'Getting in cheap'.
Topic: Poker

There's a book for sale in a glass cabinet in the Vic's card room with a title I find amusing. It's called Win your way into big money hold'em tournaments. It amuses me, because I can't stop wondering how that's any different to 'Win money'. After all, if you win enough money playing poker in any of its forms, you can use it to enter a big tournament. It doesn't have to be earned in a satellite. I've had this debate with many people before and I even wrote about it for the Gutshot site. 

There were times when I wanted to shout 'Money is fungible!', but it would have been no use, because it wouldn't have meant much to most people. But I came across an article on the FT website today that uses almost the exact same remark ( "Money is a fungible commodity" ). The article is worth reading, because it touches on the same illogical behaviour in consumer spending that people tell me about in poker.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/ebe247e0-4a4b-11db-8738-0000779e2340.html

Instead of 'I'll play a big comp if I can get in cheap through a satellite, but if I won the cash I wouldn't buy the ticket with it', it's the idea that people will spend a casino cash win on a frivolous purchase, but would spend money inherited from a dead relative on something sensible. The difference derives from what the author calls the 'mental account'. Put simply: "We put a different value on money depending on the source of funds".

It may derive from some evolutionary programming in our minds, but it's illogical nonetheless. That's why I have a problem with super-sats. They seem to require the willing suspension of disbelief, rather like watching a ventriloquist with a dummy. The fun is gone if you see straight through the act. There are a few reasons why playing a satellite or super-satellite might be a good idea and I am going to give some thought to them this week. But in general, remember that money is fungible and 'getting in cheap' is a myth, particularly when there is a vibrant secondary market for tickets and your decision to play the event in question instead of selling means you've forgone the money that you could have sold the ticket for.

The Peak Oil cult.
Topic: Politics

If you don't drive a car you may not have realised that petrol has dropped in price at the filling stations by several pence a litre in the last month. This follows similar falls in the price of crude oil

See Chart  

For me personally it's good news. I like to drive. I'm also pleased to learn that there's recently been a large find in the Gulf of Mexico that will increase US reserves by about 50 per cent. You'd think that everyone in the West would welcome this. But you'd be wrong, for there are some people who derive a perverse pleasure at the thought of oil running out. They account for some, though not all, of the so-called 'Peakniks' - believers in the theory of 'Peak Oil' - the idea that world oil production is peaking.

I can't see anything good in oil running out suddenly. Obviously there has to be a finite amount of oil in the world, as Earth has a finite size, but I've been hearing that oil's 30 years away from running out for about err ... 30 years now. So I'm inclined to scepticism about Peak Oil alarmism and indeed the claims of most environmentalists on most things. Their behaviour reminds me of religion more than science. They demonise their critics, deride the pursuit of material wealth and preach the imminence of misery unless their calls are heeded today.

Here is one Peak Oil believer whose faith is starting to melt away:

http://peakoil.com/fortopic23731.html

This hapless unfortunate has invested a great deal emotionally in the idea that the depletion of the Earth's resources will bring about a revolution. It's finally dawned on him that this won't happen and he's devastated. Read his paranoid rambling and see the environmentalist movement for what it is - a CULT. It's all there.

What's tragic is that there are things worth worrying about, but too many people worry about the wrong things. The changing demographic profile of Europe concerns me far more than anything that Al Gore has to say about glaciers. And it's not based on computer projections of the future; it's based on who's being born now and what they will grow up to believe in.

Crush or cultivate?
Topic: Poker

Over at 'Everything has a limit',

http://peterbirks.livejournal.com/162070.html#cutid1 

Peter Birks explains that a "a significant minority of [these] younger male players do not want to maximize their profit. What they want to do is dominate the game. They want to be the alpha male. And, in anthropological terms, causing your "opponents" to slink away, so that you can let out a lion's roar, or whatever the young American male quivalent of this is, is the ultimate victory. But, of course, this doesn't maximize your profit. That comes not from "crushing the poker economy", but from cultivating it."

