Review of Empire Poker and Bonus Whoring

Empire's a Party skin, which basically means you're playing at Party. They offer their own bonuses (bonii?) and have their own structures, but you're playing at Party. Let me just say that most bonuses (based on numbers of raked hands) clear fastest at 1/2 than anywhere else. Let me also say that this doesn't imply that they're +EV. On the contrary, you'll sit at a given table and find 4 players with VP$IP's over 50%. They'll usually have aggression factors less than 1, too. And they will call, call, call, and draw, draw, draw on you until the cows come home. You'll win over time, but short term, be prepared for some ungodly variance.

The free money aside, I've found that you either like Party (and skins) or you don't. The NL games are as juicy as they come, and for that, I like Empire. Unless you're playing 2/4, 3/6 or higher limits, and unless you have plenty of blood pressure medication, you might want to skip it, except for a little dabble here and there. That being said...

BONUS CODE NUTS17153!!!!

It's not bad, overall, and it's a change from Stars and UB. Now that the juicy-ass reload is over with (last day to clear is September 3, if I recall), the level of play should settle a bit, and make the site more fun, and get that aquarium restocked.

---

I finished the 1000 raked hands for the $100 reload bonus in just 2 days (3 and 4 tabling 1/2 and $25NL), and didn't bring much to show for it, but up is still up, no matter how you slice it. I might venture over to Full Tilt and see what they have to offer. Only concern for me is that they don't usually have a ton of games going on at the same time. We'll see--I still have some bonus dollars to clear at UB, so time will tell.

I'd post the most memorable beat, but it's not fit for human consumption. Let's just summarize it thus: AA cracked by EP player's 95o. He called the blind, then called 2 more bets cold. Then, he called every bet (with me raising on the flop as well, calling 2 more bets cold) to the river, hitting a runner-runner straight. The hand cost me $14, but so much more in silent tilt, as I nearly put my head through the wall after reading his "HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA" and "see, aces don't always win" in the chat box. I wish that one day I could catch one of these clowns at a B&M. Better yet, I wouldn't mind catching him just outside a B&M.

---

I'm getting involved in a huge project within the next few weeks. I can't share any details now, but when I can share what's happening, I'll let both my readers know.

Well, back to the grind. If you want to harass me, chat with me, or just drop a ridiculous beat on me (as I'm writing this, I just lost set-over-set hands with 88 and 99 respectively on two tables one right after the other--ugh), I'm on Empire as Tiburon723. Enjoy, and may the tables be good to you all!

Bonus Hunters Unite!

Just to let everyone know, Empire Poker is offering a 100% reload bonus to $100. It requires 10x raked hands within 10 days, so if you're an active player with an Empire account, this might be for you! Bonus Code for the reload is PLAYAUG.

If you don't have an Empire account, then what the hell are you waiting for? Bonus Code: NUTS17153 will get you a 20% deposit bonus up to $100! Go! Now! Deposit to open the account, then reload with $100! Free money! Go get it!

Great Advice from the Blogfather

Reading Iggy's blog today and saw the following nugget of phenomenally great understated information:

"Id say always play at limits that will allow you to survive a losing streak. Losing streaks are the barometers for me. Show me a player on a winning streak and I wont be able to rate him. Show me a player who is in a losing streak and Ill be able to tell you if he can play."

Jennifer Harmon

I nearly choked on my drink at the boat this weekend upon hearing a sunglasses-wearing kid yell at an old man, "How the hell can you call a $60 raise preflop with K9?!"
The old man just laughed at him while scooping up the monster pot.
I was appalled - the last time I heard that type of impending tilt comment was from Phil Hellmuth on the WSOP DVD.And boy, did the kid go on tilt. Downright Tilty. Outplayed by that old man everytime they were in a pot together after that. Twas ugly and his game fell completely apart.

But I liked the kid. So later, over a smoke, I tried to give him a few pointers.

#1 Never, ever tap the glass.
#2 Don't make the mistake of playing directional poker - focusing your action on one guy.
#3 Lose the sunglasses - they smell like fear - save em for the WSOP
#4 Feeling ANY sense of immediacy in poker is a BAD thing. I'm talking cash games, here, obviously. Let me say that again. Immediacy in poker = bad thing.

