The fine line between genius and stupidity

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

- Theodore Roosevelt*

Today I notified my boss that I intend to resign. I started with GE in August of 2002, and March 25, 2005 will be my last day.

Here is every conversation I had today:

So where are you going?

I don't know.

Oh I see, you're playing it cool? Come on is it Capital Source? Merrill? CIT?

No, seriously, I don't know.

You are quitting and you don't know what you are going to do?

Yup.

You don't have another job?

Nope.

Then why are you quitting?

I know that this job isn't right for me. I can't really look around and see anything here I'd like to be doing in 5 years. I figure I should get out now while I'm young and can afford to take some risks.

Why don't you look for a new job while you work here?

I've tried that the last few months, and its just too hard for me to work all day and then drive an hour home and spend more time looking for jobs. I think as long as I have this, I'd be lazy about my job search. This way I force myself to make something happen.

Wow. Are you my hero or do I hate you?

Some of both probably.

You really are just quitting?

Yes.

Are you insane?

Pretty much.

So what do you think you want to do?

I'm not sure, but this should give me some time to figure it out. I know I'd like to find something where I can use some creativity. I know that if I want to be in the business world, ideally I'd want to run my own business, but I'd at least want to work for a much smaller company so I can really jump in and make a big difference. I have a business idea that I'd like to tinker with, and I think a lot of what I've learned at GE could really help me have an impact at a smaller company. I'll also give serious consideration to going back to school.

Oh, so which business schools are you considering?

No, not business school.

Oh, law school?

No, probably not law school either.

Umm....?

I'd think about going to get a Ph.D. An academic career has always intrigued me - teaching, research, writing. In fact I was accepted to an economics Ph.D. program at Johns Hopkins and almost went there after college. If I did that now, I know I wouldn't want to study economics. There is a newly developing field of study called Evolutionary Psychology that interests me a great deal. I've been reading a lot about it lately, and plan to investigate options for further study.

This is all a joke right?

No, sorry.

Seriously?

Yes.

You're going to CIT aren't you?

No.

What about money? How can you afford this?

Well I think I can last 3 months, maybe 6 if I live light, with no more income. I have some savings and a roommate, so I should be alright. Additionally, I've been fairly successful with online poker, and I think there's a good chance I could cover my mortgage and bills playing for maybe 20 hours per week.

So you are leaving a job at GE to go play poker professionally?

I don't look at it that way. I'm leaving my job at GE because I don't like it. In my free time I plan to play some poker, and hopefully it will help me pay the bills until I figure out something else.

Bullshit! You are quitting your job to play poker!

Maybe a little.

Is that quote at the beginning for real? Are you actually trying to glorify the fact that you are about to be an unemployed hobo?

Yeah, its pathetic.


Thats all for now. Much more to come I'm sure.

* I slightly misquoted Teddy originally. I believe this version is correct now. Source.

Is Jeff upset by this?

Randy Moss got traded. Good move by Minnesota. The Vikings underacheive every year with Moss, so they might as well trade the clown and try something else out. I support any team shipping a jerk out of town.

This guy says the trade hurts the fantasy value of the Vikings running backs, but I disagree. While I understand that the presence of an elite receiver opens up the running game, they still have respectable receiving options in Robinson and Burleson, and a very good quarterback. The Vikings have 4 RBs who have had some fantasy significance in the last 2 seasons (Onterrio Smith, Michael Bennet, Mewelde Moore, Moe Williams) and I can't give all the credit for their success to Randy Moss. They have a lot of talented backs. Some of those guys will get more touches and have more opportunity to succeed, especially if they deal someone from the crowded backfield. Let us not forget the presence of excellent blocking TE/FB Jimmy KLEINSASSER, clearing holes for my dynasty league RBs.

The Big Game

I dreamed this hand last night. I'm weird.

For some reason I was sitting in the "Big Game," playing $4,000 - $8,000 with Doyle Brunson, Chip Reese, Daniel Negreanu, Johnny Chan, and several other top pros. I remember thinking that I had no business sitting there, and that they all were thinking the same thing. It wasn't clear to me how I had the money to be playing, but there I was looking at pocket deuces in the small blind, and had to make a decision.

Doyle folded under the gun, and Reese folded behind him. Another person who may or may not have been TJ Cloutier folded as well. Daniel called the $4,000 big blind and everyone folded to Chan, who raised on the button. I was about to fold, but then I thought that something seemed off about the action so far. Daniel open-limps in middle position? What is that about? This is the BIG GAME. Who open-limps? Negreanu has been known to play some weird hands in some weird ways, and so its very possible he has a pretty weak hand. Chan the Master knows this of course, so now I think that his raise on the button could come with some pretty weak hands as well.

So I decide to put $10,000 on top of my $2,000 small blind for a preflop 3-bet. I did this to put pressure on Daniel, but they can't imagine I went through the thought process of thinking that Chan's raise might not mean very much, so they will have to put me on a big hand. Both of them call my raise, and we see a flop with $40,000 in the pot:

5 2 7 rainbow (suits unimportant).

I bet out, hoping to represent AK, but knowing that I almost certainly have the best hand. Daniel raises, and Chan folds. I consider calling the raise and check-raising the turn, but i think its too likely Daniel could have a hand like 68, so I don't want to risk him taking a free card. I 3bet and he calls. $56,000 in the pot and the turn brings a 6. I bet, he calls. River is a 5. I bet, he calls. $88,000 pot.

I turn over my full house and Negreanu goes ballistic. He shows pocket 8s, and starts tearing into me, assuring me that if I keep playing that way I'll lose all my money. Pretty funny on so many levels.

• In reality, he seems to be a genuinely nice guy who probably rarely loses his temper, certainly not over a hand like that.
  
• I flopped a set. What does he want from me?
  
• If he had raised preflop, I wouldn't have played my hand.
  
• Why would I dream this. I'm insane.
  

I calmly ask him, "do you not want me at this table?" Implying that such poor behavior was likely to drive my fishy ass away from the table.

At that point everyone else started being really nice to me and apologizing for Daniel's rude behavior. They wanted me at the table. I went on to win an absurd amount of money, but then I lost some of it when I repeatedly knocked over my ginormous chip stacks, and I probably lost the rest of it in an explosion when I accidentally flipped over my rental conversion van trying to pull into a downhill angled parking spot too quickly. End of dream.

Facts and Opinions

Fact: The owner-to-be of the Minnesota Vikings said recently that he won't trade Randy Moss.