I only mention this, because the next James Bond movie is based on Bond 'crushing the poker economy' of Britain's enemies! Youtube has the trailer for Casino Royale:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl5WHj0bZ2Q

Believe it or not, this is actually quite a faithful interpretation of the Ian Fleming novel, except that poker has been substituted for Baccarat.  I know that some of the dealers at the Vic auditioned for it, though none got in. Apparently they weren't convincing enough at playing themselves, something that rather reminds me of the comment made by Arthur Freed, the producer of Brigadoon: "I went to Scotland and found nothing there that looks like Scotland".

Initial reports about the proposed poker action in the film are not encouraging, with Bond losing his money, going on the nip and then returning to win it back, and more, by hitting a back-door straight flush. I really hope that's been sent to re-write, but I fear not.

The politics of animals and children.
Topic: Politics

Animals.

 

I’ve been scooped. I was going to comment on the spate of attacks on Stingrays in Australia, pointing out that while the message will be lost on the Stingrays themselves, I like the way that Aussies have demonstrated retaliatory capacity. But Harry Hutton at Chasemeladies, www.chasemeladies.blogspot.com has done it far better than I could, and thrown in a gratuitous reference to Mark Steyn too!

 

http://chasemeladies.blogspot.com/2006/09/stingray-killings-may-be-irwin-revenge.html

 

Harry’s been on fine form lately. If you’re looking for some Miros-type humour to make up for the fact that Lord Miros hasn’t updated for months, then check him out. Please note that despite making frequent references to High Wycombe, we are not the same person. He’s far more critical of the place than I am. Any town whose municipal waste tip is named ‘High Heaven’ can’t be all bad.

 

Children.

 

I’m often amused at the way that children are held to be innocent of matters of politics. Of course they don’t have to discuss how budgets are allocated or fight over tax revenues, but they engage in plenty of machinations about the one thing they do need and have to offer – friendship. So I’m grateful to six-year old Amy at www.CatCoolamy.blogspot.com  for reminding us of this, by relating the fluctuating fortunes of her various friendships at Fircroft School.

 

Back when she started blogging in April, her best friend was Alfie.

 

http://catcoolamy.blogspot.com/2006/04/fircroft-school.html

 

despite the awkward age difference

 

http://catcoolamy.blogspot.com/2006/04/alfie-and-matthew.html

 

Amy, Alfie and another boy named Matthew used to have fun turning into things:

 

http://catcoolamy.blogspot.com/2006/04/me-and-my-friends.html

 

But over the summer things seem to have gone wrong. Her mother has reported rude notes with unpleasant anti-Amy messages being stuck on their front door

 

http://happysillyfun.blogspot.com/2006/08/notes-stuck-on-our-front-door.html  

 

and finally Amy has had to make the break. She is no longer friends with Alfie and Matthew.

 

http://catcoolamy.blogspot.com/2006/09/im-not-your-friend.html

 

I’m pleased that she’d found new friends and I wish her well in the difficult world of playground politics. If only the alliances of children were as simple and straightforward as those of the major world superpowers.

Londoners.
Topic: Politics

I weigh in at Stephen Bartley's blog:

http://weird-and-turning-pro.blogspot.com/2006/09/londoners.html#comments 

What is the sex ratio in Iraq?
Topic: Politics

I read a long time ago that Iraq was 62 per cent female. I wish I'd bookmarked where I read it, because when I tried to track down the statistic, I could only source it to this:

http://www.portaliraq.com/news/Conference+targets+woman-owned+businesses__671.html

which states: 

"Women are 62 percent of the population and represent tremendous intellectual and human resource pool."

Has anyone got a better source? If true, then it's a shocking revelation of the horrors of the Saddam era. Even if the coalition forces have killed the number claimed in the Lancet report of 2004 (100,000), that does not in any way explain a 62 to 38 female - male ratio in a country of over 20 million people. When Mark Steyn drove around Iraq in 2003, he said that he encountered many families that were almost entirely female, so many men having been killed in the wars against Iran and Kuwait, as well as the hundreds of thousands killed in the Al Anfal campaign and the suppression of the uprising against Saddam in 1991.

I've even read it claimed that one reason why the Americans underestimated the level of post-war violence was that they believed that the high level of women relative to men in Iraq would have a pacifying effect.