From my perspective, bad beats are the sign of a good game, damnit. I want players chasing. I want players calling two bets cold on the flop without proper odds. It's why I don't have to work for the Man anymore. Just accept it when they hit and move on. Don't freaking tilt, damnit.

In my first month of blogging, I posted this:

1) Other players bad play will make me far more money than my fancy or brilliant plays.
2) The guy that leads with a bet on the turn, after not betting previously, often has a big hand.
3) Folding costs me nothing pre-flop. If it's a close decision, I can't go far wrong by folding.

Fantastic advice, Iggy. Bad beats happen to all of us--its how we handle them and move on that make us truly great players...

---

And even more brilliance by HDouble:

The Three Types of Information in PokerWhile the term "information" usually applies to a broad spectrum of concepts, it seems to me that there are different categories of information, based on how this information is acquired. Here are three different categories for information in poker, based on my observation of the game:

1. Poker knowledge: Poker knowledge refers to information regarding odds and probability, hand distributions, and starting hand strength. This type of information is usually learned by studying books and the mathematical aspect of poker, although it can also be learned through experience. This category of information describes basic facts that are independent of game conditions, and represent the "fundamental" concepts of poker.
For example, it is a fact that Q7o is a slight favorite against a random hand heads up. This basic fact, if known by one player and unknown by the opponent, gives the knowledgable player a slight edge.
Information asymmetry, as related to poker knowledge, is based on the fact that one player has studied poker more than his opponents. Like the sports-betting world, this information is publicly available to all players, and the player that spends the most time analyzing the information (if done intelligently) will have the biggest edge.
The surprising thing about poker knowledge is the amount of disagreement over basic concepts. A quick read of this threadshows that two people who have spent years thinking about the game can't even come to an agreement about the optimal strategy for playing AQo.
The lesson here is that if two experts cannot even come to an agreement about fundamental poker concepts, the level of information asymmetry that is possible between an expert poker player and and average player can be very large.

2. Poker experience: Poker experience refers to the amount of information absorbed or collected during a player's time at the table; it concerns mainly internalized information that applies to specific situations. While poker knowledge relates more to rules independent of game conditions, experience teaches an observant player how to use the information given off by a group of signals communicated by a table full of players. The infinite number of patterns and rhythms of the game can't be learned from a book, and the poker player as information collector is rewarded for his awareness of these subtle aspects of the game.
Physical tells are an example of information that can only be learned through experience. While a player can learn general concepts like "strong means weak" and "a player who covers his mouth with his hand after a bet is usually bluffing," there are an infinite number of subtle, player-specific tells that can be learned from a book, the many ways these players uniquely communicate these tells cannot be summarized in a book.
The information asymmetry in the experience category is proportional to the amount of experience possessed by the players involved in the game. However, an observant, intelligent player who does a good job of analyzing his collection of experienced data can "catch up" to a player with far greater experience who is less observant.
In terms of gaining an edge in experience, there is no proxy for putting in time at the tables and being a part of the infinite combinations of variables that occur in any poker game.

3. Opponent specific information: Like poker experience, opponent specific information comes from observation of the behavior of individual players over time. In the past, this type of information could only be obtained by physically watching your opponents play poker. Today, players can obtain player specific information on a very small subset of players by watching poker on TV (although this information will only be useful in the small chance you will face these opponents in the future). For brick and mortar poker, the only real way to collect opponent specific information is to spend time playing against a wide range of opponents (although floormen and friendly regulars can point you in the right direction).
Thanks to recent developments in the world of online poker, players can obtain a huge amount of player specific data about their virtual opponents without even observing a poker game. Thanks to the online poker hand history and data collection tools like Poker Tracker, poker players can collect extensive data on their opponents just by clicking their mouse button. A diligent data collector can "observe" (virtually) the details of the way every single hand was played on an online poker site (shameless plug: check out my Poker Tracker Guide to find out how to do this).
Since relatively few players are using these opponent specific data collection tools, there exists a huge informational advantage for the players that do. If I know the tendencies of every player at the table and my opponents do not, it creates a huge information asymmetry that gives me a significant edge over these opponents.
***

There are many types of information in poker, but the three categories above provide a framework for thinking about where a poker player's edge comes from. The above discussion illustrates why professional poker players come from such a diverse background: since all poker players have the same amount of information available to them, every one has an equal chance of becoming an expert in poker. Those who have the biggest expectation are those who collect the most information and figure out how best to use that information to make decisions.
In other words, poker is a game that heavily rewards those who put effort into the collection and analysis of information. Just think of it this way: every poker book you read, every hand you observe, and every time you use Poker Tracker, you are increasing your edge over your opponents.