Opinion: Randy Moss and other idiot-savants like him illustrate to the sports world a fundamental challenge of real life. Sometimes compromising your beliefs pays off. In the Vikings case, they'd probably rather have a team where everyone bought into the concept of team, which Moss clearly does not do. But, the dude makes plays and helps win football games, so they look the other way on his me-first antics. We're all bent out of shape about steroids in baseball, but does the fact that they are so widespread really surprise anyone? Everyone else uses them, why shouldn't I? Its not fair to spot them an advantage, so I just have to keep up. Baseball is more fun to watch with the juicers, and football is more fun to watch with jackasses like Randy Moss in the game. You believe in teamwork and fair competition, but wouldn't you rather be entertained and disillusioned than righteous and bored?

Fact: Looking for a new band to like, I bought an OAR album recently.

Opinion: The lead singer of OAR sings every word of every song as if it were the most important and magnificent word in the history of time, which is cool at first, but gets old really fast. They join my list of otherwise cool bands that I can't get past something annoying about the lead singer. This list includes Led Zeppelin, Smashing Pumkins, Our Lady Peace, maybe a few others.

Fact: Maryland is about to lose to Clemson

Opinion: Terps suck.

Fact: As of the time of this posting, I am the only user of blogger.com with "Afrin" listed as one of my interests.

Opinion: Afrin is glorious nasal mist from God.

Fact: I used the spell check for this post after the Biz called me out on it for a sloppy post a few days ago.

Opinion: People should be allowed to keep midgets as pets.

Fact: Based on my replies to posts in this blog, someone said I "should probably be in an asylum."

Opinion: Everyone but me should probably be in an asylum, but the guy who said that is a gentleman of impeccable repute, so I shan't further slander his good name.

Coulda been worse

I just had a rough losing session, but I played well, otherwise it could have been worse. All these hands are intended to highlight spots where I saved myself from more serious damage, except for the last hand which I just thought was interesting. I used a hand converter (linked by clicking on the title of this post), and alternated colors so it was more obvious which commentary went with which hand.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is SB with Kh, Qh. 5 folds, MP3 raises, 4 folds.
Final Pot: 1.66 BB

This is a pretty easy fold for me these days that I never used to make. I'm up against an Ace far too often here to make it worth playing the whole hand out of position with King high.


Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is SB with Jh, Qs. 2 folds, MP1 calls, 5 folds, BB checks.
Flop: (2.33 SB) 5c, 2d, 9h (2 players)BB bets, MP1 raises, BB calls.
Turn: (3.16 BB) 3s (2 players)BB checks, MP1 bets, BB calls.
River: (5.16 BB) 5s (2 players)BB checks, MP1 bets, BB calls.
Final Pot: 7.16 BB

Another example of folding 2 big cards from the blinds. This time its just not worth completing the small blind (calling $2 more). I just can't be comfortable enough when I make top pair to play this whole hand out of position against so many players.


Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with Jc, Tc. 5 folds, MP3 raises, 3 folds, BB 3-bets, MP3 calls.
Flop: (6.33 SB) 3s, As, 6c (2 players)BB bets, MP3 calls.
Turn: (4.16 BB) 8c (2 players)BB bets, MP3 folds.
Final Pot: 5.16 BB

Pretty straightforward, folding a hand that is tempting.


Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is Button with Kh, Qc. 1 fold, UTG+1 raises, 4 folds, CO calls, 1 fold, SB calls, 1 fold.
Flop: (7 SB) 7h, 2s, Qd (3 players)SB bets, UTG+1 raises, CO folds, SB calls.
Turn: (5.50 BB) 6c (2 players)SB checks, UTG+1 bets, SB calls.
River: (7.50 BB) 7s (2 players)SB checks, UTG+1 bets, SB calls.
Final Pot: 9.50 BB

Here a tight player raised in early position, and I didn't want to take KQ against that, because his most likely hands are AA, KK, QQ, AK, AQ, JJ, TT. I'm in serious trouble against most of those hands, so I fold, and save myself a lot of money when it turns out the raiser had AQ.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is BB with Ac, Kc. UTG calls, 4 folds, CO raises, 2 folds, Hero 3-bets, UTG folds, CO caps, Hero calls.
Flop: (9.33 SB) 3c, Kh, 3s (2 players)Hero bets, CO calls.
Turn: (5.66 BB) Qc (2 players)Hero checks, CO checks.
River: (5.66 BB) 5h (2 players)Hero bets, CO raises, Hero calls.
Final Pot: 9.66 BB
Results below: Hero has Ac Kc (two pair, kings and threes). CO has Qs Qh (full house, queens full of threes). Outcome: CO wins 9.66 BB.

Here I save myself a bet by checking the turn. When the cut-off caps preflop, his most likely holding is QQ since my AK makes it less likely he has AA, KK, or AK. On the turn I can't beat AA, KK, or QQ so I check. His check behind makes me think maybe he has JJ, so I bet the river and pay off his raise. If my opponent had bet the turn I would have called and check/called the river so I'm losing 2 bets either way. If I had bet the turn he would have certainly raised either the turn or my river bet, so I saved a bet here because of a good read.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is BB with Kd, Js. 1 fold, UTG+1 raises, 3 folds, CO calls, 1 fold, SB calls, Hero calls.
Flop: (8 SB) As, Ks, 6h (4 players)SB checks, Hero checks, UTG+1 bets, CO calls, SB calls, Hero calls.
Turn: (6 BB) 9c (4 players)SB checks, Hero checks, UTG+1 bets, CO calls, SB calls, Hero folds.
River: (9 BB) Jh (3 players)SB checks, UTG+1 bets, CO calls, SB folds.
Final Pot: 11 BB
Results below: UTG+1 has 9s Ad (two pair, aces and nines). CO has Th Kc (one pair, kings). Outcome: UTG+1 wins 11 BB.

Nothing spectacular here. All of the other opponents were VERY loose, otherwise I'd often just fold this hand preflop. I call a bet on the flop because the pot is big and nobody has defined their hand very clearly. I fold the turn because at least one of these turkeys has an Ace, maybe 2 pair, and its not worth a big bet to see the river. I'm glad I folded because I would have made the 2nd best 2 pair hand.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is MP1 with Qc, Qd. 3 folds, Hero raises, MP2 calls, 1 fold, CO calls, 3 folds.
Flop: (7.33 SB) 3s, Kd, Jc (3 players)Hero bets, MP2 raises, CO folds, Hero calls.
Turn: (5.66 BB) Js (2 players)Hero bets, MP2 calls.
River: (7.66 BB) Ah (2 players)Hero checks, MP2 checks.
Final Pot: 7.66 BB
Results below: Hero has Qc Qd (two pair, queens and jacks). MP2 has Kc Qs (two pair, kings and jacks). Outcome: MP2 wins 7.66 BB.