I know that I have at least one Iraqi reader. Would any care to comment on the gender split, please?

Why is Phil Laak so highly rated?
Topic: Poker
I got a flyer from the Sportsman in the post yesterday, promoting the William Hill Grand Prix. It mentioned that Phil Laak won it last year and that at the time it was his biggest win (£150k). I found that hard to believe, so I checked it out on the HM database and it's true!

http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=16576

What I can't figure out therefore, is why then this bloke is so well revered? His record isn't that impressive relative to the attention he gets and I can't understand why he was invited to an invitation only tournament in Feb 2004. What had he done prior to that to deserve it?

What if they didn't report?
Topic: Politics

I'm not one for censorship, but there are times when it's obvious that the media can change events merely by being around to report them. This week, two kidnapped Fox News journalists were freed by the Islamic militant group that had captured them in Gaza. One of them said on his release:

"I just hope this never scares a single journalist away from coming to Gaza to cover this story because the Palestinian people are very beautiful, kind-hearted, loving people who the world need to know more about and so do not be discouraged. Come and tell the story. It's a wonderful story."

But that got me to thinking - what if journalists did refuse to go to Gaza? I think it would be a positive thing. If Palestinians really are the "very beautiful, kind-hearted, loving people who the world need to know more about" then is it too much to ask that they don't kidnap the journalists who are going to tell their version of events? I think a media boycott would benefit Gazans and journalists worldwide. Perhaps if there had been a temporary media boycott a few years ago, these two wouldn't have been kidnapped in the first place.

On a connected theme, I was struck by a comment in the middle of this report about a trip to southern Israel, near the border with Gaza:

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001251.html 

Key Quote:

“Lots of Qassams hit this city,” Shika said. “Most people killed by the Qassams live here.”

“How many rockets are hitting the city right now?” I said.

“Not as many today,” he said. “Because of the war in Lebanon.”

“What does Lebanon have to do with it?” I said.

“All the journalists forgot about us during the Lebanon war. So the terrorists are waiting for the media to come back before firing rockets again. They don’t want to waste those they have.”

“That can’t be the only reason,” I said. “The IDF has been active in Gaza this entire time. Surely that has something to do with it.”

“Yes,” he said. “Also because of the IDF.”

Later two more Israelis repeated what Shika said about Hamas and Islamic Jihad cooling their rocket launchers while the media’s attention was elsewhere. I haven’t heard any official confirmation from either side that it’s true.

(Emphasis mine)

I realise this is merely anecdotal, but it makes a lot of sense. Terrorists see the western media as a front in their strategy.

A poker hand.
Topic: Poker

I'm playing the Gutshot Series of Poker today. It's the best structured mid-price tournament that there has ever been on British soil. If you have the time and £330 is in your price range, you really must play it.  Gutshot are to be commended for putting this on.

Talking of NL freezeouts, I'm reminded that I played a £100 one at the Western a couple of weeks ago. I'd heard that there was to be a £3,000 guarantee and went hoping that only 15 people would show up! Alas it was not to be. The tournament attracted 57 runners, rougly half of whom had 'qualified' at a pub called the Captain Morgan. As the guarantee was in no threat of being invoked, the Western topped up the pool by £300 to make it a round £6,000. Nice one.

A good turnout.

 

As the event was well structured and well run, it was annoying that I got very unlucky and was knocked out on the bubble by none other than the eventual winner, Mark Strahan, author of a 25,000-copy selling poker book, which tragically I've never found time to read. Mark has inaccurately described the hand on his website, so I thought I would put this one to you. I'm happy with how I've played it - I don't think there's much special about what I've done. Instead I'm interested in whether readers think that Mark's played this wrong.

His account: 

http://ukpokerukpoker.blogspot.com/2006/08/aug-8th-10010-nl-holdem-western-club.html 

We were down to 10 players left, with only nine to go through to the final. Someone had vetoed the idea of a 10th prize and I was fine with that. Playing two tables of five each, I'm on the big blind with Mark on my right in the small blind (not 'late position' as he describes) when to my surprise I see two people limp in early position for 1200. Mark made up for the 600 small blind and I looked down to see AA. It's very rare to have people limping in pots at this stage of the tournament. It tends to be a 'pump or dump' moment. But there was quite a lot of play in the game thanks to the generous chip allocation of 5,000 points and a reasonable clock interval of 30 minutes. I think the average stack was about 24,000 at this stage and I had 16,500 before posting the BB.

