Wittering.

[peterbirks]

Well, we were a bit short-staffed at work this week, and PT Nick only got back from Cyprus on Thursday. So, I'd done some "maintenance work on Saturday, Sunday, Tuesday to Thursday, and, unusually for me, I had a training session at 4pm on Friday. We did a fairly all-round serious bit of work, and I've been feeling it in the deltoids (three muscles that park atop the shoulder) and quadriceps, to the extent that I've lazily not gone to the gym either today (Sunday) or yesterday. I really ought to have gone at least one of the days, just for a bit of cardio, and I feel guilty for not so doing.

I managed a 5k on the rower on Tuesday (22min 55sec) and then another personal best on Thursday over 4k (17 min 27 sec). But I really feel I ought be trying harder with the training and, more importantly, with the diet. I'm doing okay on the food (no chocolate biscuits, no kebabs, etc), but I really could do better.

The month started well at poker, where I've dropped down to $50 buy-in just to see if anything is beatable any more. I had a bit of a hiccup today where I carved at least one hand (leaving half a buy in on the table I think, even though I won the hand), and possibly carved the second. I'm still trying to work out if I could avoid getting stacked off when I've put in a middle position raise with As7s, been called immediately behind and by button and Big Blind, and seen a flop of Js 8s 7d, giving me bottom pair and a nut flush draw.

I bet about 70% of the pot, get called in two spots. I've only got about 35 hands on the player on my left, and he looked to be a bit passive and not too tight. Turn gives me another seven (board now Js 8s 7d 7h), giving me trips. There's $16 in there and Ive got about $44 in front of me.

Of course this is a classic hand where I don't really want to be OOP. I really can't check here (although if I do, and I get a bet, I can cr all-in), and a shove is too high. But any bet inbetween puts the pot at that irritiating level where I will have a difficult decision on the river as well. I bet $12, got called only by the player behind me. $40 in the pot and I have $32 (as does opponent). River brought Qs, giving me the flush.

Anyhow, I ended up losing my stack, which is always annoying unless it's a bad beat, but, given opponent's range and likely playing style, I cant really see the best alternative. Bleaaagh.


Bermuda in a week's time, although I still have to produce the newsletter while I'm out there. If that goes smoothly, then the "Birks on the road" scenario could be a goer -- attending more conferences and producing the newsletter from the hotel room. Add on a few days beforehand and a couple of days after (in an apartment I could rent for the week) and I might be out of the office for half the year. Which would be nice. And a nice rest from the office at home as well, giving me a chance to recharge some poker batteries. It really is a rather boring game. Thought about playing some PLO 8 or better last night at low stakes, just for enjoyment. My, that thought made me feel strange. But, really, NL Hold 'em is very hard to get excited about. And that might be part of the problem. I just don't care enough about the game any more.

____________

Comments

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

It's beginning to worry me that I am losing interest in so many of the things I found fascinating not but ten years ago or so. In your case, since you seem to mention bad beats (and other frustrations) more often, I think it's a two-dimensional thing. It isn't enough for NL Hold'em to be very hard to get excited about -- it may well stem from the inherent volatility and the unavoidable need to concentrate exactly as hard as you did when the online stuff was sparkly new. And that's tough. It's the law of diminishing returns, or low hanging fruit, or something.

Meanwhile, over at Peston's blog, there are some interesting numbers on US bank exposure to Portuguese, Irish, and Greek debt. Now, I bang on about Big Numbers all the time, in the sense that after about five zeros, people lose all ability to rationalise. However, in these cases I think we can actually use quite small numbers and draw some interesting conclusions. Here they are:

Greece: 0.125
Portugal: 0.195
Ireland: 0.47

... and Spain rolls in at 0.125, which is even more frightening in a way.

What are these numbers? Well, they're ratios of total exposure (as calculated by Peston) to GDP (rough 2009 figures).

Those are genuinely frightening numbers. I wouldn't mind "owning" 0.125 of China's GDP, or perhaps even of Turkey's. But these four?

Add Basel-II levels of leverage, and we have plenty more shit hovering just around the fan.

My (very interesting, (c) EL Wisty) conclusion? The big banks were even more insane than I thought. There is no possible economic justification for this level of absent-minded lunacy. The only possible reason it happened is a systemic failure within investment banks that can only possibly be ascribed to the disproportionate bonuses awarded for evanescent immediate profit.

I genuinely think that a world-wide diktat that basically says "no bonuses, as of now" would be an important step forward. No doubt Woodhouse would disagree with me (or possibly agree with me, but bask in the knowledge that nobody will pay me the slightest attention).

Pursuant to which

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

I think the obvious comparison is now -- not with the Depression era -- but with the Edwardian era and World War One. Those Imperial Russian stocks? Worthless. Shares in the Baghdad to Istanbul railway? Worthless. And so on and so on. I don't actually have figures for any of this, but it would be interesting. No doubt my Magdalen mate Niall Ferguson could enlighten us.

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

... and the bonuses, in comparison, were tiddly. Probably at the level of 0.001 or so, in comparable terms.

Which leads me to a truly interesting conclusion, and this one might actually fly.

Why not just pay the bastards at the 0.001 level (ie the bonus system of, say, 2006) and tell them not to do it again?

I think this might just work as an incentive scheme that everybody concerned can agree upon.

Peston

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

I saw peston's tweet on the US exposure. Very interesting. Will come back to this tomorrow.