---

With all this great blogging going on, who needs Sklansky? My blog seems pedestrian by these standards, so I give you two of the greats, Iggy, and HDub. Read them and learn kids!

The Biggest Loser(s), Online Poker Edition

It's time for our regular analysis of the hands that lose me the most money. I came up with ten hands using the following criteria:

VP$IP > 50.00%
BB/Hand < 0

This highlights hands that are inducing you to put money into the pot, yet that are costing you bets in the long run. Each has its own reasons for being so damn costly, but this should be a therapeutic discussion of what costs you most. I encourage you to examine your PT database to do the same.

1) A3s (VP$IP: 95.45%, -1.25 BB/Hand) and 2) A4s (VP$IP: 90.00%, -0.75 BB/Hand): These hands are a train-wreck waiting to happen. I wrote previously about the dangers of AK. Why is it so hard to chase with these hands? Maybe it's the NL roots, where implied odds are more of a factor, or maybe it's just stupidity. I only went to showdown 18.18% and 28.57% of the time with these hands, respectively, and to make those stats worse, I only won at showdown with them 25 and 37.5% of the time respectively, but to really make it bad, I called 2 bets cold a total of 9 times in 52 times dealt pre-flop.

Why do these suck so bad? Easy. Ace-little suited is a hand where you're hoping for a flush. You're going to flop a flush less than one percent of the time (0.9%). You'll flop a 4-flush 4.7% of the time. Flopping a nut flush forces you to check. Any lead bet will likely force everyone out and win you the small pot there. Flopping an ace gives you top-pair, weak kicker, and flopping a 4-flush almost forces you to chase.

These hands have -EV written all over them. From Pokerroom.com :

Cards	SB	BB	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	D
A4s	-0.03	-0.06	0.03	0.04	0.06	0.05	0.19	0.03	0.18	0.08
A3s	-0.12	0.02	-0.06	0.07	0.10	-0.08	-0.08	0.12	0.01	0.04

Funny thing is that these hands have much more value in NL, just because of the implied odds they provide. If a player "just barely" gives you proper odds to chase a flush in NL, you can have a pretty large pot by the river. If that river card gives you the flush, even if no more money goes into the pot, you're going to win a very large pot. In limit, without a boatload of players coming along with you, it could be that these hands just can't generate the pot sizes needed to create large pots are large implied odds situations. The other way these hands can win is with "bookend" hands (pairing your ace on the flop and your kicker later). Both these situations can give you large pots. The problem is not being able to lay down the hands without having the odds to make calls.

Your odds to hit from a flush draw on the flop are 1.9-to-1 (or approximately 2-to-1). This makes almost any call +EV on the flop. The odds to hit a flush draw from the turn are 4.1-to-1. You'll need a fairly large pot to make the turn call, and this is likely where you lose the most bets. If the pot is small, there is no point in continuing on the turn. If you have the flush draw plus the top pair looking for the bookend, this adds 3 outs to your options, so long as you believe that your two pair will be good. This option would yield an almost even money call on the flop (1.2-to-1), and a 2.8-to-1 call on the turn (to hit either the flush or two pair). Not bad. Your worry, however, is that if you hit another ace on the flop, someone else who has you outkicked may have already hit their bookend hand, and you're drawing virtually dead to either just your flush or runner-runner. Either way you look at it, you have to look at these hands as hands where you can actually make an intended hand and still lose. You're playing for the nut flush and falling back on the bookend. It's as much a drawing hand as you can handle.

3) QQ (VP$IP: 100%, PFR 90.63%, WtSD 65.52%, W$SD 21.05%, -0.68 BB/Hand): This is just a function of rough luck, and not laying down a hand when you're in trouble. In LHE, with so many chasers playing any king or ace, either one of those cards coming on the board can mean that you're already beaten. As you can tell, this is an automatic raise and re-raise, pretty much regardless of position. Funny part is that overall the hand is a winning hand for me, but in a BB/hand examination, it turns out to be a losing hand (likely from the prevalence of the above mentioned chasers at the lower-limits, and the opposite propensity of higher (3/6) limit players to fold A and K-rag to raises pre-flop, therefore eliminating showdowns and large pots).