I'm not sure about this hand but I think I played it well. When MP2 raises me on the flop, he probably has a King, but I think he could have a Jack or a straight draw often enough for me to keep playing. My bet out on the turn is the play I like here. If he has just a King, he can't raise my bet and probably would check behind me on most rivers if I check, so I get to showdown for only 1 more bet. If he has a Jack, he'll raise the turn usually, and then I can just fold. If he has a draw, he'll probably just call the turn. Basically it seemed to me that with that card, the only way he puts in 2 more big bets is with a hand that definitely beats mine, but he might have bet behind if I checked with a hand like AQ, QT, or TT. There's even an outside chance he might fold a weak King if he thinks I have a Jack or AK. In conclusion, folding somewhere would have been better, but since I made up my mind that I wanted a showdown with QQ, I got the cheapest possible showdown this way.


Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is MP2 with Ks, Qs. 3 folds, Hero raises, MP3 calls, 3 folds, BB calls.
Flop: (6.33 SB) 9d, Th, 7c (3 players)BB checks, Hero bets, MP3 calls, BB calls.
Turn: (4.66 BB) 9s (3 players)BB checks, Hero bets, MP3 calls, BB calls.
River: (7.66 BB) Kh (3 players)BB checks, Hero checks, MP3 bets, BB calls, Hero calls.
Final Pot: 10.66 BB
Results below: BB has 6s 8c (straight, ten high). Hero has Ks Qs (two pair, kings and nines). MP3 has Jc Kd (two pair, kings and nines). Outcome: BB wins 10.66 BB.

I like the way I played this hand. My bets on the flop and the turn with overcards and an inside straight draw figure to win me the pot a lot of the time if the river is a blank, since often the blind is calling with just an 8 and the guy behind me is usually calling with overcards. Turned out the weirdo in the blind had the straight the whole time, but was too scared of his own shadow to ever do anything with it. The guy behind me is a moron. I'm a moron too, actually.


Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is BB with Jc, Ac. 3 folds, MP1 calls, 2 folds, CO raises, 1 fold, SB calls, Hero calls, MP1 calls.
Flop: (8 SB) 9s, 9h, Kh (4 players)SB checks, Hero checks, MP1 bets, CO raises, SB calls, Hero folds, MP1 calls.
Turn: (7 BB) 8s (3 players)SB checks, MP1 checks, CO bets, SB calls, MP1 calls.
River: (10 BB) Ts (3 players)SB checks, MP1 checks, CO bets, SB calls, MP1 raises, CO calls, SB folds.
Final Pot: 15 BB
Results below: MP1 has Js 9d (three of a kind, nines). CO has Ah 9c (three of a kind, nines). Outcome: CO wins 15 BB.

Normally I'd probably just fold this hand preflop, but the cutoff knows that MP1 is very loose, so he'd lower his raising standards here, making me comfortable enough to see a flop out of position. I get out on the flop, but what the hell is MP1 thinking? He obviously thought his trips were the best hand the whole way. Why wait until the flush and straights come on the river to checkraise? Why not 3bet the flop or check-raise the turn?

Small Stakes No Limit fun

Since I've been struggling with limit hold'em, I figured I'd try out the online no-limit cash games. So far I like.

Game #727667997 - (blinds $0.25/$0.50) No Limit Texas Hold'em - 2005/02/20-17:23:30.3 (CST) Table "Gau (5 max)" (real money) -- Seat 2 is the button Seat 1: MSU_Poker ($44.50 in chips) Seat 2: idoljAce ($64.75 in chips) Seat 3: ADSPAR ($104.00 in chips) Seat 4: RikiRocket ($11.75 in chips) Seat 5: sckbr1 ($22.00 in chips)
ADSPAR: Post Small Blind ($0.25)
RikiRocket: Post Big Blind ($0.50)
Dealt to ADSPAR [ 6d ]
Dealt to ADSPAR [ 5c ]
sckbr1 : Call ($0.50)
MSU_Poker: Fold
idoljAce: Call ($0.50)
ADSPAR: Call ($0.25)
RikiRocket: Check
*** FLOP *** : [ 2h 6h 8c ]
ADSPAR: Check
RikiRocket: Check
sckbr1 : Check
idoljAce: Bet ($2)
ADSPAR: Raise ($6)
RikiRocket: Fold
sckbr1 : Fold
idoljAce: Call ($4)
*** TURN *** : [ 2h 6h 8c ] [ Js ]
ADSPAR: Bet ($8.50)
idoljAce: Call ($8.50)
*** RIVER *** : [ 2h 6h 8c Js ] [ 7h ]
ADSPAR: Bet ($22)
idoljAce: Timed out
idoljAce: Fold
ADSPAR: Winner -- doesn't show cards
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $29.50 Rake: $1.50
Board: [ 2h 6h 8c Js 7h ]
MSU_Poker didn't bet (folded)
idoljAce lost $15 (folded)
ADSPAR bet $37, collected $51.50, net +$14.50 [ 6d 5c ] (a pair of sixes)
RikiRocket lost $0.50 (folded)
sckbr1 lost $0.50 (folded)

When the button bet the flop after everyone checked to him, it looked like he was trying to steal the pot. Even though he limped, so could have some low cards, this didn't seem like a flop he'd want to see a checkraise, so I raised a medium amount. I was surprised that he called. He at least thinks he has a chance to win this.

On the turn I didn't want to check and face a big bet, so I decided to bet out. I like to bet weird amounts so I bet $8.50 into a $14 pot. It took him a long time, and he finally called. I'm out of position in this hand, so this was the last bit of information I was going to get before I have to make a river decision. This is a pretty good sized pot now, so I wanted to get it right.

I took a lot of time on the river before deciding to bet $22. The river brought a possible flush, which was good for me. If he had been on a flush draw, he wouldn't have taken so long to call on the turn. His stack was about $50 at that point, so I could have folded to an all-in raise. Given his flop bet and weak call on the turn, I think he probably had a pair of 8s with a weak kicker. There was just too much on that board for him to call with 89 or something like that. I decided on $22 because the graphic of $22 looked more intimidating than $20. I assume his time-out was intentionally not deciding to call, cause he was back the next hand.


