![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Undercurrents
Oct. 17th, 2006 07:43 amWhen I receive anything from Full Tilt entitled "Tips From The Pros", it usually heads straight for the recycle bin (and why is it called that? Is Microsoft making some claim for ecological friendliness here?) but one that I received yesterday from Clonie Gowan, about how to cope with a partner if you are a poker player (and how to cope with a poker-playing partner), got me interested.
Partly this was because it involved the metagame. However, one particular point struck home. It was that the partner should understand that a professional poker player can't control his (or, in this case, her) time. You never know when Rammin' Jammin' Jim from Arkansas is going to turn up. It might be a birthday, or Christmas, or an anniversary.
The point here is that it finally explodes the myth that a poker-playing professional is a free spirit. The low-level grinder might be able to live the John Fox lifestyle, playing when he or she feels like it; but at the higher level it is a bit more like being a doctor on permanent 24-huor call. When the action arrives, the poker player has to respond. The Camel put out a post a year or so ago, saying that when a certain player arrived at the high stakes tables (rumoured to be Gus Hansen, by the way) Keith would "drop everything" to play in that game.
In this sense, the high-stakes cash professional is even less free than the tournament professional. At least the latter knows when the start time is likely to be and when the finish time is likely to be. For the cash player, you play as long as the live one is around, and that is that.
+++++++++++
Played quite a few hands last night on Full Tilt and about 45 minutes' worth on Ultimate. The Ultimate $2-$4 games were particularly tough -- playing more like $15-$30. perhaps I had been spoilt by the Full Tilt $3-$6 games. However, the raise and reraise nature of things on UB meant that, even though I only broke even (plus $5.00, to be precise) I accumulated a fair whack of bonus dollars.
++++++++++
On 2+2 the discussion has finally got round to how to beat weak-tight donkeys (or "nits" as they are called there) rather than how to beat loose-passive games. So, just the 18 months behind the times for 2+2. Good going.
I'm convinced that a large proportion of the posters on 2+2 fora are railbirds and trolls who never actually play, and so they rush to folow the conventional wisdom. That wisdom is now that most games are populated by weak-tights. But you all know that anyway, 'cos you read here.
+++++
You have to admire the Chinese punters. ICBC is being floated in China and Hong Kong and the retail punters are going mad for it. The FT this morning quotes a professional saying that he is spending $12K of his own money and is borrowing another $115K "because the price is going to go up". No point in asking these guys about bankroll management, or gearing.
I think it must be tied up with ancestor worship, or theories of predestination, but many Chinese seem to have no concept of the laws of probability. Either something will happen or it won't. There is no randomness. There's no point in saying "I have six outs" to them, because, as far as they are concerned, the pack has already been shuffled, the cards are already in the dealer's hand. Either the next card will be the card you want, or it won't. It has already been decided.
I've seen this in betting shiops, with Chinese waiters putting all their money on a horse because "it will win". It's decided. The look of disbelief on their faces when the horse loses is quite amazing. And yet, they come back the following day, once again fuelled by relentless optimism that yesterday was an aberration, a flaw in the reading of the runes. Today will be different.
These gamblers are not fooled by randomness, because, to them, the concept is alien.
++++++++++++++++++
Partly this was because it involved the metagame. However, one particular point struck home. It was that the partner should understand that a professional poker player can't control his (or, in this case, her) time. You never know when Rammin' Jammin' Jim from Arkansas is going to turn up. It might be a birthday, or Christmas, or an anniversary.
The point here is that it finally explodes the myth that a poker-playing professional is a free spirit. The low-level grinder might be able to live the John Fox lifestyle, playing when he or she feels like it; but at the higher level it is a bit more like being a doctor on permanent 24-huor call. When the action arrives, the poker player has to respond. The Camel put out a post a year or so ago, saying that when a certain player arrived at the high stakes tables (rumoured to be Gus Hansen, by the way) Keith would "drop everything" to play in that game.
In this sense, the high-stakes cash professional is even less free than the tournament professional. At least the latter knows when the start time is likely to be and when the finish time is likely to be. For the cash player, you play as long as the live one is around, and that is that.
+++++++++++
Played quite a few hands last night on Full Tilt and about 45 minutes' worth on Ultimate. The Ultimate $2-$4 games were particularly tough -- playing more like $15-$30. perhaps I had been spoilt by the Full Tilt $3-$6 games. However, the raise and reraise nature of things on UB meant that, even though I only broke even (plus $5.00, to be precise) I accumulated a fair whack of bonus dollars.
++++++++++
On 2+2 the discussion has finally got round to how to beat weak-tight donkeys (or "nits" as they are called there) rather than how to beat loose-passive games. So, just the 18 months behind the times for 2+2. Good going.
I'm convinced that a large proportion of the posters on 2+2 fora are railbirds and trolls who never actually play, and so they rush to folow the conventional wisdom. That wisdom is now that most games are populated by weak-tights. But you all know that anyway, 'cos you read here.
+++++
You have to admire the Chinese punters. ICBC is being floated in China and Hong Kong and the retail punters are going mad for it. The FT this morning quotes a professional saying that he is spending $12K of his own money and is borrowing another $115K "because the price is going to go up". No point in asking these guys about bankroll management, or gearing.
I think it must be tied up with ancestor worship, or theories of predestination, but many Chinese seem to have no concept of the laws of probability. Either something will happen or it won't. There is no randomness. There's no point in saying "I have six outs" to them, because, as far as they are concerned, the pack has already been shuffled, the cards are already in the dealer's hand. Either the next card will be the card you want, or it won't. It has already been decided.
I've seen this in betting shiops, with Chinese waiters putting all their money on a horse because "it will win". It's decided. The look of disbelief on their faces when the horse loses is quite amazing. And yet, they come back the following day, once again fuelled by relentless optimism that yesterday was an aberration, a flaw in the reading of the runes. Today will be different.
These gamblers are not fooled by randomness, because, to them, the concept is alien.
++++++++++++++++++
