Saturday, April 14, 2007
It's odds time again.
Hat tip to Joaquin. Who's getting wacked this week?
Vince Curatola (John "Johnny Sack" Sacrimoni) 1/1
Dominic Chianese (Corrado "Junior" Soprano) 3/1
Michael Imperiolo (Christopher Moltisanti) 4/1
Tony Sirico (Peter Paul "Paulie Walnuts" Gualtieri) 4/1
Frank Vincent (Phil Leotardo) 6/1
Steven Van Zandt (Silvio "Sil" Dante) 8/1
James Gandolfini (Anthony "Tony" Soprano) 10/1
Aida Turturro (Janice Soprano) 10/1
Robert Ller (Anthony "A.J." Soprano, Jr.) 13/1
Lorraine Bracco (Dr. Jennifer Melfi) 14/1
Jamie-Lynn Sigler (Meadow Mariangela Soprano) 18/1
Edie Falco (Carmela Soprano) 20/1
Friday, April 13, 2007
Insane week here. Can you say consumer database segmentation?
On the positive side: TGIF.
Thanks to the esteemed Johnny Hughes for emailing me this poker story. Damnit, the man needs a publisher!
Poker History: Remembering E.W. "Ole 186. Part 1
BY: Johnny Hughes
When Johnny Chan first went to Las Vegas, he discovered poker and jumped off big winner. Then he ran into E.W. "Ole 186" Chapman, a Texas road gambler that moved his chips as fast as any man you have ever seen. E.W. busted Johnny and he busted many a good poker player. E.W. made his living playing poker but he had more leaks than the levees in New Orleans. I met E.W. when I was twenty and he was forty in 1960. We often discussed poker strategy. E.W. never helped get a game started in the afternoon. He would plunge into the game after a few hours and become the most frequent raiser and re-raiser. He waited until the losers were trapped in the Gambler's Fallacy of believing they "were due" and were playing double up and catch up. At the start of the game, everyone plays real tight and E.W. didn't want any part of that. All the games in Texas were no limit, even the small games.
The dealer anted a dollar and the blind was two dollars in Texas Hold 'em. That's like twenty dollars in today's money. Often there was a straddle. The standard raise was twenty dollars, ten times the blind. I asked E.W. one time why he raised so often. He said he raised because the other players didn't want him to. "If they had wanted it raised, they would have raised it themselves," He said. E.W. was very hard to play against. He told me you have to play flush draws like they are already made. He just kept firing at it. He was ready to move in regardless of the board card. We were always engaged in that argument about whether it is better to play tight or loose but E.W. didn't really have but one gear. He had no choice. E.W. said, "I really have too much gamble in me to leather ass the proposition. I like to draw."
Back then, we played with paper currency. E.W. was a nut about money, especially twenty dollar bills. He'd play with his whole stack in neat twenties all facing up. He taught me to repair the corners and smooth out all the bills. He was constantly doing this to all the money in the game. All of us were pretty slick with paper money, counting our bets incredibly fast. The word would spread around West Texas when E.W. was striking, on a run. We played a lot of heads-up challenge matches. When E.W. was striking, he would go visit gamblers in their homes in the mornings and break them.
E.W. could play a rush better than anyone but he could also simulate a rush. He'd semi-bluff really high and hit some miracle hands. He was the hero of countless bad beat stories. It was common to try to win all the money on the table. E.W. tried to bust players like it was a tournament. He took pills, uppers and downers at the same time, and could get really wild. He was always well mannered and gentlemanly except the time he shot Morgan in the foot.
E.W.'s real road game was deuce-five, Kansas City lowball draw. E.W. didn't mind going broke on any given day because it was easy to get a stake horse and a fresh start. He'd put all the money he had on the table. The dealer anted ten dollars and everyone else anted five. We played seven-five higher than we played poker. When E.W. drew one card, he would act like he looked but he would move in without looking. He'd always show his bluffs. In no time he had the table steaming. E.W. and I would stake each other and loan to each other. Several people were willing to stake a broke just to fill up the game. It was a friendly thing to do.
One time when I was flat broke, I went by a big low ball game to eat the home-made stew which was the day's specialty. Big poker and dice games had a single menu item each day. They used food as a draw and called all the players for steak, catfish, chili, and barbecue. E.W. was big winner and had everyone gambling. A pal staked me and a few hours later I was $1800 winner. That's like $18000 in today's money. I wanted to take $35 off the table to pay my rent and get pick up my laundry. At first they wouldn't let me, but finally they let me run the three blocks to my pad and pay the overdue rent and get the laundry. I came back and went broke.
E.W. and I were in Ruidoso one time in a big low ball game and we suspected there would be some wolfing going on. One guy had some bandages on his hands and E.W. reached out and felt of the bandages. He was a little fellow, quite and well mannered but he was fearless. We both made good winnings.
I would stake E.W. but I usually wanted to cut out when I went home. A couple of times I stayed in with him and he went on this pilling run. E.W. took uppers and downers, chain smoked menthol cigarettes, and sometimes didn't sleep for days. E.W. was such a character that the other poker players told stories about him often. A favorite was the time the bought a large quantity of black mollies, a long black pill of speed, and engraved his initials on the sides of the pills in gold leaf. When E.W. was on a pilling run, he would go all around town playing heads-up or getting in games until he got broke or robbed.
Twice when I had him staked, he ran off on one of these runs. I would hear about him and occasionally catch him on the phone but I couldn't catch up with him to cut out. Finally, I caught him and he had the whole front room of his apartment covered in the junk he had won. He had one old bookmaker's clothes and lawn mower and implements, rake and hoe. He had won one of my college pal's overcoat and Tech ring. There was this enormous mirror. He would ask me if I wanted the item and then set a price on it, more than it was worth, and give me the cash. I was silent during this but I ended up with all the money.
Another time when I had him staked, he ran off and I finally found him in the middle of the night at his apartment playing heads up against the Mule. They were both pilling. They both had high piles of currency in front of them, mostly ones and twenties. I told E.W. I wanted to cut out but the Mule strongly objected. Then they began to straddle it. It was four, eight, sixteen, until they had put all of the Mule's money in the pot before the cards were dealt. I ran on out of there before the deal. I can smell a hot score brewing better than any man that ever walked in shoe leather. Later, I heard the Mule won the pot. Probably, he put the hat on E.W.
We played at a woman named Dolly's six days and nights a week. On Tuesdays, she closed and the game moved to Morgan's whore house. Bill Smith and E.W. raised each other back and forth. It came as natural as fighting chickens. I have noticed that some of the great aggressive players like Stu Ungar and Jack "Treetop" Straus are suckers for the sports bets. E.W. was like that. He was addicted to the action. One night Bill Smith put on this ridiculous women's hat of Dolly's. Then he went on a rush, raising every pot. One of the players was a little bit slow and he paid Bill ten bucks for the hat. He won a pot and E.W. paid him ten bucks for the hat.
