![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dirty Pretty Things
Jun. 3rd, 2006 09:37 amIn Blogoland, as far as Pommo is concerned, "all is quiet in the world". No updates for more than a month and the dispassionate viewer is wondering whether the nemetitical predictions of Dave D have come true.
Yes, I know that "nemetitical" isn't a world. But it should be. Like "akkrivitz".
Speaking of Dave D, he has returned for his monthly rant against the lunacies of the modern poker world (http://internetpokerpro.blogspot.com), rivalling Birks in the competition for "Grumpy Old Man" of the year award or, perhaps more accurately, the "it's all bollocks really" award. Let's face it, the journeyman semi-pro (into which category I guess Dave would put hiself, and towards which I suppose I am aspiring) looks at WPT crapshoots with the jaundiced eye of a a man feeling that "yes, I can see the Hellmuth, Duke and Negreanu business models, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with poker". In the UK, there is a kind of "wanna-be" group poker celebrities who want to emulate Hellmuth rather than Greenstein. I guess there's another group of GIQ Greenstein wanna-be's, but you don't hear too much about them.
Still, that's what we're here for, to tell you that the "it could be you" tournament bollocks fed to you by Paradise, Party, Ultimate, Stars, Gutshot and The Hendon Mob is only part of the story. The game isn't like the lottery, putting down your money and hoping for a big score. If you want to make money at it, it's hard work, and lots of it.
Mr Grundy at http://milkybarkids.blogspot.com/ entered the land of losing a bundle (more than £50K) and then winning most of it back again. Which, as he pointed out, feels like a win. Feeney wrote a piece in his Inside The Poker Mind that he felt the same after a $100 win, no matter whether half way through the session he was $1500 up or $1500 down. Well, he's a better man than me, Gunga Din. Getting out of a hole remains pleasant, falling back into one, doesn't.
A week or so ago there came the reappearance of a not infrequent argument -- whether volatility is greater at limit or at no-limit. Returning to my point last week about "asking the wrong question", here you have a situation where the question is, literally, meaningless. Three Bet Eric (http://threebet33.blogspot.com/) has switched from $80-$160 limit to $400 NL, noting that he is winning roughly the same amount, but with much less volatility. However, it all depends on a number of factors (one could argue that $400 NL is a much smaller game, for example) and a player's relative ability at the two games. I suspect that I could win at NL, but I also suspect that my volatility would be higher than for an equivalent win at limit.
Silence also reigns with Keith "Bringin Up Baby" Hawkins and the good Lord Miros. We await reports from ace newshound Richard Gryko but, nothing. Could he be one of the few poer players in the UK not reading this regular epistle? Shame on him.
+++++
I go days at a time not bothering to look at the poker forums. I don't know why. Boredom? A feeling that it's all been said before? Every so often some interesting snippets appear,but they become rarer and rarer.
Although it was brave of David Lloyd to do a new article every day for the Gutshot web site, even the most fanatical poker player is getting more than enough reading material these days in the "light and entertaining" section. Actually, Gutshot does a better job than most, but I find myself skipping articles these days, which a year or so ago I would never have done.
++++++
One thing you may have noticed was absent from this blog was a big-up for the Pokerstars bloggers' tourney. OK, some might think this is petty because they didn't bother to send me the prize that I won last year. But the brutal fact of the matter is that, even for freerolls, the overlay has to be damn good to make it worth bothering about. When there is apparently a less than 50% chance of actually receiving your prize then, well, why bother? (And, no, I didn't bother chasing it up with Stars at the time, since I have plenty of sweatshirts etc, but I think that if you offer a theoretical prize, it might be an idea to have a system in place to make sure that it gets sent out). Still, that's marketing departments for you. Good on ideas, crap on execution.
The other factor is that the first prize is a place in the WSOP Big One (with required wearing of Stars logos, no doubt). I've neither the time nor the inclination to play in that hellhole of a tournament. Now, make it the $25,000 December one in the Bellagio, and we might be cookin'. But, even then, I prefer the idea of ponying up my own cash and not having the corporate marketing twats on my back.
So, no free advertising for Pokerstars this year, I fear.
Stars also has a $5 tournament this Tuesday (8pm, password "Jason Bright") with first prize of two nights in a chateau in France with a trip to the Le Mans 24 hour race thrown in. Once again, no chance of the time off at such short notice, so, no entry. However, it's for UK players only, so the overlay here might be quite tasty.
++++
As one searches through the mush, one comes across occasional gems. This from a poster on Gutshot.