Game #727648437 - (blinds $0.25/$0.50) No Limit Texas Hold'em - 2005/02/20-17:04:09.1 (CST) Table "Gau (5 max)" (real money) -- Seat 2 is the button Seat 1: MSU_Poker ($54.25 in chips) Seat 2: idoljAce ($52.25 in chips) Seat 3: ADSPAR ($62.75 in chips) Seat 4: GamecoxGirl ($27.00 in chips) Seat 5: puddler ($37.75 in chips)
ADSPAR: Post Small Blind ($0.25)
GamecoxGirl: Post Big Blind ($0.50)
Dealt to ADSPAR [ Ah ]
Dealt to ADSPAR [ Qs ]
puddler : Call ($0.50)
MSU_Poker: Call ($0.50)
idoljAce: Call ($0.50)
ADSPAR: Raise ($4)
GamecoxGirl: Fold
puddler : Call ($3.75)
MSU_Poker: Fold
idoljAce: Fold
*** FLOP *** : [ Jd Qd 9h ]
ADSPAR: Bet ($7)
puddler : Call ($7)
*** TURN *** : [ Jd Qd 9h ] [ 3d ]
ADSPAR: Bet ($28)
puddler : Call All-in ($26.50)
*** RIVER *** : [ Jd Qd 9h 3d ] [ 7s ]
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $75 Rake: $2
Board: [ Jd Qd 9h 3d 7s ]
MSU_Poker lost $0.50 (folded)
idoljAce lost $0.50 (folded)
ADSPAR bet $39.25, collected $76.50, net +$37.25 (showed hand) [ Ah Qs ] (a pair of queens) GamecoxGirl lost $0.50 (folded)
puddler lost $37.75 (showed hand) [ Ac Td ] (high card ace)


Another Small Blind hand. When everyone limped, it was highly likely that I was holding the best hand, but I wanted to narrow the field, or even win the small pot before the flop, hence the big raise to $4. 1 caller, and I see a flop out of position.

Good news on the flop is I have top pair with top kicker. Bad news is the board has straight and flush draws. I bet slightly less than the pot, which maybe was too little. He called with little hesitation, and the turn was an ugly diamond. The only made hands he could have that I might want to call my bet were AJ or KQ, but both of those hands would likely have raised preflop. So there was no point of milking him with a small bet. As far as my betting was concerned, he either had a made straight or flush, or was drawing to one of those. With about $24 in the pot already, and him only having $26 in front of him, if he had a made hand, all my money was going in. And if he had a draw, I wanted him to pay for it, so I went all in and hoped he'd fold.

When he called with AT, he had diamonds or straight outs, for a 34.1% chance of beating my AQ. That is 1.93 to 1. He called $26.50 with a pot of $50 in front of him, giving him 1.89 to 1, so it was basically a coinflip. River blank, WHEW!

From his perspective though, I think the call was a mistake, since if I had made a set or had a bigger diamond in my hand, his odds would have been considerably worse.

I'm much more comfortable analyzing limit hands, so if anyone has any thoughts on these no-limit hands, I'd appreciate it.

Reactions to Personality (last update 2/20)

I'll post all my responses to the feedback from the last post here, and I'll update it all here if I get any more.

• Both Biz and AC touched on something but none of us seem to know how to say it exactly right. Basically I think my style on the agreeable/antagonistic stuff so heavily influenced by my beliefs and by my strategic approach to dealing with people that its hard to tell what my natural personality is, so maybe a neutral 3 is most appropriate.
  
• The Biz said... "First, I think it may be erroneous to categorize one side of each set of traits as desirable. Someone may be so extroverted that they do not listen to others, open to experiences that are clearly detrimental to them or others, agreeable to the point of never voicing a legitimate counterpoint. It works better for some of the traits than others." I agree, and good counterexamples. I was originally going to get into that a lot in my initial post, but then I realized that while there are positives and negatives about both sides of the categories (especially at the extremes), there does seem to be a clearly preferable side. And some of the categories have more clear-cut preferables than others.
  
• Biz also made a point that when a rare event comes along that does hit me, it seems that it hits me HARD. Everyone gets hit hard sometimes, even the staunchest of the stable. And a natural problem with rarely getting hit is that you don't have experience dealing with it. I can say that my first huge loss prepared me well for dealing with the second. I'll face another hard loss some day, and that will be better than the first 2 I imagine. I don't think stability/neurosis is about how you react to the hard hits, but how you perceive more routine hits. Some people are emotional wrecks from day to day, others rarely seem to react strongly to anything.
  

Gotta go to a Herbie Hancock concert, should be awesome. I'll fill in some more later.

2/19 (10:48pm) :

The show last night was very very cool. As a former wannabe jazz musician, seeing these legends on stage together was special. Roy Hargrove, Michael Brecker and Herbie Hancock did some very very bad things. Here is the album. Herbie played with Miles and Coltrane back in the day. Silly.

Anyway back to the personality whatnot.

Biz:

Introverted/Extroverted: 4
Neurotic/Stable: 2
Incurious/Open to Experience: 5
Antagonistic/Agreeable: 3
Undirected/Conscientious: 4

Damn, the Biz defies quantification. This was hard.

Tending towards extroversion was pretty easy. While the Biz doesn't have the constant craving for attention of a 5, on any given night he'd rather hang out with people than not. I use willingness to try new foods a bit indicator for openness to experience, and the girth of the Biz alone hints at a 5 here. But beyond cuisine, he is open to trying new music, reading about new ideas, trying new activities. The Biz is down for whatever. These 2 categories were easier.

In the end I decided on a 3 for the A/A category. This was a compromise between memories of both extreme dickery and loving tender kindness. In spite of the insanely wanton cruelty, in the most tender moments, the moments I lived for, when I gazed deeply into his soulful eyes, I could palpably feel his love trying to break free and leap into my waiting arms...

Woah, got a little carried away there. Homoeroticism aside, most of his shenanigans are obviously in good fun, but he seems to enjoy them a bit too much to go beyond a 3.

The toughest were the Neurotic/Stable and Undirected/Conscientious. I haven't been around him for a few years, so I only get certain information these days. Even back in college, the Biz was good at presenting aspects of himself that he wanted to be seen, and concealing other things. We all do that to some extent, but I think he did it more than most.

My first inclination was to lean toward stable and undirected, but the more I've thought about it I'm going to go the opposite direction. Bouncing in and out of school seemed undirected, but I've also known the Biz to focus an incredible amount of energy on things that interest him. His physical manifestation exudes stability - measured movement, calculated appearance. But I think a lot of that is the way he wants to be seen, not the way he is.