At the outlaw whisper joints you didn't ask a man his last name, how he made his living, where he lived, or where he was going. E.W. got robbed a lot on his nocturnal gambling rounds. He would go over to the black area and be the only white guy in an after hours joint playing low ball. I've done that but I would not recommend it. If someone asked anyone where they lived, the answer was always, "Next door to E.W."
"Where's that?" they'd ask.
"Well, E.W. doesn't want anyone to know where he lives. " was the answer.
When I first started playing at Morgan's whore house, there had been a fight and his wife, Bell, shot another fellow once and Morgan twice by accident. Morgan was huge, about three hundred pounds. Sometimes the young working girls would be there when we played. They traveled to several cities on a circuit called "the wheel." One night Morgan was drinking and E.W. was pilling and they were beginning to argue. I hit the road out of there. Later, E.W. pulled his pistol and fired across the table at Morgan. His first shot blew the air conditioner out of the window. His second went into the wall. His third shot hit Morgan in the foot. Then E.W. ran and Morgan gave chase. E.W. left his car and ran down the street and Morgan fired a couple of shots his way. The next week we were all back to playing as if nothing happened.
One Christmas, several of the gamblers were going to El Paso for the horse races. Buddy the Beat and I took the bus there and stayed on the main drag in Juarez in a cheap hotel. E.W. advised me to bet the favorites to show and that worked until the last race. We met E.W. back in Juarez and he was incredibly wild. He had a big bankroll. He would buy things from the street vendors and then trade it and some money for other things, a sombrero, a huge plastic bull. When we'd go in a bar, he would buy drinks for the largest woman and give her the crap he had bought. Finally, a cop arrested E.W. and I. I wasn't sure what for. Maybe being drunk like everyone else. They hustled us into the back of a car and drove us a long way from the bridge. By this time, we really didn't have much money left on us. E. W. said to let him do all the talking. When he was pilling, he talked really slow and as if he were in an echo chamber.
We had this trial in this little court room with a Judge in a tie who looked to be all of fourteen. E.W. explained that we didn't have any relatives that would send us money. In the Juarez jail, prisoners had to arrange for their own food. Finally, the Judge ordered us to empty our pockets on this little table. He came over and took what he wanted: a few dollars, my silver dollar money clip, and my comb. Then the cops took my cigarettes and change and they let us go.
I road back from Juarez with E.W. My friend Buddy the Beat had hitch hiked all over the United States riding with whatever stranger pulled over in the dark of night but he wouldn't ride with E.W. It was a three hundred and thirty mile drive home and it took us twelve hours in E. W.'s old Chevy. He kept calling his dear friend Morgan and telling him to hold the game together because we were nearly there. He said to tell them he would play anyone there heads-up for his case dough.
And, of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't congratulate my buddy, Pauly, for landing the ESPN WSOP poker gig. Pauly's more than paid his dues and couldn't be more deserving.
Hoist of the Guinness to the Good Doctor.
Monday, April 09, 2007
"Nascar fans are a bunch of blue collar, middle class, wannabe rednecks.
Real rednecks run on the dirt."
That would make a great t-shirt.
I wrote this preamble on this humble poker blog over three years ago. Humour me.
It's been a crazy ride, eh? Party Poker is now up to 60,000. Pinch me, I'm dreaming.
There is always an element of luck involved in any successful venture. Being at the right place at the right time. Sure, hard work counts too, but I feel that Poker as Cultural Juggernaut was simply the winds of fortune blowing a certain way. Varkonyi. Moneymaker. McManus. Party Poker.
And it's true, both Destiny's kisses and Her bitch-slaps illustrate an individual person's basic personal powerlessness over the really meaningful events in your life. In other words, almost nothing important that ever happens to you happens because you engineer it. Destiny has no beeper; Destiny always leans trench-coated out of an alley with some sort of Psst that you usually can't hear because you're in such a rush to or from some carefully engineered endeavor of perceived importance.
A friend told me once that 99.9% of what goes on in one's life is actually none of one's business, with the .1% under one's control consists mostly of the option to accept or deny one's inevitable powerlessness over the other 99.9%, which just trying to parse this out makes my forehead turn purple.
And this humble poker blog was like that. What started as an accident helped spark something pretty fucking cool in the blogging world. I can't even believe that article I wrote for PokerSavvy about the poker blogs was nine months ago.
It's awfully hard work to write uber-posts over and over. Because my b&m friends unmercifully mock me for writing a blog, it's tough. It's my cross to bear, I suppose.
I'm just some goofball who loves poker and Guinness. It could be worse, I suppose.
I could be Phil Helmuth.
Allrighty then, enough of this pithy pontification. I need to do what I do best. Blog about fucking poker.
And here we go:
If you AREN'T playing on Party Poker, you are deeply retarded. Nature abhors a vacuum, and so do I. Go sign up on Party Poker, please. 60,000 players and 100 poker bloggers CAN'T be wrong. That's bonus code IGGY, damnit.
End prior preamble.
Are you busy today at work? Have a lot on your plate?
I sure hope so cause I'm ubering it the hell up. And per the Italian principle of abbondanza, my uber posts will always be served in a mighty big dish.
Let's Destroy Workplace Productivity, just like the old days.
It's what I do.
This post brought to you by, well, no one. I'm back to blogging my ass off for you, for free. As it should be, I suppose.
Sometimes I wonder what I should do with this silly blog. I've always been diligent about keeping Guinness and Poker on-topic. Poker, poker and more poker. But Good God, I have a myriad of other interests and wouldn't mind writing about them. If I was a talented writer ala Pauly, I'd just start other blogs, but frankly, I don't have the time nor energy, so I'm stuck here for now.
Could be worse. I still could be on the sidelines, watching the fun from the outside.
Let me give you one of my favorite time-killers. Stripper forums. Geezus, I've had sooooo much fun reading these, I can't even tell you.
Head down the rabbit hole:
Stripper Web Exotic Dancer Community forums
Oh the Humanity.
Commence tangential, Guinness-fueled ramblings.
So let's start out this post with some superb golden old-school RGP. Let's clean up this back and forth between Abdul and Phil Helmuth. I've never used the names Abdul and Hellmuth in the same sentence before.
Abdul first, then Phil.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
I wanted to ask Phil Hellmuth something at his r00ling BARGE speech, but I was having difficulty coming up with a diplomatic way to phrase the question. So here goes, after a bit of thought. I've played a huge number of hours of limit hold'em against WSOP winners and other big name tournament players. Here are a few example hands, at
20-40, 60-120, and 80-160 limits:
* WSOP winner open-raises early-middle position, gets a caller, and WSOP winner bets and raises all the way with no pair and no draw, shows down A2 offsuit.
* Very tight player raises UTG, two players cold call, WSOP winner cold calls with JT offsuit. The flop comes low rags, completely missing the JT, tight player checks, one player bets, next calls, and now WSOP winner calls to take a card off with his overcards (he snags a jack on the turn and wins the pot.)