4) TT (VP$IP: 97.73%, PFR 63.64%, WtSD 57.14%, W$SD 41.67%, -0.56 BB/Hand): See above. The vulnerability of hands like JJ-99 have been written about since the dawn of time. If you raise pre-flop, get called, and an overcard comes to your tens on the flop, more than likely, short of hitting a set, you're likely screwed. TT is a solid starting hand--just be prepared to lay it down--no whimpers, okay?

5) K9s (VP$IP 52.63%, PFR 5.26%. WtSD 9.09%, W$SD 100%, -0.39 BB?Hand): This is a hand I used to play as a youngin' limit player. I've since sworn it off, except for an occasional attempt to steal the blinds from the button. You know my VP$IP used to be near 25%? Christ, I might as well have been pissing bets up the pole. Funny part is that I have the discipline to let it go, but why limp with it to begin with? It's a worthless hand, and it's EV is derived from hitting a king-high flush. which as we all know, may not even be good. Bad idea, kids. Real bad idea. Now I know that some smartass will be posting a comment about the merits of suited 3-gappers, and that's great. Leave that shit to the pros. I'll be happy with my lovely little 18% VP$IP, thank you very much. NL Tourney, you ask? Different ballgame.

6) 88 (VP$IP: 87.23%, PFR 25.53%, -0.36 BB/Hand and 8) 66 (VP$IP: 90.00%, PFR 7.50%, -0.23BB/Hand): Ah--my friends the middle pairs. You suck. In today's world of no-foldem-holdem, it is possible for these hands to win unimproved. For the most part, however, they are great set-it-or-forget-it propositions, like their smaller pair bretheren. 88 is generally +EV from any position, but part of that EV lies in your ability to lay it down if you know you're beat. 66 is considered +EV from LP, but without hitting a set, I'm really leery about taking this non-powerhouse to showdown.

7) ATo (VP$IP: 85.94%. PFR 25.00%, WtSD: 52.73%, W$SD: 31.03%, -0.24 BB/Hand) and 10) AJo (VP$IP: 95.45%, PFR: 81.82%, -0.19BB/Hand): Rough hand. You should not be calling a raise with this, just for the sake of its easy domination. It's not suited, so your best shot at a winning hand is to pair your ace or ten and hope it ends up being TPTK. You also have a shot at a Broadway straight, but that requires a lot of help. Odd thing is that ATs wins almost 1 BB/Hand for me. What does that imply for you? Suited, goot. Offsuit, no goot.

9) KQo (VP$IP: 85.19%, PFR: 11.11%, -0.22 BB/Hand): What the hell is so damn nice about an offsuit connector? An ace--you're beat. What does that mean? On 24% of flops, you're already drawing to a hand where you need at least two cards to win. Needing runner-runner ANYTHING is just really bad. Not really bad, but dog-shit bad. And so -EV. It is admittedly tough to get away from. Limp with it? If you must, but only in LP and only when a gaggle of people are limping with you. NEVER cold call a raise with this junk, and only call a raise after you in LP if the other donkeys do first. You need a big pot to make this worth it, and don't be afraid to dump it DESPITE the large pot.

