range of hands. AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, AQ, AJ, KJ, KQ are the hands which kill me. But I'm 60/40 to hands like AT, A9, A8, KT, K9 and even money with hands like TT, 99, 88, 77. Matty had an enormous stack at that point, so he could very well try to pick me off with a less than premium hand, given that it was only 1000 to call a pot of nearly 3000.
Discuss...
We have our champion!
Alceste takes down season 5 of Wall Street Poker! Along with the $612 grand prize, he will also have to deal the end of season freeroll on April 6th. Congratulations on all the other players who made it into that one!
On another note, a little birdie told me that a club in Midtown, Good look's descendent club, got shut down this evening. The boys in blue came in, allegedly, with sledgehammers and really tore up the place. So much for innocent until proven guilty, hmmm?
The clubs are being shut down much faster than I remember the last wave. This midtown club was only open for a few months, at best.
On another note, a little birdie told me that a club in Midtown, Good look's descendent club, got shut down this evening. The boys in blue came in, allegedly, with sledgehammers and really tore up the place. So much for innocent until proven guilty, hmmm?
The clubs are being shut down much faster than I remember the last wave. This midtown club was only open for a few months, at best.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Down to the wire
We are really getting down to the wire in Season 5 of Wall Street Poker. Alceste, due in large part to his stellar performance in Tuesday's tournaments, is leading the league. Bacini Mary and W are in striking distance, but they're more Dark Horses now than anything else.
Bacini Mary, specifically, has taken some horrific beats at the table or she'd be in much better position. I saw her turn over Aces to an underpair on Tuesday and then start getting packed up, sure that the underpair would hit their set! She won that one, but in her defense it's not been the norm for her to win the 80/20 races.
W has played her consistent game, where she averages around the bubble for every tourney. She is the all-time Wall Street Poker bubble leader and if she could tweak her game just a little bit, her consistency would propel her into the money a frightening number of times.
The real story here this season has been Stephen Porcelli, who came on strong late in the season and won a few crucial tourneys to propel himself to the front of the pack. He's been a monstrous force to compete with and is playing solid poker. BUT, he doesn't have enough tourneys to qualify as of yet. Wed. night is the last night of tourneys for the season and he's going to have to do really well in both of his tourneys to overcome Alceste.
The other big story of the season has been LJ and Thomas Gillespie. LJ started off the season with the best start of any WSP player. She cashed in her first four tourneys, winning two of them and getting runner up in the other two. This was during the phase wher she was winning online tourneys at a fast pace too and cashing BIG. So it seemed like she had just catapulted to another level. But it's hard to play that good for that long and her next few tourneys were real crash and burn affairs, putting her far out of the running the WSP championship.
The story with Thomas was that no one noticed him doing so well! He was the quiet guy who kept cashing until, before you knew it, he was in front of the pack with a month to go! His reputation as a beginning player was helping him get big money in with the best of it and he was taking the insults to the bank. But a few bad tourney placements the last few weeks have similarly knocked him out of the running.
The next week should be a real doozy. Including, and this is no small thing, the return of Dawn Summers after a self-imposed religious exile from poker. I, for one, will be very very happy to see her again. Mayhap a game of stud/8 in her honor?
Bacini Mary, specifically, has taken some horrific beats at the table or she'd be in much better position. I saw her turn over Aces to an underpair on Tuesday and then start getting packed up, sure that the underpair would hit their set! She won that one, but in her defense it's not been the norm for her to win the 80/20 races.
W has played her consistent game, where she averages around the bubble for every tourney. She is the all-time Wall Street Poker bubble leader and if she could tweak her game just a little bit, her consistency would propel her into the money a frightening number of times.
The real story here this season has been Stephen Porcelli, who came on strong late in the season and won a few crucial tourneys to propel himself to the front of the pack. He's been a monstrous force to compete with and is playing solid poker. BUT, he doesn't have enough tourneys to qualify as of yet. Wed. night is the last night of tourneys for the season and he's going to have to do really well in both of his tourneys to overcome Alceste.
The other big story of the season has been LJ and Thomas Gillespie. LJ started off the season with the best start of any WSP player. She cashed in her first four tourneys, winning two of them and getting runner up in the other two. This was during the phase wher she was winning online tourneys at a fast pace too and cashing BIG. So it seemed like she had just catapulted to another level. But it's hard to play that good for that long and her next few tourneys were real crash and burn affairs, putting her far out of the running the WSP championship.