* Player open-raises middle position, fairly tight player 3-bets, WSOP winner 4-bets from the small blind with 76o (there was some out of order mucking, which could have
caused WSOP winner not to respect those raises), original raiser folds, WSOP winner shows his 76o to the 3-bettor alone, after the 3-bettor folds on the turn (76o actually was the best hand at that point, though the 3-bettor had odds to draw.)
* Tournament pro has been 3-betting early raisers with Q7s and other crazy things for a while, and will be leaving soon and probably won't be playing against the same players any time soon. Now he open raises one off the button, fairly tight player 3-bets from the big blind, he calls. Flop comes K65, big blind bets, and he turns over 83 offsuit before mucking.
These are four real hands from four different major tournament winners, and they are fairly typical. I suppose Phil might argue that the tournament pros had their reasons - tells or whatnot for each and every seemingly wacky decision - but didn't even Phil say in his speech something like, "Tournament pros should stick to tournaments and avoid limit ring games"?
Now my questions for Phil:
Should this style of play be emulated by those wishing to win tournaments?
Does this style of play facilitate monetary success in tournaments?
Do you consider there to be a significant difference between the strategy for winning tournaments and the strategy for making the most money in tournaments?
Do you try to win tournaments or make money in tournaments?
You were one of the players in those hands... which hand was yours, A2, JT, 76, or 83?
Others, please feel free to jump in too.
And thanks for the good talk, Phil.
And Mr. Hellmuth graciously responds, dragging Daniel into the sludge:
From: Phil Hellmuth
Subject: Re: TOURNAMENTS: Questions for Phil Hellmuth
OK Abdul, here goes...
I am not sure which hand that I played in your scenario, but I could see
myself in a 'non tilting' moment play the A-2 strongly. I think that a
lot of top tournament players go on tilt very easily, myself included.
My guess is that this is what you witnessed in each case.
Yes, I do try to make money in tournaments, but more importantly, I try
to win tournaments! I believe that you have to 'make the money' in
order to make the final table in order to make the top three, and then
finally, win the event. Erratic play in general is not helpful towards
achieving tournaments success. Erratic play - usually brought about by
the top pro tilting in any given event - does have its payoff over the
next few events from the people that witnessed the meltdown.
I believe that there isn't too much difference between the correct
tournament strategy for 'making the money' vs the correct strategy for
'winning the tourney.' Of course, you need the ability to adapt to the
changing conditions of your table along the way. For example, I will
play non-agressive poker at a table full of maniacs, but after I make it
down to the final three tables, they always seem to be filled with tight
players, so then I step up the raising quotient of my game.
On another note, I have a big disagreement with Daniel Negreanu over
side game players vs tournament players.
Daniel wrote (in this thread):
I've said it time and time again, the best tournament players
couldn't hold a stick to the best live game players. The live game
players could more easily adapt to tournament play than a tournament
player to a ring game.
Although holding Daniel to his exact words of, "I've said it time and
time again, the best tournament players couldn't hold a stick to the
best live game players" wouldn't quite be right, he really does believe
that the top side game players have more skill. You see, I witness
these top side game players play hard every year at the WSOP, and rarely
do I see them win an event. Conversely, if many of the top tournament
players had to make a living solely in the sidegames, then I believe
that they would just tighten up their games and eventually play in the
highest limit games in the world.
In fact, I am going to post another thread right now challenging Daniel
to a bet!!
-Cheers, Phil Hellmuth
Weeeeeeeeeeeee. I've run out of Phil hyperbole. For now.
Wow, 2+2 did a redesign.
I'm really tired of the 2+2'rs arguing that poker is a skill game.
Look, you retards, anytime you bet money on the turn of a card - it's GAMBLING.
But hey, of course skill is involved. Don't make me quote Rounders damnit.
Wow, this is some crazy news.
Macau punts Las Vegas in casino stakes
MACAU says it has overtaken the Las Vegas Strip as the world’s biggest casino draw, raking in more than US$7 billion ($8.58 billion) in 2006.
The tiny southern Chinese enclave’s 22 casinos generated 16.7 billion patacas in the final quarter, taking the year’s total gross gaming revenues to 56.2 billion patacas ($8.83 billion).
By comparison, the 40-odd casinos on Las Vegas’ famous main strip - including the plush Venetian and MGM resorts - generated $US6.6 billion ($8.09 billion).
Here's my favorite poker hand of the week. Jennifer Tilly Vs Patrick Antonius... Jennifer Tilly = donk. Phil Ivey's facial expression are damn funny but the chest heaves are also worth the price of admission:
I was curious to see the answer to this question since I just visited there. Q&A follows:
Online gambling and Mexico - question
What is the deal with Mexico? Does anyone know? I know us Americans could all move to Canada and still continue to gamble online, use Neteller, etc. But what about Mexico? I can honestly say that I've never seen anyone playing online from a city in Mexico.
Someone asked me that question today and I could not answer it. So what IS the deal with Mexico? Is it illegal or impossible for some reason to gamble online from Mexico?
I gamble from Mexico (Juarez). I have no problems except a couple of years ago pokerroom wouldn't accept players from Mx. Don't know if they do now or not. It is my understanding that it is illegal to gamble on-line but Mx. has more important problems to worry about.
Gambling in Mx. is illegal (except horse/dog racing/sportsbetting) but there are small slot joints all over Mx. that found loop holes and are readily available. The
Gov. will step in if they find slots in convenience stores since kids can play them. I do not know anything about the Banking system regarding depositing/withdrawing since all my financial stuff is in the US, which causes many problems. Since Firepay/Citadel left I use gift cards. Also, some gambling/poker sites really frown on personal information and I P addresses being in different countries so I stick with sites that don't care.
Damn, whoda thunk?
$17,000 found under old Atlantic City casino slot machines
Only the change collected from under or around slot machines at the former Sands Casino Hotel in Atlantic City, New Jersey, topped $17,000 (€12,700) worth of coins.
The casino was closed last November after 30 years and will be torn down later this year to make way for a new gambling hall. So when workers began removing the 2,350 slot machines for use at other casinos owned by the Sands' parent company, they expected to find a bit of cash.
But, $17,193.34 (€12,876.98) was a bit more than they had imagined.
You know, I'm completely over the fact that my money on Neteller is gone. Even though that money was earned by writing. But I'm pretty freaking pissed off that I have to pay taxes on that income. That just ain't right.
On the flip side, I'm lucky that I gave up the poker lifestyle when I did. I think I took my job thirty days before the damn legislation passed.
But here's one of the kid poker pro's who finally succumbed and went back to the rat race.
i got a job today, FUCK
well after two years of sitting around my college apartment drinkin beers and mopping up the kiddie games its the real world.
selling cars for a honda dealership and doing bitchwork for their finance manager, should be a good go.
bankroll is about to go BOOM since i wont need to cashout unless i just want to.
In that vein we also have this take:
Good news: The death of poker books
One good thing the online ban as had an effect on is the number of poker books that will hit the press in the coming year.
We can all share in the joy of the death of new useless poker books on the market written by people that can not beat the game or are nothing more than one hit wonders in some lotto tournament.