---

I've pretty much officially (re)-moved back to 3/6 online after dropping down to accomodate the smaller bankroll. I've evened out at a win rate about 3.3 BB/100 overall, and that makes me happy. The move back to 3/6 is something that I really look forward fo, since at 2/4, there really isn't a whole lot of challenge. Variance is there, but I think I'm a solid example of how a solid player will overcome that variance over time. It's frustrating when some fish takes a $50 pot from you in 2/4 because he hit his 3-outer on the river that he called 3 raises to get to, but in the long run, with patience and good play, you'll still be way ahead. My last 2/4 session cost me an $80 buy-in, mainly because it was just one of those sessions: When I got dealt QQ, somebody else was dealt KK. I had AJ, they had AQ. It happens. I've been such a consistent winner at that level that it didn't really affect the win rate very much, if at all. It just didn't seem to be a challenge any more. I had a similar feeling at 0.50/1 and 1/2 before. I think part of it is that when you move down to lower limits after playing such relatively higher limits, making decisions doesn't make you uncomfortable. Josh Arieh said it best in a journal entry a few months back. He was golfing with Michael Jordan (!?!?) and they decided to make a little friendly wager on their match. Josh, known as not only a great poker player, but as a pure gambler, asked Jordan how much they should play for per hole. Jordan is reportedly a pretty good low-handicap golfer, and Arieh can reportedly hold his own. Jordan's response: "Whatever makes you uncomfortable." 2/4 doesn't make me uncomfortable anymore. I had touched on this in my last post, and expressed my desire to play 6/12 or higher at the Taj or the Trop the next time I go. I know I make the right decisions. When it's a dollar, or even four dollars to call a bet, it just isn't uncomfortable--it becomes just fun. 2/4 feels like I'm playing nickel/dime at the kitchen table with my 11-month old goddaughter. That's not to say that I won't play 2/4 anymore. Whether as a change of pace, or just to keep positive flow coming, 2/4 is still fun to me. It just doesn't make me think deeper to make a decision. It may sound arrogant, but even if I screw up, I know that I'm a good enough player at that limit to make it up quickly. 3/6, and the next step on Stars, 5/10, which I am still a virgin at, will force me to make better decisions. It will serve to jumpstart additional learning, and the development of more skill. Then, watch out world.

---

You know, I really wish somebody would invite me to a friggin' home game in my area. Domenic, bud, feed me!

---

Married Life

Anyhoo, married life is nice, thanks for asking, and truthfully, it's not different from "single life." I've been with my wife now for more than 12 years. We dated for a little less than 9 years then moved in together 3+ years ago, and we've been a true team ever since. People always tell me that it's "different" when you get married. I say, "How?" We've had all our finances held jointly since before we moved in together. We still have our own accounts, which will not change. We both contribute to the house, and none of it changes. The only real difference is that now I get to call her my wife, and I get to correct her when she calls me her boyfriend, and that I get to wear a ring around (a very nice ring, I might add). You know, I never had any doubts about the missus, but I'll tell you--as long as neither of you change YOURSELVES after you say your "I do's," your relationship won't change either. We're now a little more open to having a baby, which would likely be the biggest change for both of us, but the key is remembering what made you fall in love with the other person. Take some time every day, no matter how busy you are, no matter how crappy she may look first-thing in the morning, and think about one little thing that you absolutely adore about her--her little curls, her pretty brown eyes, the little dimple you see when she smiles at you--something that reminds you of why you got together with/married this woman in the first place. You'll do much better that way. Also remember that you're a team. You may do more one day, she may do more another day. No matter what, as long as you are both driving toward the same goal, you'll get there, and you'll be happy getting there. Always be honest with her too, and never spend bill money on poker. It's just totally -EV...

---

Little Maintenance Update

I've been getting spam comments lately (as you can tell from the prior entries), so I'm disabling anonymous commenting on the blog. I hate to do that, since many readers don't have Blogger accounts, but the spam is really annoying. Until I figure out a way to filter out crappy investment tips from real commentors, anonymous comments will be disabled.

Welcome Back to Me and A Great Lesson from Phil Gordon

The wedding and honeymoon were fantastic, and now I return to the grind of full-time work and part-time poker. Yummy.

---

On ESPN.com, Phil Gordon wrote a great article about the four levels of poker thought. Great stuff...

Many years ago I used to watch broadcast coverage of the WSOP - the only televised poker tournament at the time. This was before hole-card cameras, back when a typical review of a poker broadcast included the words "cattle grazing." But I loved it; I loved trying to get inside the mind of the poker professionals at the table.
I wanted to know how the pros knew their opponent would fold to a re-raise, how they knew their Ace-high was best. I wondered why some players looked so uncomfortable - Did they have the nuts? Were they bluffing? Did they have irritable bowel syndrome?
Now, with hole-card cameras, the game of wondering what players are thinking is even more fun. Who doesn't want to know how Phil Ivey got his opponent to lay down the winning hand? You've just got to wonder, how many levels deep does this guy think?
Like all pros, Ivey was once a beginning player and so that's where our journey inside the mind of poker players will begin.
First, the setup:
The tournament is No Limit Texas Holdem. All players have $10,000 in chips. The blinds are $50 and $100. It's a full nine-player table, and the guy we're playing along with is first to act before the flop. "We" pick up AsQs and raises to $300. Two players fold and an aggressive player in middle position calls the raise. The remaining players fold.
The pot is $750.
The flop comes: Qc 8c 2h