The story with Thomas was that no one noticed him doing so well! He was the quiet guy who kept cashing until, before you knew it, he was in front of the pack with a month to go! His reputation as a beginning player was helping him get big money in with the best of it and he was taking the insults to the bank. But a few bad tourney placements the last few weeks have similarly knocked him out of the running.
The next week should be a real doozy. Including, and this is no small thing, the return of Dawn Summers after a self-imposed religious exile from poker. I, for one, will be very very happy to see her again. Mayhap a game of stud/8 in her honor?
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Lazy Sunday
It's a wierd time in the banking world. Tensions are high and some very good people I know at Bear Sterns may or may not be employed in the near future. The credit market turmoil is affecting all divisions in my own bank and my own job could very well be deemed irrelevant at any point. Who knows? But in the meantime, there's work to do....
I spent the last hour or so updating my poker room map (linked at the bottom right corner of this blog page). So far, I've counted *70* official poker room visits in the U.S. My next trip is out to California for the first week of May, where I should rack up at least 6 or 7 more visits. I'm really looking forward to it.
I played poker yesterday for Andy Rettig's birthday. He hosted an all-day affair at his place and I was on fire at the table. For .50/1 NLHE, I bought in for $60 and cashed out for $243. Then, Paulie and I broke at 5:30 to go see Matty Ebs do a set at Comix. Good stuff. We came back to Andy's at 9, with Matty in tow, and played .50/1 Pot Limit Omaha until 2:00 am. I bought in for $50 and cashed out with a grand total of $335. A fine total and a good day at the tables for me. I made two excellent laydowns in PLO where I had the second nut flush, once on the turn and once on the flop and was able to get away from it when my bets were re-raised. Both times, my opponent showed the nuts. I saved myself at least $75 or more because of those lay-downs.
On a tangential note, there was a play at my own table on Friday which I want to put up for discussion. I was dealing a raucous game of 1-2 NLHE and a new player, Patrick, had raised the pot pre-flop in early position. Matty, playing his seemingly loose and aggressive style, re-raised about $25 more. Patrick immediately pushed all in for $300+ dollars! Matty was stunned. He was speechless for a few seconds, turning this interesting event over in his mind. The previous hand, Matty had tangled with Patrick and took down a pot. Was Patrick just being overly aggressive? Or was he pretending to be on tilt so he could induce a call with a monster hand he held. Matty thought for a few more moments and turned over his hand on the table to fold...KK. OMG. The table was in shock. Patrick, with a flourish, showed AKo to win the pot. A discussion ensued as to whether KK is ever a good fold pre-flop. I maintain that there is almost no situation in which KK is a good fold preflop heads up. Unless you have a dead read on your opponent. I mean an absolute dead on read, you are going to be ahead so often it's scary. I think your EV in the long run is so high with KK heads up that it doesn't make sense to fold.
I can't fault Matty though. He was the big winner of the night, leaving over $600 up. But it could easily have been $1000 or more had he just called. We ran the board by the way, and an Ace never materialized, just FYI.
Another poker chore I accomplished recently was to update my poker spreadsheet. I've been..um..lazy about it. Since June of last year to be precise. But I finally filled it in with all of my poker sessions since that time. The good news is that I'm up about $1,200 since I started keeping track. The bad news is that I started keeping track in late Sep. '05. Yeah, I'm a break even player all right. I'm in positive territory the last three months though. And I aim to keep it that way.
I spent the last hour or so updating my poker room map (linked at the bottom right corner of this blog page). So far, I've counted *70* official poker room visits in the U.S. My next trip is out to California for the first week of May, where I should rack up at least 6 or 7 more visits. I'm really looking forward to it.
I played poker yesterday for Andy Rettig's birthday. He hosted an all-day affair at his place and I was on fire at the table. For .50/1 NLHE, I bought in for $60 and cashed out for $243. Then, Paulie and I broke at 5:30 to go see Matty Ebs do a set at Comix. Good stuff. We came back to Andy's at 9, with Matty in tow, and played .50/1 Pot Limit Omaha until 2:00 am. I bought in for $50 and cashed out with a grand total of $335. A fine total and a good day at the tables for me. I made two excellent laydowns in PLO where I had the second nut flush, once on the turn and once on the flop and was able to get away from it when my bets were re-raised. Both times, my opponent showed the nuts. I saved myself at least $75 or more because of those lay-downs.