I've gotta concur with that sentiment, for the most part. I diverge, however, when it's just fine damn writing about the game of poker. And thusly, I must thank the fine folks at Simon & Schuster for sending me an Advance Reader's Proof of "Bigger Deal" - A year Inside the Poker Boom, by Anthony Holden. I loved the Big Deal, Mr. Holden's first classic on our game and finally found time to dive into his new offering. Good, good stuff.
Let's move along, shall we? It's that time again. Gary Carson silliness. You know you love it almost as much as I do, damnit.
I spent too much time digging through a firestorm of shit on RGP about Dateline and their "Catch a Predator" TV show. Gary Carson, ever the definition of a contrarian, decided to defend the perverts and impune the cops, to succinctly sum things up.
Here's where I point out some crazy threads before giving you a few choice quotes.
250 posts in this monster thread.
OMG...The Dateline Internet Sex Predator Show Tonight is 15 miles from my home
OT: Count the child molesters on RGP
OT: OrangeSFO is a sick fucker
Pokerchimp asked why 60 Minutes or Dateline hasn't done a story on the online poker ban. The answer is because 99.9% of the population doesn't give a flying fuck. However, here is OrangeSFO's response:
"They're too busy destroying the lives of sad sack online pedophiles for committing thoughtcrime."
Are you fucking kidding me? Destroying their lives? These are sick fuckers who prey on kids and you say Dateline is destroying THEIR lives? Give me a fucking break. You, my friend, are in serious need of an ass kicking.
Curious about Gary's position? OK, OK, I'll give you a taste of Gary's posts:
They aren't arresting pedophiles. They are entrapping people who have some pedophile tendencies and destroying them so the police in some small town can get on TV.
It's all bullshit.
Just look at how they effect the arrests. Guns drawn, get on the ground, big production. They didn't think the people were dangerous just seconds before when in the house? Why pretend they are dangerous just when the cops are on camara and can show how tough and brave they are?
Do you really think the internet is full of 13 year old girls as easily approachable as their bait? I don't really think so.
Are these guys they arrest problems? Yes, obviously? Are they a danger to anyone other than themselves? I never seen any evidence of that.
> At any rate, that show is scary, isn't it?
Well, yes, but probably not in the way you mean it. The scary part is how these cops behave and how we demonize people who havn't harmed anybody but clearly need help.
Funny, but Gary's posts even got old school RGP'r, PBO Cop, to chime in:
Subject: Re: OMG...The Dateline Internet Sex Predator Show
I can tell you have a very strong opinion of cops, and it's not a good one so I won't argue with you on that point.
The other point is that they committed a Felony, it is unknown if they are armed, so they take the necessary precautions. If you don't think they have cops with guns out and ready behind those walls, you are wrong. They are ready for anything and everything, that's why they the decoy runs out of the room so quickly.
I can tell you that many many more people than you would imagine end up armed when I do undercover prostitution busts.
So yes, in your eyes, having guns out is overkill. But in reality, the one time we do take down criminals and wait to pull the guns out and allow them that split second, we are the ones that die, or your family members that are innocently standing by.
On the other topic of the criminals not doing the crime without the illegal bait, it happens in everything these days. Kids walking into liquor stores, us selling dope to people, us buying dope from people, us offering sex, us buying sex, etc. None of it would be there if we didn't offer it. So it's just part of the never ending cycle.
I miss the ol' RGP days. Haven't posted much in years.
Hope all is well.
OK, that's enough of that. I spared you the tangential debate about prisons and the USA locking up more people than ever before, and the need for more prisons, if only because they keep the lines down at fast food joints.
Oh my, I'm pissed because I had eight outstanding Jimi Hendrix YouTube videos to share with you but now they are all removed. "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Experience Hendrix, LLC." Dernit.
Ah well, I suppose I should post this latest update from the PPA and their efforts to do something/anything about the attack on our beloved game of poker.
Dear PPA Member:
As the fight for poker continues, the PPA grows stronger by the day. In the past two months, PPA membership has more than doubled to nearly 320,000 members! This exciting growth is pushing us closer to our 1 million member goal.
As most of you know, it was recently announced that three-term U.S. Senator Alfonse D'Amato has joined the PPA to serve as the Chairman of the Board. His decades of public service and deep understanding of the political process will be instrumental in our efforts to ensure that you can continue to enjoy the game of poker in the venue of your choosing.
The PPA is providing a unique chance for you to hear from the Senator and ask him questions about the future of poker. On Thursday, April 12th at 3pm EST the PPA will host an interactive Webcast. The Senator will give you an update of the federal government issues facing poker today and what the PPA is doing to fight for your rights. You have the opportunity to send e-mail questions before and during the Webcast which the Senator will answer live.
Participation is easy and I encourage everyone to be part of this exciting
If you would like to send a question ahead of time you can send to AskAl@pokerplayersalliance.org
Michael Bolcerek, President
Poker Players Alliance
Good God yes, this next bit is soooo me. I am on tilt reading a full fucking week of RGP straight through. Pure agony.
RGP Misery Index
The Maverick Brain trust has developed an optimal formula for calculating the misery of this newsgroup that can be used to extrapolate game conditions at various cardrooms.
This rating system 0-10 (10 is total misery saturation) is a propreitary combination of various newsgroup factor including, but not limited to:
1. Posts on various topics including online, dealers, rulings, comps, and suckouts
2. Various authors who have a weighted influence over the group and contribute valuable material exposing the negative aspects of the poker industry.
3. Noise such as promotional ads and any fluff posts about any poker player or cardroom.
Current Misery Index as of 4/7/07: 8.8
I mean, for fucks sakes, I'm STILL having to read 9/11 conspiracy theories on there.
Working on some of the biggest brands in the world has truly been a fascinating and enlightening experience. I'm finally back to embracing corporate speak. Some of it is in a class all by itself. Listening to two Brand Managers talk is like listening to a foreign language. Or Scientologists.
My latest favorite phrase I heard in a budget planning meeting was:
"Gingerbread is Tier Two."
I've been reciting that one all week.
It's funny to get more hits in an hour here at Guinness & Poker than I did all day at PokerWorks.
One of my favorite RGP'rs, Howard Beale, wrote an RGP post complaining about uber-troll, Ramashiva. Who is one of the biggest idiots on RGP, ever. I enjoy his Paul Popinjay persona far more, for whatever that's worth.
Anyway, Ramashiva had a few defenders:
What the fuck? They drove off Sklansky. They drove off Mike Caro. Doyle Brunson. Negreanu. Paul Philips. And now you want to drive off Ramashiva TOO? Are you trying to ruin RGP? Calm down and control yourself.
Sorry, but RGP was ruined long ago. Take it from me, one of the few people in the world who actually still reads it.
But this long-timer had this retort per the state of RGP:
The only reason these people don't post here any longer is that, because of the poker boom, they prefer to get paid for their writing, and who can blame them? Why give it away for free on here? You people should be grateful that Gary Carson still does post here, even though so many of you don't approve of his opinions. Too bad. You don't know a good thing when you have it.