Upon finding the aces, I raised 7,000. There was 4,800 of blinds in the middle. It's a bit more than I would normally raise to win this, but I thought it would thin the field and I might get action from one of the early position limpers regardless of the amount if they were trapping with KK or QQ.

The limpers folded and then to my surprise, Mark asked me 'How much more have you got, Dave?' I replied ''8,300' and he said 'I'm all in'. I said 'So am I'.

Mark showed JJ and won when a jack hit on the turn.  This was frustrating of course. I wouldn't have minded so much if Mark had raised and then called my re-raise. That would be a fairly common blind skirmish encounter. What I couldn't understand was how his hand was worth 600 more one minute and 17,000 the next. How had it gone up in value so much? His unsolicited answer was 'I thought you were at it'.

Hmmm. I think that answer says more about how Mark plays or thinks most others play than it says about me. That's a clue by the way to many people's thinking. They reckon that others think like them. So the way they interpret someone else's action is through the prism of how they would play the hand in the same circumstances. That's one way you can get a line of someone's play without being in a hand against them.

What interests me more is whether Mark's call before the flop made sense. Obviously his hand is not to be folded, but shouldn't it be raise? I think it's a clear raising situation. You should like JJ, but not want to play them four handed out of position if possible. But at least one well respected player has told me that he agreed with what Mark did, but added that instead of re-raising he'd have flat called the 7,000 and then led into me on the flop regardless of what fell as a stop'n'go. (See comments to find out who)

I'm dubious about this I have to say. If you don't like raising with JJ because you fear that the early position limpers might have the hand dominiated, surely my raise should be feared because I've shown that I don't fear them? Unless you think I'm just some wild reckless gambler that is.

The worthy winner!

Terror threatens Germany.
Topic: Politics

What are Germans to make of the news that two young men, at least one of whom had middle-eastern connections, attempted to explode bombs on trains packed with commuters? In contrast to Britain, where terrorist apologists can be relied upon to quickly rustle up a few excuses about various provocations, it's not obvious what Germans could do differently. They have no troops in Iraq, no troops in Afghanistan, no involvement in Algeria, no involvement in Chechnya, no ban on headscarves and didn't publish cartoons about Mohammed!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5267920.stm  

Despite trying hard to be good infidels, they are still targets.

Carb addiction.
Topic: Misc.

In recent years I've become fairly convinced that carbohydrate and not fat is the real enemy the west faces if it wishes to combat the epidemic of obesity. In my own case, I find I can lose weight without feeling too hungry if I focus on meals that are based on meat, fish, vegatables and salad. Several times a week I go to a local 'greasy spoon' for a fry up breakfast and I find it keeps me full for most of the day. In fact the effect is so strong that I usually don't feel like eating again for seven or eight hours. That never happens if I eat the sort of Bran/Muesli swill that the 'experts' recommend. The result with those is that my body is screaming for more food in under three hours, often sooner.

On a whim today I did a google search for 'carbohydate addict' to see whether anyone thinks such a person exists and discovered this quiz:

http://www.carbohydrateaddicts.com/caquiz.html 

Answering the questions on the assumption that I eat some carbohyrdate in my diet, I find that I score almost 100 per cent! So that's me then! Luckily I've been off the carbs for a couple of weeks now and I've lost about six or seven pounds since then. Clothes are starting to fit more comfortably, which is nice.

Meanwhile, here's an interesting critique of the film 'Supersize Me' from a doctor who promotes a low-carb, high protein diet -

http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/archives/2006/08/appearing_in_th_1.html

The Year of the Car Park?
Topic: Poker
As others have noted, it wasn't a good WSOP main event for those who promote the idea that the name players have a substantial edge over the field. Not only was the winner, Jamie Gold, a complete unknown, but so too was virtually everyone else in the last 100. After Gryko got knocked out in 50th place, I think there were only three people left I'd heard of!