My best guess is what at first seemed like lack of direction was actually a manifestation of some degree of neurosis. "Neurosis" sounds so clinical and extreme, which isn't really what I mean. I'm going to interpret the notoriously quick temper of the Biz as evidence that he is a lot more emotional than he might have us believe. Acting on based on emotion rather than rationality is a big part how I interpret the stable/neurotic category, so I think Biz often on the emotional side. So in a bit of an upset, I'm concluding that the Biz is fairly conscientious but somewhat neurotic.

I'll get to Bub's later. I'm going to watch SNL now. I can't decide if host Hillary Swank is really hot or really not hot. Cacocallia?

Bub (2/20/05, 5:30pm):

Introverted/Extroverted: 5
Neurotic/Stable: 3
Incurious/Open to Experience: 2
Antagonistic/Agreeable: 1
Undirected/Conscientious: 2

Bubspar demands an assessment, and for some reason I'm giving her a quick one, despite her offering nothing in return. She's definitely an extrovert, a social butterfly, so most likely a 5. The neurotic/stable category is tough for Bub, since I think women are naturally insane. Since there is no absolute scale, all the ratings are comparative to other people (which means I have to base it on the people I know, and my guesses about how that group fits into the rest of the population). For a 19 year old girl, I think she is extremely stable, which gets her a 3 compared to everyone. Hard for me to size her up on the curiousity issue since most of our time together is with our extremely incurious family. Aside from meeting new people, she doesn't seem to try new things very often - not adventurous with foods, reluctant to branch out to find a new job, etc. So I'm calling her a 2, but I wouldn't be surprised if she expanded out into a 4 over the next few years. She definitely loves to fuck with people and is extremely sarcastic, so I'm giving her a 1 for highly antagonistic. Bub seems all over the place a lot of the time, somewhat undirected. But I wasn't around when she was in high school and I only have certain anectodes about her college experience so far, so I might not have a good picture of this one.

I'm a feedback whore

Psychologists have discovered that our personalities differ in five major ways: we are to varying degrees introverted or extroverted, neurotic or stable, incurious or open to experience, agreeable or antagonistic, and conscientious or undirected. Most of the 18,000 adjectives for personality traits in an unabridged dictionary can be tied to one of these five dimensions, including such sins and flaws as being aimless, careless, conforming, impatient, narrow, rude, self-pitying, selfish, suspicious, uncooperative, and undependable.
- Steven Pinker, from The Blank Slate

Another Pinker reference. This excerpt from a passage about the heritability of personality characteristics made me want to do some self-evaluation based on those 5 criteria. I'll do a 1 to 5 scale for each. I see extroverted, stable, open to experience, agreeable, and conscientious as the preferable side of each category (although there are some positives of the other sides), so they'll be the 5s.

Introverted/Extroverted: 2
No doubt I'm on the introvert side. I do have some extroverted tendencies, most often when women and/or alcohol are involved. I value solitude, and when I don't get enough time to myself, it wears on me. I don't often initiate social interaction, however, when I find myself in social settings, I'm not uncomfortable and often enjoy myself. I think I'm very similar to my father in this trait.

Neurotic/Stable: 5
Very little can faze me. In fact I can really only think of 2 things that ever have - a tough breakup in college, and Melanie's death. But even at the hardest moment of dealing with those things, I was very conscious of a feeling that these tough times make me feel so alive, and I treasure that feeling. I'm a rock. I pride myself on it.

Incurious/Open to Experience: 2
I used to make fun of myself with the Wolfe about having a very small "bubble." Anything outside my comfort zone was outside the bubble. I'm naturally pretty conservative. Based on my behavior through high school, I'd call myself a 1, but I think that was more the effects of my ultraconservative parents who very set in their ways and rarely try anything new. This is a category where I have made an effort to force myself to change, and I've been steadily trying to expand the bubble, although I believe I'll always have a bubble mindset, as opposed to a 5 who wouldn't feel any bubble at all.

Antagonistic/Agreeable: 3
This category was a challenge for me to evaluate, cause there's a lot of static. On the one hand I don't have a lot of close friends, but on the other hand there are lots of people I'm friendly with. I tend to be fairly intolerant of what I see as weakness of character, but I also tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. I don't like to cause people discomfort, but I do find a strange thrill at uncomfortable situations that are less uncomfortable for me than for people around me.

I think I like to test people. I'm probably the most antagonistic with the people that I think I might like, but I'm not 100% sure yet. With people I know I don't like, I don't even give them the respect of saying or doing anything that might bother them at all, so with them I'm pretty agreeable. And with the people I'm sure I like, any antagonism is more of a game - almost a mocking of the test antagonism for the people in the middle. Actually classifying them as people I "like" or "dislike" isn't really right. I think its more about respect (although I'm starting to learn to respect certain things about almost everyone).

That all was completely incoherent, so I'll say that a I'm in the middle and let's move on...

Undirected/Conscientious: 2
This one was tricky cause I'm not sure exactly what he meant. Undirected to me implies drifting aimlessly without a goal. I can relate to that. But conscientious to me means given a goal, you clearly focus on achieving it. I think that when I have a specific goal, I'm pretty good at driving towards it, but I don't often have one. But this doesn't seem like a well-defined continuum compared to the other categories that weren't hard to interpret.

In the end I'm calling myself a 2 here, because I have no attention span and I too often fall back on my cocky belief that my half-assed efforts are better than most people's full effort. In an office setting where there's very little incentive to go the extra mile its very easy to act that way cause there isn't often any incremental reward for incremental performance, but even the fact that I continue to stay in such a situation is indication of a lack of clear goals. Maybe I'm just young and restless and I'll eventually get better at this. Definitely didn't inhert this from my mother.

We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done.

-Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (and for some reason my high school senior yearbook quote)

I'm curious how others would classify me on this kind of scale. I'd appreciate anyone's feedback with as much or little explanation as you feel like. And its all in the spirit of self-improvement, so I won't take offense if you say I'm a reclusive jackass hobo. Leave a response below this post, and if you want I'll size you up too, either publically or privately.

Just for fun we should all do Erm's as well:

Introverted/Extroverted: 5

Neurotic/Stable: 3

Incurious/Open to Experience: 4

Antagonistic/Agreeable: 2

Undirected/Conscientious: 5

This is weird

For over 2 years at work I've been using a semi-secret proxy server to get past the company ban on personal use of internet at work. Three days ago they finally caught on and changed the settings of the proxy and now I can't use hotmail, gmail, AIM, or yahoo fantasy sports. Huge disaster. But now I can read blogs and post on here, which I couldn't do before.