RGP is an uncensored place where everyone can express their opinions and, if personal attacks are the price we have to pay for it, I'm willing to pay this price
This is a post by the aforementioned Mr. Popinjay. Surprisingly, this spurred one big-ass thread.
OT: Girls Just Wanna Have Fun
Back in the 80s, we all remember this Cindi Lauper music video, Girls Just Wanna Have Fun.
I was pretty young back then in the 80s. It was a long time ago but I remember it pretty well. I remember when this music video came out. It was a catchy tune, and everybody loves Cindi Lauper.
But I remember one thing about the video. You know the scene where they show Cindi's girlfriends talking on the phone? I remember thinking, "Gee, those are some of the ugliest girls I've ever seen. Couldn't they have found some better looking girls for the video?"
The more I watched that video, pretty soon something occurred to me. If you don't already know where I'm going with this, take a look at the youtube video link above and look REAL CLOSE at those ugly girls. I think they're transvestites.
Well? Does anyone else think they are transvestites? I think maybe Cindi was playing a joke on us all and these were not really girls having fun. What do YOU think?
Tons and tons of discussion. But my favorite comment was Gary Carson's:
I was living in San Francisco in the 80's. So, I was used to girls with Adam's apples.
Whew, this is getting long. Especially in terms of beer consumed.
Look, right now my wife is downstairs on the couch drinking a beer, eating pretzels and watching Southpark. And I'm up here in my office typing out an uber post for my girly blog.
How emasculating is that?
Don't answer that.
Well, this WSOP news is over a month old but it's too big not to post.
Some said it would never happen "WSOP EUROPE" is here
World Series of Poker Europe Launched by Harrah's Entertainment
The world's leader in entertainment, Harrah's, has announced the launch of
the World Series of Poker Europe (WSOP).
The inaugural WSOP Europe is scheduled to make its debut in London on September 6-16, 2007. This exciting new tournament will be situated between three casinos operated by London Clubs International-Fifty, Leicester Square, and the Sportsman.
World Series of Poker Commissioner, Jeffrey Pollack, said, "This is the first time bracelet events will be awarded outside of Las Vegas."
"The World Series of Poker Europe will have a unique identity, style and flair, but will remain true to the 38-year tradition and heritage of the WSOP," he said.
"This new tournament has been designed with European players in mind, but registrants from every country are welcome. We hope it becomes an annual tradition for poker enthusiasts and a home for WSOP fans after the action concludes in Las Vegas each summer," Pollack added.
The event will begin with a three day £2,500 H.O.R.S.E tournament at LCI's newest casino in Leicester Square, which will be opened in April 2007.
Another host for the WSOP is the Leicester Square Casino, which will offer a two-day £5,000 Pot-limit tournament beginning September 8, 2007.
The WSOP Europe main event will be held on September 10, 2007, which includes a six-day, £10,000 No-Limit Texas Hold'Em Championship, which begins at LCI's Leicester Square, The Sportsman, and Fifty.
Makes me wonder if they (Harrah's) will accept "indirect buy-ins" in these events. I think it's also very interesting that the dates will coincide with other big U.S. tourneys. Harrah's is hell-bent on world gaming domination and well on their way it seems to me.
Howard Beale asks the burning question:
It's 3:00am at Casino Arizona where I'm at the 6-12 08 game. A real hottie, early 20's, is strutting around the poker area wearing a tight tank top (cut low), 3 inch heels, black stockings that reach half-way up her thighs, and a white *skirt* (looked more like a big napkin) that comes down just 1/2 inch from there. All the guys are looking and she knows it.
Q: What denomination chip do you place in her path to see if she will bend over to pick it up?
Random gambling factoid:
Traditional Native American dice are two-sided.
There are over one hundred different traditional Native American dice games.
Bonus Code IGGY on Party Poker, damnit!
Just to show you the silliness that happens on RGP these days, just imagine the thread that followed this late night post from a popular Rgp'r.
OT real dilemma which should spark a good thread.
after I post this I am going to sleep, so I won't be responding any more to this thread for a while. I look forward to hearing from you all. I may even unkillfile a few people just for the entertainment value
OK, here it is. It's hard for me to say it. About 2 months ago I met someone i really like. Since that time we have become very close friends, and we are also
neighbors and have spent a lot of time together. We are total opposites in every way, political beliefs, religious beliefs... a lot of other stuff. but there are definitly some sparks flying between us. We are moving toward the next level.
The dilemma: This is a guy I am talking about, and honestly, even though he is
really handsome and in excellent shape and 15 years my junior, I just can't
imagine myself ever having sex with a man again.
Also, being as I really don't trust men (and women...people in general) I'm trying to figure out what he sees in a 48 year old short fat bi-polar lesbian. Is it just a challenge for him?. I am actually starting to care. He says he does care. He treats me very nicely. He is a southern gentleman ex military type. .I've actively avoided relationships for the last 5 years. Maybe I am so horny because I've been
celibate all that time, that now I'd be attracted to anyone who showed interst.
My best friend has been away in Brazil for the last 2 months, and i can't exactly talk to my lesbian friends about this at this point, although there are several bi's in our gay community as well.
Anyway, I care what some of you think. i don't care what others of you think, but all are welcome to post their opinions. I am in a masochistic mood.
Good times, good times. For once in my life I'm taking the high road here instead of the easy snark rip. I must be getting soft in my old age.
Omaha Chris did post what he called 'The Best link of all Time' in that thread. It's NSFW. I call sites like this "Flashterbation." Yes, I just coined a phrase, thank you very damn much. Thank the Guinness.
My deepest apologies for entering the time machine and posting this review of ESPN's old poker show, Tilt, but hey, there's still some people out there (Helixx!) who thought this was a good show.
So this is for Helixx:
ESPN's 'Tilt' = Garbage
Embroiled in a bout with insomnia last night, i'm watching re-runs of 'Tilt'....
'Lowball' (the estranged casino manager) is at the brothel with the country cop
(in Vegas to avenge his brother's death). Lowball is apparently a regular there,
the girls seem to love him, he's throwing money around like water, he tips big,
and everything seems to be just ducky between he and the madam.
later on in the episode he goes back for more (with the cop, who's apparently
allergic to hot women). the madam greets him, and tells him 'Porche' is waiting
for him in her room. he goes back to meet her, the madam goes to the phone with
a serious look on her face and makes 'the call'......the drama builds.
Lowball goes into Porche's room, she's dressed in leather, she handcuffs him to
this whipping post thingy. She leaves in a huff. the cop, sitting at the bar,
notices the madam is leaving in a huff as well.
meanwhile, back in Porche's room, Lowball (helplessly handcuffed, now) is being
strangled to death by one of th Matador's henchmen. the cop busts in, just in
the nick of time, and saves Lowball.