Faced with that, I can't help wondering whether this was bound to happen, given the plethora of books about No Limit hold'em that have been written in recent years, and the huge amount of actually quite good blogging about poker hands and situations (mercifully surrounded by a lot of crap too). There used to be a rule about not educating the weaker players - "Coaches in the Car Park!"

Luckily there are still plenty of people who are capable of reading a good poker book and completely misunderstanding the context in which its advice applies. But in a field of nearly 9,000 players, there's going to be about a thousand who are clever enough to digest the advice and know when to apply it and when not to. With the addition of many more skilled players, along with the increased field sizes, perhaps your skill level matters less than your stamina; knowing the odds and the moves being less important than being able to apply any skill at all after nine long days of play!

But what if someone wrote a really bad book? I'm not pointing any fingers here, as I've not read much of the output of recent years, but isn't it interesting that in the year following the publication of 'Kill Phil', Phil Hellmuth has one of his best WSOPs!

More nonsense about online poker.
Topic: Poker

I bought Private Eye this morning and discovered an ad at the back in the 'Eye Bet' section of the classifieds (page 37). It read 'Are you a loser? online poker help. www.get-even.info '

Well obviously I couldn't resist checking the site out. Of course it's a load of bollocks. I feel confident saying that, because it contradicts itself massively. On the intro page, it assures you that it's possible for online players to purchase software to help them cheat. But if you click on the link titled "How to make a six figure income playing online poker" you get to a page written by a 'Danish' online professional, who speaks his mind about online poker on the clickable link (in a mid-West American accent) and he firmly dismisses claims that online programmes can assist players. What a difference a page can make!

I'd love to say that you can take his word for it, but given that he also claims that he can teach you to: 'Win more pots day after day and skyrocket your earnings' and how to 'Never lose to a gambler with lucky cards again', that may not be possible.

PS - the sound file in which 'Kim Birch' claims that online poker rigging software doesn't work is near the bottom of the page, next to his photo and not the one at the top. By the way, does anyone else think that it's two different voices?

Guest contribution, from Frode Gjesdal.
Topic: Poker

Poker tournament deals – why take the money off the top?

By Frode Gjesdal

The other day I was in a poker tournament. Ninety two players had started, which meant the nine last remaining players would be paid. The first prize was some £24,000 while 9th would pay just over £2,000. When we got down to 13 or 14 players somebody (from the table with 40 per cent of the chips in the tournament, incidentally) suggested a deal should be made, taking money off the top two prizes to secure places 10-13 the tournament entry of £750. Everybody agreed, except, as is so often the case, the one Scandinavian at the table - me.

Now I don’t have a problem with deals in principle, but I don’t usually make them. For a number of strategic reasons, which I will not get into here, I think they are a mistake for a person with average or above average chips to agree to. But this is not the point I am trying to make.  What I feel was wrong about the deal proposed, and the deals that are normally proposed, is that you should take money off the top prizes to pay for the all the remaining players in the tournament.

Ask yourself this question; who benefits from this deal at this point? Surely most people would agree that the players with short stacks do. They are, after all, more likely than the big stacks to be knocked out before the money. They are also less likely than the players with more chips to go on and win the tournament. If a deal is struck, it secures money for people who are the most likely to finish just off the money or just into the money. Some of the pressure is off.  

Well if this is the case, money to pay every remaining player in the tournament should be taken from the smaller prizes not the bigger ones. I don’t see what is fair about asking the chip leader to give up equity to pay for the shorter stacks. If, as I pointed out above, the shorter stacks are the beneficiaries of the deal, then the shorter stacks should pick up the tab, instead of asking the chip leader for a free ride.

Guest contribution, from Dominic Bourke.
Topic: Misc.

Are you gambling responsibly?

By Dominic Bourke 

There is a dealer at the Gutshot cardroom in London who is affectionately known as Polish Mike. When sitting down to deal, he invariably greets the punters with the words ‘Please remember to gamble responsibly'. This is inevitably met with much laughter, followed by people betting bottom pair as if they held the holy grail itself. While Mike is a very likeable guy, he has one major flaw, and that is that he is massively underemployed. He should in fact be Governor of the Bank Of England. If the BOE aren’t going to employ him in their top job (he couldn’t do worse than Mervyn King, the present incumbent) then they should at least put him on the payroll. They could buy him a huge megaphone and station him outside large banks and major lending centres and as people entered these buildings he could shout at them ‘Please remember to gamble responsibly!’ Hopefully these punters would be more receptive than most poker players.

