Two years old today!
Topic: Misc.
It's two years since I started "Sleepless in Fulham". Hope you've found it interesting. I've enjoyed getting your feedback (most of the time). Lots of ideas for the next fortnight, so watch this space.

All the best.

DY

Tying up loose ends - Part one (continuing 'The Hendon Mob and the Unsung Heros, part one')
Topic: Poker
I'm aware that I've left several loose ends lying around this year. I intend to tie them up over the next few weeks. In 'The Hendon Mob and the Unsung Heros, part one', I said: "In a subsequent post, I want to talk about some of the unsung heroes of the UK poker scene." So consider this to be Part Two.

I want to write about two people you've never heard of today. The first is Paul Blunt. He was the manager of the Russell Square casino when it opened in the summer of 1997. He supported poker, even though he knew that it didn't deliver a lot of direct revenue to the bottom line. Obviously he expected some poker players to lose money on the roulette and blackjack tables. But he also knew that the players who didn't do that nevertheless gave the place atmosphere. On otherwise quiet nights for the casino, the presence of lots of poker players excitedly discussing their triumphs and near misses created a buzz that most casinos lack.

After he went, management support and interest in the card room declined and it closed in December 2002. Although it was sad, it was for the best, as the club had created a sufficient nucleus of players to get the Gutshot club launched. I've only been back to Russell Square once since it shut. The man at reception told me that the place was really boring since the poker players left. Roy Houghton tells me that the hardest job in running a UK casino is getting new customers through the door. So think about this - Gutshot got 5,000 members in the first year of opening its doors in Clerkenwell.

The other person I think deserves praise is Steve Howell. If you've ever played at the Victoria, you'l know him as 'Ginger Steve'. He's the Villa fan with the Midlands accent. In my opinion, he gave the card room a massive shot in the arm by coming up with the idea of giving the #100 Hold'em game blinds of #3/#3. It's a structure that I would never have thought of. But it works brilliantly.

The Vic desperately needed an entry level hold'em game. A few years ago, omaha reigned supreme and hold'em was non-existent. People would turn up in dribs and drabs wanting to play hold'em and they would phone up asking about the game they had seen on the television, but they were always told that there was only omaha to play.

At some point in December 2003, that all changed. The game started with a #3/3 structure and it's never stopped since. Previously Jeff had tried it with a #2/2/5 structure as a Wednesday special game, but it died out in a matter of weeks, as this was just too big. Steve's suggestion has brought countless thousands in revenue to the room and brought in hundreds and hundreds of new players. I should add that he says partial credit should go to Vicky Coren for this too.

When is it time to forgive France?
Topic: Politics
I've been boycotting France and French products for about two years now because I was appalled by the country's behaviour in the run up to the war against Iraq. At first I thought it was merely a commercial matter of the French being annoyed at losing a customer for their arms industry, but I later read about the philosophical differences between France and the US/UK and the desperate need the French have to believe that they are different and superior. I was sickened by the sight of French people presuming the worst about America and Britain's intentions in the Middle East. Remind me why they speak French instead of German or Russian, can you?

But I don't intend to hold this grudge forever and I've been wondering what would be the occasion to forgive them. The No vote against the constituion might be just such a moment. However it's clear that part of the reason for its rejection was the French people's fear that the EU might become too Anglo-Saxon and liberal free market. Oh that this worry were justified!

Nevertheless, the French have the right to stick to their ridiculous featherbedding if they wish, as long as it doesn't drag everyone else down too. I'm reminded of the film 'Angels with Dirty Faces', where James Cagney is a gangster who befriends some young tearaways. At the end of the film, he's taken to the electric chair and realising that his young fans are in earshot, he screams and blubs like a coward in order that they will change direction and be spared the same fate.

That is the role that I would like France to accept - to go downhill, screaming and blubbering all the way, so that young and impressionable nations see what the 'social market model' has in store for them and avoid going down the same path. If they do that and deter others from making the same mistakes, then all will be forgiven.

Amnesty International falls into a trap.
Topic: Politics
I would like to support Amnesty International. I really would. Human rights should concern us everyone and drawing attention to their abuse ought be a priority for all those who value freedom. But the organisation's recent claim that the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba is "the gulag of our time" is ridiculous, insulting and ignorant.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4598109.stm

The comparison is wrong in terms of both scale and intention. The Gulags killed millions. They held people who were thought a threat to the unelected Soviet regime. The Guantanamo Bay camp holds those who are thought a threat to civilians. While it is far from ideal to hold people without trial ever, Amnesty should attempt to understand the difficult position that the US finds itself in. In the past five years, civilians have been killed in the World Trade Centre in New York, a railway station in Madrid and an Irish bar in Bali. The men held in Guantanamo Bay are believed to be combatants in the same cause that killed those people. While it's possible that some are innocent, it's impossible to believe that they all are. I really would not like to make the judgement call on whether it's safe to release any of them. It's easy for people who don't hold executive power to heckle from the sidelines - much harder to live with the thought that you could be releasing someone who will kill a thousand people in a public place.