Okay, so let me get this straight:
i run a brothel in nevada. it's my livlihood. i have a regular customer with a
lot of money. i like him, and we have a lucrative relationship. he's well known
in vegas, throws me a lot of business, and is good to my girls....
i get a phone call from a poker player, who wants to have this guy killed in my
place of business. i agree to set the whole thing up and make myself and one of
my girls accessories to murder; putting both my freedom and livlihood in
oooh, the realism. i'm getting chills just thinking about it. i thought Tilt was
garbage the first time around, and in re-runs at 4am (i'm sad to say) it's even
This is an oldie but goodie per Tilt. Fine satire of the show here: Tilt: the Blasphemy of Poker as we Know it
Well, maybe the fat, bi-polar, old lesbian posts from above didn't properly explain the pain I go thru to write these posts for you.
Here's a typical troll dispensing poker advice:
NEVER rebuy or add on
A general rule of thumb when playing rebuy tourneys is to NEVER spend anything over your original buyin when the rebuys or add on is the same price. Its simple. The value of chips goes down too fast to trade them for dollars. It KILLS your Return On Investment. If you have any skills at all you can use them instead of money to build a nice stack.
Rebuy tournaments are the way players today justify playing like a donkey and "showing off" how little they care about their money and this is why winning players like me can exploit these FREEROLLS so easily. I read an article by a typical donkey who says he averages 7 or 8 buyins for every rebuy he plays. I will make more money playing in 7 or 8 rebuy tournaments with only my original buy in every time. This seems like common sense to me but I guess ignorance spreads. Remember when everybody just knew the world had to be flat?
I won't bother reposting the dismantling that went on, but suffice to say, this troll got em all riled up.
This is pretty damn funny, especially considering that Izmet's one of my poker heroes from way back in the day. But check out his blog post from October of last year. He might want to stick to poker instead of predicting the effects of the UIGEA:
* There will be no WSOP next year.
* If there is a WSOP, the prize will be $1 mil.
* There will be another poker boom in 2008 after new legislation of exempt companies.
Let's hope he goes one outta three.
I've been thinking about the 2007 WSOP Main Event. Damnit, I really wanna play. I wonder if I could get a sponsor if I tried.
My favorite Overheard In New York in the last few weeks:
Yuppie kid: Mommy shaves her hoo-hoo!
Yuppie dad: Okay, honey. Look, do you want your book?
Yuppie kid: I came in the bathroom this morning and asked Mommy what she was doing and she said shaving her hoo-hoo. Mommy shaves her hoo-hoo!
Yuppie dad: Dylan, remember when we discussed at-home conversations and outside conversations?
Yuppie kid: Yes.
Yuppie dad: Well, this is an at-home conversation.
Yuppie kid: Okay, daddy. [Sings to herself quietly] Mommmyyy shaves her hoo-hooo...
Black lady: See, home conversating, outside conversating -- that's bullshit. My kid says shit like that, I
smack him. He won't say shit like that again.
Yuppie dad: Okay, thank you, but I think our method works just fine.
Yuppie kid: Lady, do you shave your hoo-hoo?
Black lady: Oh, yeah, that shit is workin' just fine. She's all kinds of polite.
Yuppie dad: Okay, Dylan, this is our stop.
Irish Mike has been posting his top four poker posts. I haven't found them worthwhile but I'm gonna post his final one, if only for Carson's response.
Irish Mike's Poker Tip #4 of 4
In poker there's a big difference between winning money and having money.
Poker players and bad money management are a well established combination.
Some estimate Stu Unger won more than thirty million dollars in his poker
career but he died with $800 in his pocket. Johnny Moss, the Grand Old Man
of poker, finished up broke, standing on the rail and dependent on the
charity of Jack Binion. Mike Matasou stated in a recent interview that he
won more than a million dollars in a poker tournament but was broke less
than a week later. The same bad money management scenario plays out on a
smaller scale in poker rooms all over the country, every single day.
Despite their skill many poker players are constantly broke or on the verge
of going broke. Borrowing money, begging for backers and running errands
for tips becomes a sad, recurring cycle in their professional poker lives.
When you play poker for a living you own your own business. You are
president and chief financial officer of "You, Inc." Ask any business owner
what it takes to run a successful, solvent business and he or she will list
money management near the top. You can have a good business and a good
product but if you're a bad money manager you'll still go broke.
The first thing to understand is that if you aspire to play for a living
your initial poker bankroll really has two components. The first is the
money you actually need to play poker and the second is the amount needed to
cover your monthly living expenses while you get established. In my
experience most wanna-be professional poker players only look at the first
component and ignore, or greatly underestimate the second. If you want to
give yourself even half a chance to succeed you need at least six months of
living expenses in addition to your playing bankroll. It's the height of
blind optimism to think you're going to sit down in a poker game, as a
professional, and start winning from day one. The majority of new
professional poker players fail for the same reason the majority of new
businesses fail. They just run out of money.
But what if you have no intention of becoming a professional poker player?
(Let me pause here to congratulate you on a wise career decision) Well, a
lot of nonsense has been written about poker money management but the truth
is it's not mysterious or complicated. All it takes is a little common
sense and a lot of discipline.
I believe it's essential that even recreational players have a separate
bankroll that is used exclusively for poker. They also need to avoid the
very bad habit of mixing poker money with household funds. You just can't
play your best game if the chips in front of you represent this month's car
payment or grocery money. And when your opponents realize you're playing
with scared money, it's like bleeding in a shark tank.
So how much money do you need to play poker and how should you manage it?
Well that depends on three things. How well you play, the size of your
swings and your poker objectives (Remember tip #1; ask yourself why you
play poker and what you want to accomplish). Obviously the better you play,
and the smaller your swings, the less money you need in your bankroll.
However, a good rule of thumb is to have at least 300 times the big bet of
the highest limit game you play. So if you play $10/$20 for example, your
minimum bankroll should be (300 x $20) $6,000.00. If you play $40/$80 you'll
need at least $24,000. Remember, if you don't play particularly well and/or
regularly experience large swings, you'll need closer to 400 to 500 times
the big bet. If you're like me, and play on the road a lot, you also need
to build in enough to cover your travel expenses.
A worthwhile recreational poker objective is to eventually move up to the
highest limit game that you enjoy playing in, and can consistently beat. So
your $10/$20 bankroll should include taking an occasional shot at a $15/$30
or $20/$40 game, when you see the right kind of line-up. Conversely if you
start losing frequently, never be too proud to drop down and play a lower
limit game until you can identify your problem and rebuild your bankroll.
About now you're probably saying, "That sounds pretty basic". Well that's
because it is. There's no rocket science in poker money management. So why
do so many other-wise smart players do such a lousy job of it? As I said in
tip #3, "It doesn't matter how well you can play. It only matters how well
you do play". Same thing applies to money management. Knowing what to do is
one thing. Having the discipline to do it is another.
I'll give you a real life example. Just recently a young player asked my
advice about moving up from $4/$8 to a $10/$20 game. He'd never played
higher than $4/$8 but said he was "easily beating the game" and had turned
his initial $100 bankroll into $775. I advised him to stick to $4/$8 until
he had more money. He argued that there were two really big fish sitting in
the $10/$20 game. I had played in this particular game dozens of times and
had notes on every player in the line-up. I replied no, there are actually
four fish in that game, they've got a lot of money and they play like
chip-burning maniacs. Well that's as far as I got in my big advice speech
because they called his name and he took a seat in the $10/$20 game.