On a tangential note, there was a play at my own table on Friday which I want to put up for discussion. I was dealing a raucous game of 1-2 NLHE and a new player, Patrick, had raised the pot pre-flop in early position. Matty, playing his seemingly loose and aggressive style, re-raised about $25 more. Patrick immediately pushed all in for $300+ dollars! Matty was stunned. He was speechless for a few seconds, turning this interesting event over in his mind. The previous hand, Matty had tangled with Patrick and took down a pot. Was Patrick just being overly aggressive? Or was he pretending to be on tilt so he could induce a call with a monster hand he held. Matty thought for a few more moments and turned over his hand on the table to fold...KK. OMG. The table was in shock. Patrick, with a flourish, showed AKo to win the pot. A discussion ensued as to whether KK is ever a good fold pre-flop. I maintain that there is almost no situation in which KK is a good fold preflop heads up. Unless you have a dead read on your opponent. I mean an absolute dead on read, you are going to be ahead so often it's scary. I think your EV in the long run is so high with KK heads up that it doesn't make sense to fold.
I can't fault Matty though. He was the big winner of the night, leaving over $600 up. But it could easily have been $1000 or more had he just called. We ran the board by the way, and an Ace never materialized, just FYI.
Another poker chore I accomplished recently was to update my poker spreadsheet. I've been..um..lazy about it. Since June of last year to be precise. But I finally filled it in with all of my poker sessions since that time. The good news is that I'm up about $1,200 since I started keeping track. The bad news is that I started keeping track in late Sep. '05. Yeah, I'm a break even player all right. I'm in positive territory the last three months though. And I aim to keep it that way.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Movie idea...
Feel free to develop this if you'd like.
A brilliant young Harvard Law student defies all odds to work his way up the dog-eat-dog chain of public prosecuters, establishing himself at the top of the heap when his efforts lead to the dissolution of the most powerful crime lords in the Tri-State area. Capitalizing on his reputation as a squeaky clean crimefighter, he gets to be the top law fighter in New York by becoming Attorney General. His equally brilliant wife stands by his side by putting her own career on hold to raise their children and be the perfect politician's wife.
After spending two successful terms as Attorney General, taking on Wall Street's sleaziest corporate elements along the way, he sets his sights higher. But things are taking a darker turn. His public perception is awesome, but darker forces are poised against him. His own ego is growing, and his ambition with it, but he is making powerful enemies and they're marshalling their forces.
He goes on to get elected Governor of the state, winning by an enormous margin with his sights firmly set on a future Presidential run. His life is idyllic, but there are cracks. The Senate majority leader is a thorn in his side, so he gets caught using State resources to discredit him. But the public forgives his zealousness.
The drama builds, until, out of nowhere, a secret Federal probe into possible financial malfeasence uncovers his long history of using $4,000 an hour prostitutes.
In the last two minutes of the film, he apologizes, resigns, divorces, gives up his dreams and spends the rest of his life consulting for various law firms, as off the books as possible.
On second thought...nah. Too far-fetched.
A brilliant young Harvard Law student defies all odds to work his way up the dog-eat-dog chain of public prosecuters, establishing himself at the top of the heap when his efforts lead to the dissolution of the most powerful crime lords in the Tri-State area. Capitalizing on his reputation as a squeaky clean crimefighter, he gets to be the top law fighter in New York by becoming Attorney General. His equally brilliant wife stands by his side by putting her own career on hold to raise their children and be the perfect politician's wife.
After spending two successful terms as Attorney General, taking on Wall Street's sleaziest corporate elements along the way, he sets his sights higher. But things are taking a darker turn. His public perception is awesome, but darker forces are poised against him. His own ego is growing, and his ambition with it, but he is making powerful enemies and they're marshalling their forces.
He goes on to get elected Governor of the state, winning by an enormous margin with his sights firmly set on a future Presidential run. His life is idyllic, but there are cracks. The Senate majority leader is a thorn in his side, so he gets caught using State resources to discredit him. But the public forgives his zealousness.
The drama builds, until, out of nowhere, a secret Federal probe into possible financial malfeasence uncovers his long history of using $4,000 an hour prostitutes.
In the last two minutes of the film, he apologizes, resigns, divorces, gives up his dreams and spends the rest of his life consulting for various law firms, as off the books as possible.
On second thought...nah. Too far-fetched.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Maybe AIG has a point?