Amnesty has fallen into the trap of moral equivalence. Someone needs to point out that there is a vast difference between:

A) an unelected government protecting itself.
B) an elected government protecting its civilians.

Amnesty either doesn't understand the difference, or has a ulterior agenda. That makes it either stupid or wicked. Anything it says in future should be treated with a great deal of scepticism.

My first Neo-con thoughts.
Topic: Politics
Since I'm often called a 'neo-con', I thought I would write about how I was introduced to this way of thinking. Despite the fact that it's associated with Americans, Jews and American Jews in particular, the first person to push me in this direction was a Pakistani who writes under the alias of Ibn Warraq. He runs the Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society and wrote an excellent book titled 'Why I am not a Muslim' which I cannot recommend highly enough.

At the conclusion of the book he quotes Judith Miller, writing in Foreign Affairs:

'Liberalism tends not to teach its proponents to fight effectively. What is needed, rather, is almost a contradiction in terms: a liberal militancy, or a militant liberalism that is unapologetic and unabashed.'

The phrase 'militant liberalism' hit me in the face. It was the perfect expression of what is needed if the West is to survive. Below this excerpt, Warraq ends the book by saying:

"The West needs to be serious about democracy, and should eschew policies that compromise priniciples for short-term gains at home and abroad. The rise of fascism and racism in the West is proof that not everyone in the West is enamoured of democracy. Therefore the final battle will not necessarily be between Islam and the West, but between those who value freedom and those who do not."

Get it from Amazon.

Cringe and learn.
Topic: Poker
A hat tip to Paul Phillips for introducing me to Antonio Esfandiari's website:

http://www.magicantonio.com

It contains some of the most cringe-making material I've ever read about a poker player. In the Rocks and Rings section, we are told of the exploits of his 'posse' - guys who really know how to party -- and seem determined to teach the world this skill, one nightclub at a time. I'm not making this up.

One gang member is descibed as 'Executive Vice President of Female Affairs'. What a pratt! I suggest you check the section titled 'How do they talk'. If you think that Neil Kinnock shouting 'We're all right!' in 1992 was the high point of cringe, be prepared for a shock.

It's a shame really as he gives some quite useful advice in other sections and even informs readers about the history of some of the places where he's played.

What little I know about football.
Topic: Misc.
I never really got into football as a child. Growing up in the home counties, there was no local team worth caring about. At my secondary school, the games teachers made us play rugby and refused to discuss football. But that is not the only reason why I don't follow it now. Apart from the World Cup, I never felt that there was anything at stake. Who cares whether a bunch of foreigners nominally attached to Derby beats another bunch of foreigners nominally attached to Birmingham? In a few years time they will be somewhere else. What difference does it make to your life?

I do enjoy the big international tournaments, but it's painful to support England. Of course I don't really understand the finer points of the game. To illustrate how little I know, I'll tell you what I think is wrong with our national squad: We don't pass the ball. I'm so ignorant that I can't see past the fact that our players have a tendancy to boot the ball all the way to the front in the hope that our forwards get it. Since we have some of the shortest forwards in the international game (Owen, Rooney) and our tallest one (Heskey) is about as useful as a plank of wood, this seems rather dim. But there must be something I don't know about the game, as booting the ball up the field seems to be the default setting even when we are against 10 men! I could swear that the Brazilians, who seem to win almost everything, play the game with lots of low short passes, but copying them seems to be out of the question. As Blackadder learned in series four, if your plan has failed 18 times, the enemy won't expect you to try it a 19th time. You have the element of surprise in your favour!

But I digress. What has caught my attention recently is the tale of the Manchester United takeover by Malcolm Glazer. Glazer is an American who took over the Tampa Bay Bucanneers and turned them from also-rans to Super Bowl winners. He also forced the town to buy him a new stadium at no cost to the team. Naturally with a distinguished track record like that, he is totally unfit to buy a team whose best years seem to be behind them.

What makes this story so ugly though is what it reveals about the the greedy selfish side of the game. I mean the greedy selfish fans, that is. I have been dumbstruck at the whinging I've had to listen to on radio and TV. And the sheer stupidity, too. What's with all these banners saying 'Not for sale'? It is for sale. It's a public limited company on the stock market. Here's a hint. When the price of something is quoted in the FT every day, then it's for sale. Got that?