Sad story short, he bought in for his entire $775 bankroll. He won a couple
of pots right off the bat and was up about $400. Then he lost several big
hands plus one huge heads-up pot and tried to push some drawing hands past
the chip burners. He hit the rail broke in less than two hours. Now I'm
not saying he's a bad player . I am saying he's a bad money manager.
First, he sat in a jammed-up game without the bankroll to handle the swings.
Second, he gambled more of his bankroll than he could afford. Third, he
didn't lock up his win and fourth, he didn't set a loss limit.
So what can we learn from this poor lad's misfortune? First, if you're
going to make a run at a higher limit game at least consider how fast it's
playing. Yes, four maniacs with money can certainly be a +EV. But these
same maniacs can also burn up a lot of your chips along with their own. If
you're in a game where it costs you three or four bets to see every flop,
you better have the bankroll to handle the inevitable swings associated with
wild, loose play. In addition, this kind of game usually attracts some very
solid players who are there to take a shot at the fish tank. Focus too much
on the maniacs and one of these solid guys can knock you off. BTW, I'll
just assume you are keeping notes on any opponents you face regularly.
Don't gamble more of your bankroll in a single session than you can afford
to lose. In a typical $10/$20 game I'll buy in for 20 big bets ($400) and
have another $400 in my pocket. If my stack drops below $200, I re-buy for
another $200. I don't want to lose more than 10% of my total bankroll in
any single playing session. I'm not saying these rules need to be chiseled
in stone but they represent the kind of discipline it takes to keep from
going broke during the tough times.
Always look to lock up a win. The objective, of course, is to maximize your
wins and minimize your loses. The trick is to find that balance between
shutting down a winning streak too soon and giving back everything you won
plus some. How many times have you heard a player say, "Damn, I should have
quit when I was ahead?" Or, "Man, I was up $600 and now I'm stuck $500".
Well some where during that $1,100 swing would have been a good time to
think about locking up a win. If I'm up say $1,000 in a $10/$20 game I'm
not going to quit if I lose a pot. But I am going to decide on an amount of
that $1,000 that I am going to walk out with. For example, I might say,
"OK, I'll play back $300 of this win but when I'm down to $700, I'm out.
Now I can hear the RGPers screeching from here. "You shouldn't set an
arbitrary number like that." "It's all just one big game and it makes no
sense to quit today when you know you're going to play tomorrow." "You don't
play poker by the session; you play poker by the year". Or, the one that
has busted more players than any other single sentence in poker, "Never quit
as long as you are a favorite."
Well my response, with all due respect, is you manage your money and I'll
manage mine. If I'm up $1,000, in a $10/$20 game, that's a pretty decent
night. Now I blow back $300. Maybe I've been playing for three or four
hours and I'm getting a little tired. Maybe the line-up has changed and a
couple of weaker players have left or just tightened up. In any case, I'm
still ahead $700. Do I want to sit here and chase that $300 or is there
something else I would like to do? Am I going to sleep better tonight with
a $700 win or knowing that I developed ass glue, gave it all back and
ended-up losing $200? Am I likely to play better tomorrow knowing that I'm
fresh, rested and up $700 from the night before? Personally, I'll walk out
with the $700 win and sleep just fine.
I believe in setting loss limits. There, I said it and I ain't ashamed. I
know, all the experts say "Never quit as long as you are a favorite". Well,
yes they do and so does every RGPer who has ever read Sklansky or Malmuth.
Yet if all these poker players never quit when they are favorites, why do so
many of them end up losing their asses?
The answer is, they weren't favorites and they didn't have the discipline to
walk away with a small loss.
If you're stuck more than 30 big bets in a game, you need to stop and ask
yourself why. Maybe you're tired, maybe the line-up is now tougher than it
was or maybe it's just not your night. Hell, maybe there's some collusion
or out-right cheating going on. In any case, my recommendation is to
seriously consider calling it a night and walking away. Sure, some times
you can turn it around and fight back to even or scrape out a small win.
But, for every time that happens there will be a lot more where you'll just
bury yourself that much deeper. Again, how much of your bankroll are you
willing to lose in a single session?
To be fair, staying in a game as long as you are a favorite is actually good
advice. Assuming all poker players are totally objective, can accurately
pin point that exact moment when they switch over from being a favorite to
being a dog and then have the discipline to immediately get up and leave the
game. Sorry, but most of the players I've observed lack that accuracy. In
fact, most of them believe they are playing just as well in the eighth hour
as they were in the first hour and that they play just as well when they are
losing as they do when they are winning. Sadly, neither is usually true.
My personal rule is to never lose more in one session than I can reasonably
expect to win back in another session at the same limit. Here's why. Let's
stick with our $10/$20 game example. I'm stuck 30 big bets ($600, or 10% of
my $6000 total bankroll) so I get up and leave the game. Now I'm going to
review that session in my mind and try to figure out why I lost. Was I
tired or not feeling well? Did I get sloppy or start chasing? Did the
line-up change? Did I just get out played? I'll be a hell of a lot more
likely to come up with an honest answer once I'm out of the game and can
really think about it. I'm not happy but I know I can turn it around
tomorrow. I at least know I had the discipline to walk away with a small
loss. More importantly, my bankroll is still in good shape. All I need is
one good session at the same limit and I can recover my entire loss and
maybe even make a small net win.
Now compare that to what happens when a player stays in the game and starts
chasing his or her loses. That 30 big bet loss can easily turn in to 60 or
70 big bets. You're stuck $1,400 before you finally run out of money or
just throw in the towel. It turned into a marathon session and you're too
damned tired to see straight, let alone objectively analyze your play. Now
you get home and try to sleep. You know that it's going to take you at
least three winning sessions in a row just to claw your way back to even.
The more serious consideration is that you just dumped 23% of your total
bankroll in one session. Plus, it's psychologically harder to regain a
winning mind set - and mind set is a big part of the game. You're kicking
yourself for not having the discipline to quit sooner. When you walk back
into the poker room, every one who was in that game, or has heard about it,
knows you lost your ass and they're going to be looking for a way to exploit
it. The negative effect of a big loss can be cumulative and impact your
future play. No poker player wins all the time; the difference is having
the discipline to manage your money and control your losses.
Thank you for allowing me to share these four poker tips. I hope you found
something of value in them.
Gary Carson's take?
It's amazing how tightly wrapped this guy is. He's found 4 different ways to say "be disciplined, keep your eye on the goal".
There's no way anybody this tightly wrapped could play a game with 4 maniacs and
I'm running out of gas, sadly. But at least I got up a decent little post for my faithful readers on a Sunday night. Lord knows I love me some Destroying Workplace Productivity.
A reader sent me this rant but didn't give me the attribution. I hope you get a few chuckles out of it, regardless.
Practical Texas hold-em poker strategy.
Texas holdem is boring. Especially if you take it seriously. But everyone finds themselves sitting down at the green oval holdem table from time to time due to peer-pressure or curiosity of poker.