Why do I think Polish Mike should be in charge of British Monetary policy? Because the largest threat to the British economy is people gambling, sorry investing with almost psychotic irresponsibility. No one personifies this problem more succinctly than Sayara Beg.  Fortunately the BBC have given this lady her own blog, so I don’t need to go into too much depth explaining her situation, you can read it for yourself:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4997170.stm  

 

To give you a brief précis:

 

Her husband’s business was struggling, so they remortgaged their house and took out a personal loan. They also have two buy-to-let properties mortgaged up to the hilt, as well as credit card debts. Having decided that they were earning way too much money to service their meagre debts (which as a figure in the air guess, I would estimate are at least £500k) they decided to have a baby. Unfortunately shortly after she got pregnant, she was released from her job.

 

And guess what? One income, especially an uncertain one such as owning a restaurant, was not sufficient to service their mountain of debt. She is now using a news organization funded by you and I, to whinge and whine about how unfair it all is.

 

What galls me most about this woman isn’t the fact that she has taken a punt and that it has gone wrong. God knows any poker player/gambler could empathise with that. We have all punted a racing certainty and watched it get beat and many people, myself included, are nailed on to do it again (if Vorteeva runs at Tipperary on Thursday, my mortgage will be firmly on the line.) No, the real problem with this woman, and by extension with the British economy is that she refuses to take any responsibility for her situation. None of it is her fault; she feels she should take exactly 0% of the blame. So you have no guaranteed income in your family (he owns a restaurant, she is a freelancer) you rack up what must be a minimum of half a million pounds worth of debt, then you decide to have a baby. Yet when you can’t service your debt it isn’t your fault???

 

She points out in her first entry that she is different from most people who go broke, because she didn’t spend money she didn’t have on a shopping spree. Actually that is exactly what she did, only rather than buy Dolce and Gabbana dresses or Rolex watches, she bought buy-to lets, I guess the main difference is that if you have a cash flow problem you can flog a Rolex on Ebay way quicker than you can sell a studio flat in Bermondsey.

 

Further evidence of her sanctimoniousness comes when she reveals that by contacting her banks with a plan of action, she genuinely believes she has fulfilled all her responsibilities to them. The fact that she offers them the worst financial deal in the world by resolving to take a 6-month payment holiday, during which she will pay no interest nor pay any charges and after which they will simply continue as normal as though nothing has happened, doesn’t seem to be reason enough to her for them turning it down. If anyone doesn’t realise why this is such an awful deal for any bank to agree to, I will quite happily take £10k off their hands, pay no interest or charges on it, and then give them the £10k back in 6 months time. She takes her creditors refusal to countenance such an offer as proof that they simply have no desire to allow her to have her baby in peace, rather than what it actually is, namely commercial companies taking decisions that reflect their desire to act as ‘For Profit’ organisations rather than charities.

 

I don’t want to appear heartless here. I am after all a human being. I think it is nothing short of tragic that someone who is heavily pregnant has got herself into this situation. I really do hope that nothing that is happening at the moment affects the child and the baby is delivered healthy and happy. But the truth is that this lady’s attitude affects all of us. There are so many people who feel that they have a right to borrow unlimited amounts of money, and that any investment they make with that money has a divine right to be risk free. There are so many people out there who delude themselves into thinking they are ‘Asset rich, but cash poor’ when in fact their debts are worth more than their assets, which in layman’s terms means they are skint.

 

The problem is that when enough of these people find their house of cards collapsing around them, it will give not just them, but also the entire British economy a hell of a problem. It is no surprise therefore that the banks have now decided to take action, for example in the last year HBOS have lowered the limits of 600,000 credit card customers. It seems that if the British public are not going to listen to Polish Mike and gamble responsibly, then the financial institutions have decided that they aren’t going to allow the bets to be placed with their money.