For decades now, football fans have been spoiled. They have come to take it as normal that bored millionaires take over their clubs and pour in millions with, in some cases, little hope of getting it back. That's fine with the fans, but when someone comes along who actually expects to see a return on his investment once he's done some hard work and taken some risks, all of a sudden their world has come to an end. If it was so bloody important to them that no American ever owned a 75 per cent stake in the club, then they should have used their OWN money to buy a 25.1 per cent stake. They didn't and now they act like a child who's thrown his dummy out of the pram. To hear some of them talk about their years of support you would think that they had never got anything in return for it. Well that's nonsense. For years they had the 'bragging rights' and boy did they brag. They got to sing about their team's latest victories and puff about like peacocks when the trophies were dished out. I can feel no sympathy for them and the hollow talk of boycotts merely makes me laugh. They were happy to see the club make money out of selling shirts in China before last week, how can they now complain when someone wants to buy their club for that income stream?

Gutshot domain change.
Topic: Poker
Gutshot has bought the domain name www.gutshot.com (as opposed to www.gutshot.co.uk). I have been asked to inform readers. Change your links.

Gross exaggeration.
Topic: Poker
This extract from the Paul Phillips blog illustrates something that has always bothered me about tournament reporting - the way that people who play a lot of tournaments can come across as far better than they really are when looking at their 'wins'. In part one of the extract, titled 'Nothing I could do', he shows a couple of plays made by someone who sounds like a terrible player.

Then he shows this person's 'stats' on the Hendon Mob database. A superficial glance would make you think that he's a good player, but it's clear he's not from what Phillips tells us. So this guy must just be playing a lot of tournaments. I would like to know his results after entry fees are deducted. What you earn from this game is the 'net' not the 'gross'.

Actually, on second thoughts, the fact that losers can look like winners keeps this game going. Forget the above!

Food for thought.
Topic: Misc.
A very interesting article in the Sunday Times of May 1st this year disputes the idea of "dumbing down":

Bad is Good

Read the whole thing.

Election thoughts.
Topic: Politics
I have just voted in my 5th general election and like every time before, I've voted Conservative. That won't come as a great surprise to most of you. But this has been different in that for the first time ever, I can think of one Labour policy that appeals to me and I'm annoyed at the Conservatives' opposition to it.

What has disappointed me most about the campaigns has been the clear focus on elderly voters at the expense of the young. I can understand why the parties all do it. They know that the retired are more likely to vote than the young, as they have the free time and have had longer to form opinions. But at the risk of sounding ageist, I have to say it sticks in my craw. Is it really right that the future direction of this country is determined by the votes of people who have less than a dozen years left to live? The decision we make today will have repurcussions for decades to come.

The Conservatives have come up with some good issues on which to fight the election, but left it too late to spell them out. I also happen to think that while Michael Howard would be a good prime minister, Portillo would have stood a better chance of winning the election and I was disappointed that he wasn't selected as leader. Perhaps he could be persuaded to run one more time? Please?

I expect that Labour win today. What is interesting is whether they win next time. I don't think they will. There are a lot of chickens coming home to roost and discontent will rise. I just hope they don't do too much damage to the economy before they are booted out.

The one policy where I find myself in agreement with Labour is on housing. The Conservatives vilify Prescott for wanting to build more housing on the Green Belt, but I think Prescott's got this right. There is an urgent need for more housing in the South East of England and I feel that he's facing facts, while others bury their heads in the sand. I do feel sickened listening to some middle-class southerners prattling on about defending the Green Belt. While they may think that they are speaking for the defence of rural tranquility, what they are actually saying is that people who live in overcrowded and overpriced towns and cities should be made to stay there. It sickens me. The Tories express their opposition to 'Prezza's digger' in terms of giving local communities a voice, but we all know what this means because nobody has any incentive to say 'yes'. Every community would say no to more housing, because the people consulted are those who don't benefit from greater supply. The poor and the homeless wouldn't have a voice in this process.

Before anyone leaps to the assumption that I'm wanting government interference in the market to suit my own needs, I should stress that I'm not. What I would like is for the market to be made more free. What we have at present is unrestricted demand, but highly restricted supply. The number of bodies who have the right to object to new housing construction has risen in recent decades and the result is a big anti-development bias. This must be reversed. The Tories are supposed to be the party of free enterprise and it disappoints me to see them being so protectionist on this matter.