If you visit one of those sushi-on-a-conveyor belt places just make sure that the agressive eaters are on your left and the weaker ones are one your right. Position is everything.
Back to the grindstone.
PJ
Yes, I know that "nemetitical" isn't a world. But it should be. Like "akkrivitz".
Speaking of Dave D, he has returned for his monthly rant against the lunacies of the modern poker world (http://internetpokerpro.blogspot.com), rivalling Birks in the competition for "Grumpy Old Man" of the year award or, perhaps more accurately, the "it's all bollocks really" award. Let's face it, the journeyman semi-pro (into which category I guess Dave would put hiself, and towards which I suppose I am aspiring) looks at WPT crapshoots with the jaundiced eye of a a man feeling that "yes, I can see the Hellmuth, Duke and Negreanu business models, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with poker". In the UK, there is a kind of "wanna-be" group poker celebrities who want to emulate Hellmuth rather than Greenstein. I guess there's another group of GIQ Greenstein wanna-be's, but you don't hear too much about them.
Still, that's what we're here for, to tell you that the "it could be you" tournament bollocks fed to you by Paradise, Party, Ultimate, Stars, Gutshot and The Hendon Mob is only part of the story. The game isn't like the lottery, putting down your money and hoping for a big score. If you want to make money at it, it's hard work, and lots of it.
Mr Grundy at http://milkybarkids.blogspot.com/ entered the land of losing a bundle (more than £50K) and then winning most of it back again. Which, as he pointed out, feels like a win. Feeney wrote a piece in his Inside The Poker Mind that he felt the same after a $100 win, no matter whether half way through the session he was $1500 up or $1500 down. Well, he's a better man than me, Gunga Din. Getting out of a hole remains pleasant, falling back into one, doesn't.
A week or so ago there came the reappearance of a not infrequent argument -- whether volatility is greater at limit or at no-limit. Returning to my point last week about "asking the wrong question", here you have a situation where the question is, literally, meaningless. Three Bet Eric (http://threebet33.blogspot.com/) has switched from $80-$160 limit to $400 NL, noting that he is winning roughly the same amount, but with much less volatility. However, it all depends on a number of factors (one could argue that $400 NL is a much smaller game, for example) and a player's relative ability at the two games. I suspect that I could win at NL, but I also suspect that my volatility would be higher than for an equivalent win at limit.
Silence also reigns with Keith "Bringin Up Baby" Hawkins and the good Lord Miros. We await reports from ace newshound Richard Gryko but, nothing. Could he be one of the few poer players in the UK not reading this regular epistle? Shame on him.
+++++
I go days at a time not bothering to look at the poker forums. I don't know why. Boredom? A feeling that it's all been said before? Every so often some interesting snippets appear,but they become rarer and rarer.
Although it was brave of David Lloyd to do a new article every day for the Gutshot web site, even the most fanatical poker player is getting more than enough reading material these days in the "light and entertaining" section. Actually, Gutshot does a better job than most, but I find myself skipping articles these days, which a year or so ago I would never have done.
++++++
One thing you may have noticed was absent from this blog was a big-up for the Pokerstars bloggers' tourney. OK, some might think this is petty because they didn't bother to send me the prize that I won last year. But the brutal fact of the matter is that, even for freerolls, the overlay has to be damn good to make it worth bothering about. When there is apparently a less than 50% chance of actually receiving your prize then, well, why bother? (And, no, I didn't bother chasing it up with Stars at the time, since I have plenty of sweatshirts etc, but I think that if you offer a theoretical prize, it might be an idea to have a system in place to make sure that it gets sent out). Still, that's marketing departments for you. Good on ideas, crap on execution.
The other factor is that the first prize is a place in the WSOP Big One (with required wearing of Stars logos, no doubt). I've neither the time nor the inclination to play in that hellhole of a tournament. Now, make it the $25,000 December one in the Bellagio, and we might be cookin'. But, even then, I prefer the idea of ponying up my own cash and not having the corporate marketing twats on my back.
So, no free advertising for Pokerstars this year, I fear.
Stars also has a $5 tournament this Tuesday (8pm, password "Jason Bright") with first prize of two nights in a chateau in France with a trip to the Le Mans 24 hour race thrown in. Once again, no chance of the time off at such short notice, so, no entry. However, it's for UK players only, so the overlay here might be quite tasty.
++++
As one searches through the mush, one comes across occasional gems. This from a poster on Gutshot.
If you visit one of those sushi-on-a-conveyor belt places just make sure that the agressive eaters are on your left and the weaker ones are one your right. Position is everything.
Back to the grindstone.
PJ