There's plenty of Texas holdem books, Texas holdem websites, and Texas holdem instructors that can teach you Texas holdem strategy and techniques and bullshit on how to play well. But none of that really matters because even if you play poker better than everyone at the table, you'll still lose all your money to the rake. So if you're going to lose money playing Texas holdem, at least do it with some style.
So in case you find yourself stranded in a Casino with $500 in your pocket, here are some practical Texas holdem tips and strategies that I've come up with.
Talk constantly about girl problems, family problems, financial problems, anything personal.
Blow smoke into the middle of the Texas holdem table.
Tip the dealer a quarter on a huge pot and say, "Here ya go, buuuudy."
Ask if you can deal.
When you catch a lucky river, tell people it was all skill.
Say, "Alright, let's see some pocket aces" every time you're dealt.
Always claim to have the stone-cold nuts on every flop. If the flop is king-king-three, say, "Wow, good thing I didn't fold my pocket kings heheheh."
If you folded before the flop, say, "Dammit, I would have won that hand."
When you get dealt Aces, check to the river and whine about how your pocket aces always get snapped.
Accuse people of being suck-outs when you never had anything to begin with.
State the obvious after the fact. "Man, you should have folded."
Inform others in great detail of how they screwed up and what they can do to correct their playing flaws.
Request a deck change every three hands.
Change seats constantly and complain it's because of the smokers. Make all your complaints in betwee drags.
Ask people why they're wearing sunglasses inside.
Contemplate every decision for at least thirty seconds.
Completely misuse poker jargon. "Sweet! I have the inside outside nutter butter gutshut flush-house draw."
When it's your blind, throw the chips into the dealers fingers while he's shuffling.
Dress up like a Jew with the hair curlies and everything. Then buy in for ten thousand dollars and don't play a single hand.
Bring a plastic animal and play from its point of view. Example: "Biglette the Frog folds"... "Biglette the Frog raises".. "Biglette the Frog is not pleased with the river card."
Make awful puns.
-"Damn, my river was dry."
-"I fold.. tower."
-"Four to call.. protocol..."
-"I'm raisin.. no, no, like sundried."
-"I'm pot commited. I just can't stop smoking the stuff."
-"Look, I have a chip on my shoulder."
-"I check.. oslavokia."
-"I put almonds in the freezer and got the stone cold nuts."
Set a picture of a famous poker player in front of you. Show him your cards and ask for advice. "What do you think, Mr. Moneymaker?"
Pick at your chode underneath the table and smear the underbutter on the chips and cards.
Tell neighbors stories about really lame hands you've had. "Last week I caught an ace on the turn and won hahahaha."
- When you lose, say, "Sure, you may have won the chips, but I won the satisfaction of knowing you're touching chips that I tainted with chode paste."
Count out large bets in stacks of two.
Always ask the dealer, "How much can I bet?"
Always put the wrong number of chips out.
Ask the dealer to slow down.
Ask other people what they had.
Whenever you lose, sigh and mutter, "Every blind squirrel finds a nut."
Buy 400 chips and set them in front of you in stacks of five.
Stack your chips like stairs and be like, "Look, it's stairs." And have your plastic animal climb up and down them and make faggity little sound effects.
Thanks for reading, if anyone did. Any just in case, I'm gonna leave you with this little tidbit for the chat at Full Tilt Poker between Doyle Brunson and Phil Ivey:
Ivey and Doyle golf convo on FTP
Was just railing the HORSE game and caught this chat...
texdolly: PHIL...WE ARE PLAYING 100,000 A HOLE
Phil Ivey: don't tell me that i will be on the next flight back
texdolly: PHIL..U HEAR ME?
Phil Ivey: i just noticed what u said
texdolly: BOOBBY WON 2 MILLION MORE
texdolly: SEXTON BIG AL AND ME
Phil Ivey: when
Phil Ivey: wow
texdolly: HE SHOT 33 SCRAMBLING
Phil Ivey: going to call you now
texdolly: I SHOT AT 100 FOR 200,000
Wow, I just discovered Phil Ivey's high school graduation picture. I rule.
I'm sorry to go all off-topic here, but I just read this hilarious stuff about Rosie.
Allow me to post this nonsense and then make it up to you by doing a small photo dump.
Sometimes I easily slip past drunk into stupid. This is one of those times.
Over at her blog.
Scan down for the "Parsons" entry, a slam on O'Reilly in, um, poetical form, which alludes to the Parsons character from 1984, a book which Rosie did not read when it was assigned to her in eighth grade and has not of course read since, but which is easy to quote from due to the magic of internet searches.
sitting on my sofa
thinking of u and ur mind control
so many questions fill my head
what really happened at WTC
how did bush get iran to take hostages
what is that smell
o its just my mung cheese
it smells like a cocktail of gorditas
peace all 2 u and ur cats.
My favorite comment:
I knew it was bad, but... there exists no word in the English language (which Rosie seems not familar with) to describe exactly how bad her "poetry" is. It's like something a 13 year old girl would send as a text message after smoking half an eighth of high-grade pot and huffing 3 cans of spray paint.
I may have to pour some bourbon directly into my ear to wash that unspeakable abomination from my brain. There is no way in hell she has an IQ higher than 85. I can't believe they let a borderline retard adopt kids.
Dear Lord, someone went ahead and posted Rosie style poetry.
Here it is in all it's brilliance:
beauty and intelligence
lonely i walk
to the fridgitater
fudgesickle U R my friend
U don't judge me
and I don't judge U
Xcept I think U should be bigger and have more chocolate
Link of the Day:
Happy Easter, Cadenhead!
Sunday, April 08, 2007
As a huge Sopranos fan, I've been waiting for tonight. Not to mention a new Entourage for good measure. Life is sweet.
I'm going to start a long rumored uber-post. Hopefully, I can bang it out despite the must-see TV this evening.
Saw this press release I thought was topical:
Sopranos: Betus.com is offering odds on who gets whacked next!
Online gambling website BetUS.com has begun offering betting odds on which Sopranos character will be whacked first in anticipation of the final season which begins April 8 in the US.
Last season, oddsmakers frenetically pulled Sopranos betting odds after Tony was shot by his own uncle in the first episode. Odds were set at ridiculously high payouts on Tony with a number of people placing the bet.
Because it is the final season, bookmakers like BetUS.com are anticipating the possibility that a major popular character could be killed off early on.
This season's favorite like seasons before is Christopher. He is listed at +200 odds, paying out $200 for every $100 bet.
Johnny Sack is next in line with +350 payout odds. This would translate into a $350 win for every $100 bet.
Not surprisingly, Uncle Junior comes in with +400 odds as does Paulie Walnuts.
Silvio is set at +700 odds. And not taking a chance, BetUS.com gives Tony Soprano shorter odds with a payout of $800 for every $100 bet.
All Content Copyright Iggy 2003-2007
Information on this site is intended for news and entertainment purposes only.
100% Signup Bonus at PokerStars.com up to $50