On a sad note, it disgusts me to report that my award for the most interesting policy initiative of any manifesto that I've seen goes to the British National Party. I don't mean its race/immigration policies. I refer instead to its idea of gun ownership for anyone who has completed a period of national service. I have no desire to see the BNP win anywhere, but I have to say this is the sort of bold thinking that all parties should attempt. Gun ownership is a subject that I can't make up my mind own, but I can agree that we ought to accept that the police are failing in their duty to protect people and that if they don't improve soon then perhaps citizens should be entitled to defend themselves. Alas the fact that it's been presented by a bunch of racist thugs will probably mean that it's not taken seriously when it should be.

Poker in Barcelona.
Topic: Poker
There were two cash games going on when I arrived:

?20/40 Hold'em
?250 buy-in
?200 minimum rebuy
2.5 per cent rake
Cap of ?15

?250 Omaha
?200 minimum rebuy
?5/10 blinds
2.5 per cent rake
Cap of ?30

A tournament is staged once a month. The next one will take place on the 12th May and will be ?200 Hold'em NL, with rebuys of ?50 (don't understand how this works) and an optional add-on. Entry fee is ?20.

In the following months:

9th June - ?200 Hold'em, Pot limit same details as above.

14th July - ?200 Omaha, Pot limit

11th August - ?200 Hold'em, No limit

8th September - ?200 Hold'em Pot limit

The ultimate compliment.
Topic: Poker
I received the ultimate compliment yesterday, while playing online. I was called a 'calling station' and a 'rock' by the same player in the same game, in under half an hour!

There can be no higher praise.

Banged to rights.
Topic: Misc.
I got a phone call out of the blue yesterday from an old university friend whom I normally meet every couple of years or so. He told me that he's had a change of career and is now a police officer. I'm delighted by this, as he's just the sort of person I think should be in the police. He's bright, polite, trustworthy and most importantly of all, six foot six.

We got talking about the workload in the police. I'm not impressed with the way that the service functions in this country and I got a glimpse of the problem when he explained how much work he had to do after arresting someone. Essentially it's a nine hour task. The last time he arrested someone it was at 2pm. He got home at 11.30pm. I can certainly imagine that this is a deterrent to anyone. In fact he told me that 25 per cent of those who join the service leave within two years. Those who survive are often those who avoid getting involved in marginal cases. That just can't be right.

One thing that maddens him is the trend for innocent people to give 'no comment' interviews rather than just say that they didn't do it. No comment interviews are more time consuming than those where the interviewee says something, as the officers have to think of every possible question in order to cover themselves.

In one recent case, several young men were taken in after some criminal damage. The first one they spoke to said that he was completely guilty and that the others had nothing to do with it. The rest all gave 'no comment' interviews, when they could have just said: 'It wasn't me. X did it.'

I asked Jon whether he could think of ways to speed up the process and he mentioned a few bureaucratic changes, before coming to the wording of the new police caution, which now says.

"You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

Given the time wasted by no comments, he said 'I think we should say:'

"...it may fuck your defence if you do not".

And I totally agree. So if you get arrested in Brighton by a giant who cautions you this way, tell him Dave says 'Hi'.

Speechless in Fulham.
Topic: Poker
Transcript for game #1571808035 requested by DavidYoung (ebznl@aol.com)
*********** # 1 **************
PokerStars Game #1571808035: Hold'em No Limit ($3/$6) - 2005/04/23 - 14:08:52 (ET)
Table 'Wotho' Seat #6 is the button
Seat 3: DavidYoung ($235 in chips)
Seat 4: JarleAA ($1186.25 in chips)
Seat 6: Obender ($721.25 in chips)
Seat 8: alkor ($529.10 in chips)
alkor: posts small blind $3
DavidYoung: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to DavidYoung [Qd Jd]
JarleAA: folds
Obender: raises $12 to $18
JarleAA leaves the table
alkor: folds
DavidYoung: calls $12
*** FLOP *** [6d 4h 5d]
DavidYoung: checks
Obender: bets $24
DavidYoung: raises $60 to $84
Obender: raises $402 to $486
DavidYoung: calls $133 and is all-in
*** TURN *** [6d 4h 5d] [9s]
*** RIVER *** [6d 4h 5d 9s] [8c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
DavidYoung: shows [Qd Jd] (high card Queen)
Obender: mucks hand
DavidYoung collected $471 from pot
DavidYoung said, "?????????????"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $473 | Rake $2
Board [6d 4h 5d 9s 8c]
Seat 3: DavidYoung (big blind) showed [Qd Jd] and won ($471) with high card Queen
Seat 4: JarleAA folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: Obender (button) mucked [Tc Qh]
Seat 8: alkor (small blind) folded before Flop