Matty Ebs hit me with an interesting concept the other day. Let me throw this one out to the crowd to see how it flies.
Let's say you ran a poker room, legitimate or otherwise. Let's further say that you make money by charging either a 'time charge' or a rake of the pot. Some of your players might be upset at the amount you have to charge to stay in business. What if you could enhance your income by offering a service to the players? The service would be 'pot insurance'. No, this is not paying to have someone watch your weed!
Here's how it would work:
Players 1 and 2 get into a big hand. For the sake of this discussion, we'll say player 1 has AA and player 2 has KK. Both push all in PF after some betting and re-raising. The pot contains $1000. In some places, at this point, players would be allowed to negotiate to 'run business', that is run the board multiple times. In our room, however, running business would be banned, replaced by the insurance concept. The dealer would offer each player, once they've shown their cards, of course, the option to buy insurance. The insurance offered to each player would allow them to be paid the full value of the pot if they lose, for a fee. The fee would be determined by a formula that takes into account the size of the pot, the chances the player has to win the pot and the profit the house wishes to make on the insurance (the 'spread').
Taking our example and assuming the house wishes to have a 5% 'spread', the dealer would offer a price of $240 to the player with AA and $810 to the player with KK. If both players take the insurance, the house would take in $1050 in revenue and pay out $1000 in insurance to the losing player. But the spread would still apply no matter who takes the insurance.
The basic formula (subject to tweaking) for offering insurance would be: (Size of Pot - (1-Odds of Player winning hand)) + ('spread' percentage * (Size of Pot * Odds of Player winning hand))
There are some logistical issues to work out.
1. With margins being tight, how can you train dealers to accurately offer the right price. Matty thought about a cheat sheet with standard pricings being offered based on number of outs, which seems sensible.
2. How do you pay the players and/or take the money? It seems strange to pay out/receive chips because that would violate the 'table stakes' rules. If you do everything off the table, the dealer would have to have some sort of way of keeping accurate track and the house would need a way to collect at the end of the night.
But logistical issues aside, how do you like this in theory? I know what some of you are going to say. Why give up 5% EV? It seems a sucker bet in the long run, and that's true. BUT, what you are selling here is a reduction of volatility. And lots of gamblers will take odds against them anyway, or hadn't you heard of this thing they have called 'casinos'. :-p
Let's say you ran a poker room, legitimate or otherwise. Let's further say that you make money by charging either a 'time charge' or a rake of the pot. Some of your players might be upset at the amount you have to charge to stay in business. What if you could enhance your income by offering a service to the players? The service would be 'pot insurance'. No, this is not paying to have someone watch your weed!
Here's how it would work:
Players 1 and 2 get into a big hand. For the sake of this discussion, we'll say player 1 has AA and player 2 has KK. Both push all in PF after some betting and re-raising. The pot contains $1000. In some places, at this point, players would be allowed to negotiate to 'run business', that is run the board multiple times. In our room, however, running business would be banned, replaced by the insurance concept. The dealer would offer each player, once they've shown their cards, of course, the option to buy insurance. The insurance offered to each player would allow them to be paid the full value of the pot if they lose, for a fee. The fee would be determined by a formula that takes into account the size of the pot, the chances the player has to win the pot and the profit the house wishes to make on the insurance (the 'spread').
Taking our example and assuming the house wishes to have a 5% 'spread', the dealer would offer a price of $240 to the player with AA and $810 to the player with KK. If both players take the insurance, the house would take in $1050 in revenue and pay out $1000 in insurance to the losing player. But the spread would still apply no matter who takes the insurance.
The basic formula (subject to tweaking) for offering insurance would be: (Size of Pot - (1-Odds of Player winning hand)) + ('spread' percentage * (Size of Pot * Odds of Player winning hand))
There are some logistical issues to work out.
1. With margins being tight, how can you train dealers to accurately offer the right price. Matty thought about a cheat sheet with standard pricings being offered based on number of outs, which seems sensible.
2. How do you pay the players and/or take the money? It seems strange to pay out/receive chips because that would violate the 'table stakes' rules. If you do everything off the table, the dealer would have to have some sort of way of keeping accurate track and the house would need a way to collect at the end of the night.