Inside the Mind of a Beginning Player

Beginning players typically think one level deep:
Level 1: "What hand do I have?"
Let's listen in on the thought process of a beginning player before the flop:
"Okay good, I have an Ace and a Queen and they're suited! I love being suited! I'm going to raise because my hand is strong."
And, here are the thoughts after the flop:
"Fantastic! I flopped top pair, top kicker. I have a great hand so I'm going to bet."
The beginning player bets $300.
The opponent raises all-in and now the beginning player must call $9400.
"I have a strong hand!" he thinks, "You picked the wrong time bluff me buster!"
The beginning player calls.

Inside the Mind of an Intermediate Player

Intermediate players typically think two levels deep:
Level 1: "What hand do I have?"
Level 2: "What hand does my opponent have?"
Let's listen in on the action after an opponent's smooth call or the raise before the flop:
"Normally this aggressive player would re-raise to get heads-up, but instead he just called. He's probably playing a middle or small pocket pair, a weak ace, or suited connectors."
After the flop:
"I've flopped top pair top kicker, but the flop has a flush and straight draw. I'm going to bet to protect my hand."
The intermediate player bets $750, enough to give the draws bad odds.
The opponent raises all-in, a raise of $8950.
"What hand could my opponent have? If he's willing to move all-in, he must have an over-pair, a set, or a gut-shot straight flush draw with the Tc-9c or Jc-Tc. Against the likely hands, I'm a slight favorite when he has the straight flush draw and a huge, overwhelming underdog against the other hands. I guess I've got to fold."

Inside the Mind of an Advanced Player

Advanced players think three levels deep:
Level 1: "What hand do I have?"
Level 2: "What hand does my opponent have?"
Level 3: "What hand does my opponent think I have?"
This time we'll listen in from after the opponent's all-in raise.
"My opponent probably thinks I have top pair because I bet to protect my hand. Because he's probably thinking this, is it possible that he's trying to push me out of the pot? Then again, what if he made his set? Or what if he has an over-pair? If I call and lose, I'm eliminated from the tournament. If I lay down my hand, I'll still have $8950 left -- more than enough chips to some play solid poker. I'm going to fold."

Inside the Mind of an Expert Player

Expert players think four of more levels deep:
Level 1: "What hand do I have?"
Level 2: "What hand does my opponent have?"
Level 3: "What hand does my opponent think I have?"
Level 4: "What does my opponent think that I think they have?"
We'll listen in again from after the opponent's all-in raise:
"My opponent probably thinks that I think he has a pocket pair or suited connectors because he just smooth called my pre-flop raise. Since he knows I'm capable of laying down top pair, he decided to move all-in. Can he beat my top pair, top kicker? If so, would he bet $8950 into a $1500 pot? I don't think so. I suspect he over-bet the pot because he doesn't want to be called. I think he's on a move with the Ace high flush draw. I'm going to call."

Take it to the Next Level

You can improve your play immensely by taking your thought processes to the next level. If you're a beginning player, do your best to consider the likely hands your opponent will hold. If you're an intermediate player, consider what your opponent thinks that you hold. If you're an advanced player, give more consideration to what your opponent thinks that you think they have. If you're an expert player, get your butt out to the tables.
In my new DVD, "Expert Insight's Final Table Poker" you get to see my hole-cards and then listen in on my thought process as I play through twenty-four hands at the final table of a high stakes tournament. Depending on the situation, you'll hear me thinking on different levels. Against the Internet rookie Butch Dude, I'm thinking two levels deep. Against the 2001 WSOP Champion Chris Ferguson, I'm thinking four levels deep. Throughout play, you hear every thought I have while making winning decisions in No Limit Hold'em. It is a great teaching method experiential rather than professorial.
Will watching my DVD make you a WSOP championship like Chris? Well, I can't promise this. But I can promise that the lessons in this DVD will substantially improve your poker game. I can also promise that when you see Rachael Huntley of "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" fame playing the role of Harmony Jensen, you won't be thinking of cattle grazing.