Still no porn though.
*Sigh*

Blue Oyster Cult

I GOTTA HAVE MORE COWBELL!!

If they want to hang themselves, just give them the rope!

A couple hands from tonight that illustrate a valuable strategy for low-limit online games.

***** Hand History for Game 1587050276 *****$3/$6 Hold'em - Sunday, February 13, 19:54:55 EDT 2005Table Table 12085 (Real Money)Seat 10 is the buttonTotal number of players : 10 Seat 2: PokerTov420 ( $180 )Seat 3: ADSPAR ( $388.5 )Seat 5: Monkeydenis ( $93.5 )Seat 6: NEROS_ACESUP ( $130.25 )Seat 7: GEORDIEC ( $119.5 )Seat 8: talentedbmk ( $216 )Seat 10: Buckner333 ( $65.5 )Seat 4: thejtrain ( $144 )Seat 9: cskollmann ( $156 )Seat 1: herjn64 ( $147 )

herjn64 posts small blind [$1].PokerTov420 posts big blind [$3].
** Dealing down cards **Dealt to ADSPAR [ 9s 9h ]
ADSPAR raises [$6].thejtrain folds.Monkeydenis calls [$6].NEROS_ACESUP folds.GEORDIEC folds.cskollmann folds.Buckner333 calls [$6]..herjn64 folds..PokerTov420 folds.
** Dealing Flop ** [ 2s, 3d, 5c ]
ADSPAR bets [$3].Monkeydenis calls [$3].Buckner333 calls [$3].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 3c ]
ADSPAR bets [$6].Monkeydenis folds.Buckner333 calls [$6].
** Dealing River ** [ Jc ]
ADSPAR checks.Buckner333 bets [$6].ADSPAR calls [$6].Buckner333 shows [ 6s, Ah ] a pair of threes.ADSPAR shows [ 9s, 9h ] two pairs, nines and threes.ADSPAR wins $52.5 from the main pot with two pairs, nines and threes.

After the turn action, its pretty obvious that I have the best hand and that Buck is drawing, most likely he is holding an Ace and hoping for a 4 or a pair to his Ace or kicker. There is also a backdoor flush draw he could be drawing to.

The river card isn't an obvious scare card, so I almost decided to bet. But then I realized that if he was on the draw I suspected, he probably wouldn't call the bet with no pair. However if I checked, there is a good chance he'd bluff at the pot, hoping I was betting on a draw. This also protects me from having to pay off a raise if he paired the Jack or hit the flush.

This move took into account specific information about this player. I hadn't played many hands against him, but he had played more than half of his hands since he sat down, which made it even more likely that he was the kind of player to play Ace-rag that way.

***** Hand History for Game 1587070265 *****
$3/$6 Hold'em - Sunday, February 13, 19:58:39 EDT 2005
Table Table 17509 (Real Money)
Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 1: ADSPAR ( $238 )
Seat 3: EkenSe ( $149.5 )
Seat 5: Leatherwings ( $153.25 )
Seat 7: massh0le ( $141.75 )
Seat 8: guydubois ( $279 )
Seat 9: Searle33 ( $152.5 )
Seat 6: wise2004 ( $140.5 )
Seat 2: johnbond ( $176 )
Seat 4: IB2BAD ( $96 )
ADSPAR posts small blind [$1]. johnbond posts big blind [$3].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to ADSPAR [ Ah 9c ]
EkenSe folds. IB2BAD folds. Leatherwings folds. wise2004 folds. massh0le folds. guydubois folds. Searle33 calls [$3]. ADSPAR raises [$5]. johnbond calls [$3]. Searle33 calls [$3].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 3h, Qc, Qh ]
ADSPAR checks.
johnbond checks.
Searle33 bets [$3].
ADSPAR calls [$3].
johnbond folds.
** Dealing Turn ** [ 5s ]
ADSPAR checks.
Searle33 bets [$6].
ADSPAR calls [$6].
** Dealing River ** [ 7d ]
ADSPAR checks.
Searle33 bets [$6].
ADSPAR calls [$6].
Searle33 shows [ 2d, Jd ] a pair of queens.
ADSPAR shows [ Ah, 9c ] a pair of queens.
ADSPAR wins $46 from the main pot with a pair of queens with ace kicker.

Preflop I knew that Searle was very loose, and would have probably raised with a pair or a better Ace than me. Since the big blind's random hand is probably worse than A9, it was an easy raise for me.

That flop was good for me, since there are only 2 cards that could improve my opponents' hands. I decided to check because I thought I'd get more information that way. If I bet and get called, I don't really learn much cause people call flop bets with just about anything. If I bet and get raised it leaves me more confused, cause I would think someone would wait til the big bet streets to raise a Queen. So I check, and am glad to see the big blind check. I seriously doubt that Seale has a Queen, so my call is easy, and the fold from the big blind is beautiful.

The check-call on every street makes me look weak, so he keeps betting his crappy hand that he would have folded instantly if I showed any aggression. Obviously I risk letting him hit a flukey pair to beat me, but I think it was worth it.

Happy New Year, now you suck at poker

Since the start of 2005 I've lost $3,000. I guess its actually worse than that since I have $400 of buy-in bonuses improving that number. Definitely the worst losing streak I've ever experienced, and frustrating as hell. Its taken me a week to write this part, which reminds me that I never finished writing my LA trip poker recap because I didn't want to write the part about losing $1,800 in one horrible day. I should finish that story and post all of it on here.

Anyway, here are some numbers from pokertracker, which might be a little off since I tend to forget to request hand histories from Paradise. Also I took a shot at $15/30 and lost $1,200 and kept those hands in a separate database, so I won't include those unless specifically noted.

Since 1/1/05:

$3/6 full handed
Total Hands: 5,746
VP$IP: 18.34%
W$WSF: 34.21%
W$ at SD: 54.46%
BB/100 hands: 0.16

$5/10 full handed
Total Hands: 3,557
VP$IP: 16.17%
W$WSF: 32.63%
W$ at SD: 50.22%
BB/100 hands: -4.20

$5/10 (6max)
Total Hands: 1,360
VP$IP: 27.72%
W$WSF: 35.05%
W$ at SD: 45.85%
BB/100 hands: -10.28

Aside from the huge drop in win rate, there aren't even any stats that jump out at me. I've felt like I've played fairly well - I really can't believe my play has been this drastically poorer. I do think that I have a lot to learn about shorthanded play, and its going to be a while before I try the $5/10 6max party game again.