But logistical issues aside, how do you like this in theory? I know what some of you are going to say. Why give up 5% EV? It seems a sucker bet in the long run, and that's true. BUT, what you are selling here is a reduction of volatility. And lots of gamblers will take odds against them anyway, or hadn't you heard of this thing they have called 'casinos'. :-p
Wall Street Poker presents: You Make The Call
I love that old thing on TV during sports programs where the announcer comes on before a commercial segment to present "You Make The Call". They would typically show you footage of a controversial sports play and then freeze-frame just before the official made their decision. During the commercial break, you were encouraged to ignore the commercial and think about what the official called on the play (kinda funny to be encouraging viewers to ignore the sponsors) and then when the show came back you were treated to the rest of the segment.
In the same vein, I present: "You Make The Call"
You're in the BB in the money phase of a SnG which is now three handed. Jesse is on the button, UTG and Thomas Gillespie is in the SB. You have QTo. Blinds are at 400/800. You have 13,100 in your stack. Jesse has 3,900 and Thomas has 3,000. Jesse, first to act PF, moves all in for 3,400. Thomas moves all in on the SB. What do you do?
Somethings to consider:
If you win outright, you win the tourney.
If you beat at least one of the people in the 3-way race, you will gain at least one spot in the ranking.
If you lose to either player, that person will have much closer to half the chips in play (20,000 total) than if you had folded.
I thought about the pot odds to me. It was 2,100 for me to call which would leave me with still over half the chips in play. There was now 7,200 in the pot, so I was getting more than 3-1 to call. But was my QTo getting 30% to win? I just didn't know. Maybe I was dominated on both ends? Maybe one of them had a pair higher than a Ten? Or maybe, just maybe, both my cards were live.
You Make The Call!
Ok, got it in your head?
Here's what I did. I folded. I reasoned that no matter what happened, the person who lost would leave the tourney in 3rd place, giving me one spot up on the rankings. And in order to capture first, the additional 2,100 in chips would be a significant advantage in the heads up match, representing just a shade over 10% of the chips in play. Rather than give up that advantage for the quick kill, I decided to keep my chips. Jesse turned over AJo and Thomas turned over 99. The board paired a Ten and no one else hit, so I would have won! But it's a slightly risky play to give up the advantage like that. If Jesse had won with AT, for instance, the extra chips he got from me could have made a big difference. So Thomas took down the pot and Jesse was all in blind on the next hand with 400 left in the BB. My 88 in the SB did him in and Thomas and I chopped up the money so we wouldn't have to play an extended heads up match.
Another question for the group. What do you think the right thing to do, mathematically, would be. If this were a cash game, for instance, would the correct move be to call?
In the same vein, I present: "You Make The Call"
You're in the BB in the money phase of a SnG which is now three handed. Jesse is on the button, UTG and Thomas Gillespie is in the SB. You have QTo. Blinds are at 400/800. You have 13,100 in your stack. Jesse has 3,900 and Thomas has 3,000. Jesse, first to act PF, moves all in for 3,400. Thomas moves all in on the SB. What do you do?
Somethings to consider:
If you win outright, you win the tourney.
If you beat at least one of the people in the 3-way race, you will gain at least one spot in the ranking.
If you lose to either player, that person will have much closer to half the chips in play (20,000 total) than if you had folded.
I thought about the pot odds to me. It was 2,100 for me to call which would leave me with still over half the chips in play. There was now 7,200 in the pot, so I was getting more than 3-1 to call. But was my QTo getting 30% to win? I just didn't know. Maybe I was dominated on both ends? Maybe one of them had a pair higher than a Ten? Or maybe, just maybe, both my cards were live.
You Make The Call!
Ok, got it in your head?
Here's what I did. I folded. I reasoned that no matter what happened, the person who lost would leave the tourney in 3rd place, giving me one spot up on the rankings. And in order to capture first, the additional 2,100 in chips would be a significant advantage in the heads up match, representing just a shade over 10% of the chips in play. Rather than give up that advantage for the quick kill, I decided to keep my chips. Jesse turned over AJo and Thomas turned over 99. The board paired a Ten and no one else hit, so I would have won! But it's a slightly risky play to give up the advantage like that. If Jesse had won with AT, for instance, the extra chips he got from me could have made a big difference. So Thomas took down the pot and Jesse was all in blind on the next hand with 400 left in the BB. My 88 in the SB did him in and Thomas and I chopped up the money so we wouldn't have to play an extended heads up match.
Another question for the group. What do you think the right thing to do, mathematically, would be. If this were a cash game, for instance, would the correct move be to call?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