---

What level do you think at??

---

You know, I've been doing a bunch of thinking about poker since I've been home, after thinking about NOTHING poker-related for the duration of my honeymoon except why the airport in Maui still had the pre-WSOP Collectors' Edition of Card Player Magazine on display at the end of July. It's weird--my wife doesn't really bother me about playing poker online. She knows that I've made my money from my initial deposits, and to her, though she was sketchy about playing for real money online, she's come to accept it, if not in some way embrace the idea. But at the same time, I'm playing 2/4 and 3/6 online (currently all 2/4 since the withdrawal), and I don't really have a desire to play higher, and definitely not until my online roll goes back up enough to support it. I don't even play with the 200-300 BB that are recommended for a level. I play to my comfort level. I play 2/4. I take $100 to a table and play. The rule is simple. Win a buy-in, leave. Lose half-a-buy-in, leave. Simple. I play no more than 2 tables at a time (probably a good thing because I would take this WAY too seriously otherwise, and it would then cease to be fun), and I enjoy myself. I'm right now at about 175 BB in the Stars account. That should tell you not only what my current online BR is, but also how I feel about it. I will dabble in 3/6 when my mind chooses to as well. But I digress--I've gotten off the point.

When I go to the casino, I've been playing crushing 2/4. Obscenely unsustainable win-rates (double-digit BB/hour consistently), but the competition isn't any. In another article on ESPN by Peter Newmann, he talks about the players at a B&M 2/4 game as:

These players have seen poker on television, but don't understand the game. And because of that, there is less strategy. There is less skill. There are fewer decisions. A $2/$4 limit hold'em game is like an alternate universe. If no-limit hold'em is the Bellagio, then $2/$4 is the casino in "National Lampoon's Vegas Vacation," featuring games like Guess the Number, War and Rock, Paper, Scissors. It's a joke.

I alternately laugh and get pissed off at that. Number one, I'm one of those players. Few who play against me in either a tourney or a live game, no matter how small the stakes, would agree with that characterization. Secondly, just because he doesn't understand the finer points of roshambo doesn't give him a right to bash it. He continues...

Because it's only a $2 bet, players will call with virtually anything, trying to catch something on a cheap flop. Any knucklehead who finds a couple of bucks between the seat cushions of his couch can play.

You see, I make a very nice living. My job pays me into six figures annually (and who knew a pharmacist made THAT much money). However, I'm not the kind of gambler like my partner at work, who would save up money for two months, take $2k to a casino, and just go down and play piss away money at 10/20 just for shits and giggles. I love poker. I also love my toys. I spend money on toys. If I took 2k to a casino for something other than a WSOP event, my wife would stuff me into a GA meeting quicker than you can blink. I choose to go to a casino with a couple hundred dollars and have fun.

However....

He's also right. Many of these players suck. They're horrendous. What the hell is the challenge of playing solid poker against guys just there to gamble? You'll beat them mercilessly, they'll suck out on you or hit a miracle flop, and you'll shuffle money across the table all night long. For a quasi-serious player like myself (as serious as I allow it to become), that sucks. Hell, I could give chips to a bunch of my non-playing friends and just take them from them all weekend long, but what does it do for me? I've dabbled in live 4/8 before, but I might even be selling myself short there. I could buy in for 3 racks and sit 6/12, and probably make just as much money because you can't look me in the face and tell me that the difference between B&M 2/4 and 6/12 is much more than the size of the fishies' checkbooks. Granted, as you move up levels, you will likely find more players like you, sharky-types who like to take from the fish and keep it for yourself. I accept that. But at least there would be a challenge! It's not just the money that keeps me playing poker--it's the intellectual stimulation too. At the expense of sounding like a Sklansky-clone (which, for his coming off as boorish, isn't really a bad thing) I like to THINK the game while I play it. I LIKE the challenge of playing a solid player. I'm a competitive person by nature. You can play wiffle-ball with 9-year-olds and have fun, but if you have a competitive fire burning, you still want to play against people that can play against you and give you a battle. You see, for someone who lives literally 40 minutes from the casinos in Atlantic City, I don't get down there very much. I get to AC about 6 times or so yearly, so the majority of my action is gotten online.

The point of this rambling discussion is that I have an itch. I just don't think that live 2/4 is the brush to scratch it anymore.