I'd like to figure out how to use pokertracker to get to the bottom of this losing streak. Is it just bad luck? Have the games changed? Here are some more comparative stats on the full-handed $3/6 and $5/10 games:

2005 (2004)
Average pot size in big bets: 6.66 (5.93)
Winning %: 8.84 (11.02%)
Aggression Factor Total: 1.49 (1.52)
Aggression Factor Preflop: 1.35 (1.43)
Aggression Factor Flop: 1.70 (1.80)
Aggression Factor Turn: 1.64 (1.53)
Aggression Factor River: 1.34 (1.28)

I'm surprised that the pots are actually bigger, cause it has seemed to me that the games haven't been as good. It looks like I'm playing just as tight and just as aggressive as I was before, I'm just not winning hands. I'm winning 20% fewer hands. So with an average pot size of 6.66, if I won 11 pots per 100 instead of 9 I'd be getting 13BB/hour back. Assuming that there are slightly under 10 players at the table on average, I guess I should be winning a little over 10% of the hands (I'm tighter than the average player, so maybe this should be lower??). So it looks like those 3 ridiculously good months I was winning a bit more than I can expect, and lately I've been slightly unlucky.

I'm still averaging 4.47 BB/100 and about 3BB/hr overall at $3/6. Playing 4 tables for 20 hours per week for a year that would make $72,000.

For now I've decided to stick with $3/6 until I win back the $3,000 I lost mostly at higher levels, at which point I'll reevaluate. I'm going to play only 3 tables until I start winning again. I also will try a few tournaments on occasion to increase those skills.

I did this whole post without a bad beat story. I rule.

What's love got to do with it?

Kevin Lomax: What about love?
John Milton: Overrated. Biochemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate.
- Devil's Advocate

Breakthroughs in cognitive neuroscience are showing that the human mind is made up of many "modules." Kind of like a computer, our brains have programs for everything we do - language, face recognition, reaching for objects, vision. Rather that studying the mind as one complete organ, it is more appropriate to look at the subparts, the modules, the programs.

But don't we feel like we just have one mind? Our sentience, our consciousness feels to us like one continuous stream that is in charge of everything. How can we have multiple minds?

There are well known studies of brain surgery patients whose corpus callosum (the nerves that connect the 2 halves of the cerebrum) has been severed. These people literally have 2 minds! Since the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, if you show them an image only in their right eye, only their left brain gets the message, and vice versa for the other eye.

For example if the left eye is shown a picture of snow, and the right hand is instructed to feel several objects and grab the corresponding object, it grabs a shovel. Meanwhile the right eye is being shown a chicken, and the left hand grabs an object that feels like a claw. But what is fascinating is that if you ask the person why the right hand grabbed the shovel, the left brain which controls language answers "well I'll need the shovel to clean up after the chickens" with complete sincerity. The left brain is completely unaware of the real reason the left hand picked up the shovel, so it makes up a believable story to explain its actions, and it does this without even realizing thats what is happening.

The one conscious mind we feel is probably a lot like the left brain observed in the study. We have direct access to some of our mind modules like pain sensors, vision, and hunger, but like the split-brain patient maybe we don't have the connection to other modules that influence our behavior. (Most of the train of thought from the last few paragraphs is presented in The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker. If you find it interesting, I highly recommend all of his books. This entire post is highly influenced by my recent study of evolutionary psychology.)

So what's love got to do with it? What if we have "mate detection" modules?

1. I see a girl with a symmetrical face with unblemished skin whose features appear at the average of the population and some module says "she is healthy and has no obvious genetic defects."
2. I see that her body is proportioned in an hourglass shape and some module says "her body appears capable of carrying and giving birth to a child."
3. As I talk to her some honesty-detection module says "this person genuinely believes what she is saying."
4. As I get to know her and observe her behavior a trustworthiness module says "this woman is unlikely to abandon her child" and "this woman is unlikely to sleep with another man behind my back."

So while all those modules are processing information and the natural conclusion is that she would be an excellent long-term partner in reproductive efforts (as opposed to someone with only the first 2 characteristics but without the 2nd two, who might be only good as a short-term reproductive partner), what is my conscious mind feeling?

The pain-detection module doesn't work by giving your conscious mind a message like "excuse me, but this fire you stuck your arm into is causing severe damage which might impair your survival chances. I suggest you remove it from the heat source." It sends a message that I feel: "SHIT THAT BURNS!"

So the modules send me these messages:

1. This girl is beautiful. Her face is very attractive to me.
2. This girl has a smoking hot body. I want to have sex with her.
3. What a great person, I know she won't give me misleading information.
4. I know I can always trust this woman.

I don't register each of those feelings individually probably (well maybe 1 and 2). My mind gets each of those reports from the modules and tells me that I love her. My love of a woman is my conscious mind's reception of messages from several modules, that are designed to recognize the suitability of a reproductive partner.

For lots of people who grow up believing in true love and the purity of emotions, this kind of coldly scientific analysis of their most personal feelings could be pretty traumatic. It seems so... inhuman!

But thats the whole point of love in the first place. If a woman had the choice between 2 ideal suitors, and one of them says "I love you" and the other says "I have observed that you are a healthy female of breeding age, and I believe that you would be an excellent choice to raise several of my children" that isn't much of a choice for her is it? But picking the lovey dovey guy isn't just best from an emotional standpoint, it is strategically best for her genetic interests as well.

A man who appears to be motivated strictly by rational calculation will probably at some point rationally calculate that she is no longer worth investing his time into, and might calculate that hot young neighbor is probably a better choice. Now she's got 2 kids, and is knocked up again and alone, and some of her kids will be lucky to survive at all. Meanwhile that cold, calculating bastard is bringing home the bacon to the neighbor and the kids he had with her.

But the guy who is in love isn't acting on cold, inhuman logic. He is motivated by this crazy force he has no control over. He loves her so much that she knows he'll always be there for her and for their children. He writes her poems and buys her jewelry to prove his love, while the other guy is saying "it would be in our mutual best interests for me to save the money I would have spent on jewelry to buy winter clothing for our children, and I can't waste my time writing sonnets because it would be more beneficial if I spent those hours working and accumulating more wealth to insure our survival." Practical Joe has a good point, which hopefully will be of comfort to him when Enrique gets the girl.

So what I am supposed to do with all this information? What am I supposed to do if I'm in love?

