![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirks(Warning - slight hints of grumpy old man mode to follow):
It was serendipitous that Big Dave wrote about the problem he had with running a poker-related operation — that he did not like most poker players. For, that very night, a fight broke out at Gutshot. One of the participants (well, alright, the bloke who started it) then apologised on the Gutshot forum, said that the two of them had shaken hands, and that he hoped that would be the end of it.
Where are we, in some sink estate pub where you could guarantee a brawl every weekend, but that was okay because a few hours later everyone would be good mates again? I've written several times that poker has, unfortunately, become the new football. A place that people go with their mates for a night out.
I fear that I may have been doing football a disservice.
Gutshot could be playing with its reputation here, as well as future attendance. I for one don't fancy the idea of attending a poker club where there is a vague chance that a fight will break out.
Now, tempers get frayed. And some people resort to violence. They aren't the people I would invite to dinner, or people I would dream of doing anything socially with, but I accept that they exist and, if they are producers, it would be silly to ban them. Fights have broken out in the Vic, Bellagio, and many other places where poker is played legally, simply because a certain proportion of society resorts to physical violence when they get annoyed. In that sense, I guess that I was naive to think that Gutshot would be any different.
+++++
Warren Buffett has bottled it. The archetypal "long view" man has (partially) crapped out of his short dollar position after it has cost Berkshire Hathaway about a billion bucks. This may or may not be related to the fact that hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit Berkshire for $2.99bn, which, even for Berkshire Hathaway and its cash pile of $20bn, is a little bit irritating.
As with stockmarkets, the time to make your move is when the last bear has thrown in the towel. Is this the time?
With ¥/$ at nearly 118, I think that it might be. There just isn't that much downside to that level (of course, I said that about oil when it broached $55, and I was wrong there, but I have a better feel for currencies than commodities)
It was serendipitous that Big Dave wrote about the problem he had with running a poker-related operation — that he did not like most poker players. For, that very night, a fight broke out at Gutshot. One of the participants (well, alright, the bloke who started it) then apologised on the Gutshot forum, said that the two of them had shaken hands, and that he hoped that would be the end of it.
Where are we, in some sink estate pub where you could guarantee a brawl every weekend, but that was okay because a few hours later everyone would be good mates again? I've written several times that poker has, unfortunately, become the new football. A place that people go with their mates for a night out.
I fear that I may have been doing football a disservice.
Gutshot could be playing with its reputation here, as well as future attendance. I for one don't fancy the idea of attending a poker club where there is a vague chance that a fight will break out.
Now, tempers get frayed. And some people resort to violence. They aren't the people I would invite to dinner, or people I would dream of doing anything socially with, but I accept that they exist and, if they are producers, it would be silly to ban them. Fights have broken out in the Vic, Bellagio, and many other places where poker is played legally, simply because a certain proportion of society resorts to physical violence when they get annoyed. In that sense, I guess that I was naive to think that Gutshot would be any different.
+++++
Warren Buffett has bottled it. The archetypal "long view" man has (partially) crapped out of his short dollar position after it has cost Berkshire Hathaway about a billion bucks. This may or may not be related to the fact that hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit Berkshire for $2.99bn, which, even for Berkshire Hathaway and its cash pile of $20bn, is a little bit irritating.
As with stockmarkets, the time to make your move is when the last bear has thrown in the towel. Is this the time?
With ¥/$ at nearly 118, I think that it might be. There just isn't that much downside to that level (of course, I said that about oil when it broached $55, and I was wrong there, but I have a better feel for currencies than commodities)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Fish Fights
Date: 2005-11-07 03:02 pm (UTC)I'd suggest that there's at least a "vague chance" of a fight breaking out just about anywhere. You're living in Lewisham, for goodness' sake: hardly Sleepy Hollow (ask multiple mugging victim Harrington).
That said, I sort of agree - at my (almost as advanced as your) age, the prospect of witnessing an impromptu amateur boxing exhibition doesn't exactly fill me with eager anticipation.
Poker Players
Date: 2005-11-07 05:41 pm (UTC)The thing is that sports rivalries and money often bring out the worst in already nasty people. I am around your age and have commented before in the 2+2 forums before that these young online players really don't appreciate what it took to get poker to where it is today and how it was just a few years ago (not just the 30+ they imagine). I've played with drug dealers, pimps, prostitutes, bookies, cheats, hustlers and every assorted ilk imaginable as well as lots of everday joes. Many of those people were interesting characters, but I am glad I don't have to associate with them any longer to make a living playing poker, or to have to carry a gun to get home with my winnings as I used to. However as you said, those types of people are often the "producers" in live games.
BluffTHIS!
P.S. reread Dave's blog for comments I made regarding small edges.
Re: Poker Players
Date: 2005-11-07 06:36 pm (UTC)I read your comments on BDD's thread and was a bit puzzled. You said that "Dave was right", but the content of your post seemed to agree with my point (that you should push lots of small edges for a small percentage of your total bankroll) rather than Dave's!
Pete
I've played and lived with a lot of criminals. I've drunk with them in criminals' bars. One thing I think you will find is that most of them wouldn't dream of starting a fight within the club. That was the difference. They might have been nasty pieces of work, but there were times and places for everything. I'd feel safer winning money off a crook (who would just go out and steal some more) than off a compulsive gambler. (That said, you were probably right to carry the gun!)
PJ
Re: Poker Players
Date: 2005-11-08 03:46 am (UTC)Sorry I had a brain fart and didn't read your post on Dave's blog correctly, concentrating only on the first part before you explained you should indeed push small edges.
Regarding carrying a gun, I was never really concerned about someone in the game criminal or degenerate, but rather someone robbing the game or trying to rob me as I went to the car. Of course if robbers got in and got the drop on me I wasn't reaching for it, but if I had time they were going to get a spread of lead.
BluffTHIS!