I know when I feel love, but now I also know WHY I feel it. A problem is that my mental modules were designed to maximize replications of my genes in the more primitive hunter-gatherer environment in which 99.9% of human evolution took place. Society and technology have changed much faster than our minds could evolve. Since the environment is different now, I feel conflicts between my conscious rational strategies, and the emotions that are supposed to guide my behavior.

We aren't built to be happy. We are built to have as many healthy offspring that live to have as many healthy offspring as possible. Falling in love at 19 with a 15 year old girl makes sense in a hunter-gatherer world. By that point we're both more or less physically mature, and I can probably bring home enough food for myself and a wife and child. My hormones are raging, so I want to have sex with her, which leads to babies and being in love with that girl means those babies are more likely to survive and have their own babies eventually.

But think about all the people in our modern world who are all fucked up about high school romance. A teenage couple 150,000 years ago was just trying to survive. Now we have proms and condoms and go off to college, and our emotions don't know what to do.

We're jaded about love because our first one didn't work. Back in the day, the first one had to work for almost everyone, and if it didn't you were too busy trying to feed yourself and your kids without help from a partner to really worry about your hurt feelings.

We do have a remarkable luxury emotion we call humor, and I'm thinking we should all be willing to use it. Let's all laugh at ourselves and our anachrononistic emotions a bit more often.

Stop the madness

Our life is frittered away by detail. Simplify, simplify.
Henry David Thoreau (1817 - 1862)

I got so excited about the whole blog idea that I started 2. Made sense at first - one was going to be a personal journal type thing, and the other was going to be a poker/sports rambling thing to share with people. But once I started writing I realized I liked sharing all of it, and now it just seems pointless to have split everything up.

So I'm combining them both into this one. I put all the posts from the other one in here and backdated them. Suck it, dolphin!

Stalling with a pair of hands from tonight.

I've been wanting to write the 2nd part of my online poker saga, but my schedule has been just too busy lately. I have basketball games on Monday and Wednesday nights, and indoor soccer games on Tuesdays. I considered writing it when I got home from work today, but decided to play instead. I put in 1 hour playing 4 full $3/6 tables on Party, and I lost $70. Blegh.

Here are some hands I thought would be interesting to write about.

***** Hand History for Game 1571336377 *****$3/$6 Hold'em - Thursday, February 10, 20:05:38 EDT 2005Table Table 13140 (Real Money)Seat 4 is the buttonTotal number of players : 10Seat 1: kidmarek ( $158 )Seat 2: Simplecall ( $134.5 )Seat 3: Blackdan13 ( $152.5 )Seat 4: babyNM ( $421.5 )Seat 5: STP21604 ( $126.5 )Seat 6: muggsy666 ( $196.5 )Seat 7: RAllen28 ( $134 )Seat 8: ADSPAR ( $245 )Seat 9: mx957 ( $146 )Seat 10: LDHpp ( $184 )

STP21604 posts small blind [$1]. muggsy666 posts big blind [$3].

** Dealing down cards **Dealt to ADSPAR [ Qc Ks ]
RAllen28 folds.ADSPAR raises [$6].mx957 folds.LDHpp folds.kidmarek folds.Simplecall folds.Blackdan13 folds.babyNM calls [$6].STP21604 folds.muggsy666 calls [$3].

** Dealing Flop ** [ 9h, 3h, Tc ].
muggsy666 checks.ADSPAR checks.babyNM checks.

** Dealing Turn ** [ 9c ]
muggsy666 checks.ADSPAR checks.babyNM bets [$6].muggsy666 calls [$6].ADSPAR raises [$12].babyNM calls [$6].muggsy666 calls [$6].

** Dealing River ** [ 3d ]
muggsy666 checks.ADSPAR bets [$6].babyNM folds.muggsy666 folds.

ADSPAR does not show cards.ADSPAR wins $58.5

Preflop the raise here is pretty standard. Limping is usually not a good play cause you get less information about hands behind you. This forces weaker hands to fold, and most hands that dominate you (AA, KK, AK, AQ) will reraise a lot of the time and warn you on a cheap street that you are in trouble. The button calling two cold rules out those hands for the most part. The big blind calling the raise means basically nothing in this game.

A lot of times a blind will bet out on a flop without face cards, so his check looks pretty weak. I consider betting with my overcards and inside straight draw, but decide to check and call or possible checkraise a bet from the button, but he checks too.

The turn 9c is a great card. When the blind checks again, it almost completely rules out the possibility of him having a T,9,3 or pocket pair, since he saw our weakness on the flop. I again consider betting, but decide that if I get called I won't know what to do if I don't improve on the river. So I check, and I love it that the button bets. There's no way he would have checked the flop with any pair, so he probably has either some weak straight or flush draw (note there are 2 flush draws now) or maybe Ace high or even a complete bluff. When the blind calls this bet, it means he is on a similar draw. I checkraise with King high and they both call.

When the 3 pairs on the river, I have an easy bet. The only remote concern is that maybe the blind had a 3 and played it weak. The button couldn't possibly call a preflop raise with a 3 so when the blind checks, I'm pretty sure my bet will take down the pot, which is does.

I like the way I played this hand and built a nice pot and didn't have to show my bluff.

$3/$6 Hold'em - Thursday, February 10, 20:07:51 EDT 2005Table Table 13140 (Real Money)Seat 6 is the buttonTotal number of players : 10 Seat 1: kidmarek ( $158 )Seat 2: Simplecall ( $131.5 )Seat 3: Blackdan13 ( $152.5 )Seat 4: babyNM ( $403.5 )Seat 5: STP21604 ( $101.5 )Seat 6: muggsy666 ( $160.5 )Seat 7: RAllen28 ( $176 )Seat 8: ADSPAR ( $279.5 )Seat 9: mx957 ( $146 )Seat 10: LDHpp ( $184 )

RAllen28 posts small blind [$1].ADSPAR posts big blind [$3].
** Dealing down cards **

Dealt to ADSPAR [ Ad 4h ]
mx957 folds.LDHpp folds.kidmarek calls [$3].Simplecall calls [$3].Blackdan13 calls [$3].babyNM folds.STP21604 calls [$3].muggsy666 folds.RAllen28 calls [$2].ADSPAR checks.

** Dealing Flop ** [ 9c, 3d, 5h ]
RAllen28 bets [$3].ADSPAR calls [$3].kidmarek folds.Simplecall calls [$3].Blackdan13 calls [$3].STP21604 calls [$3].

** Dealing Turn ** [ 2d ]
RAllen28 bets [$6].ADSPAR calls [$6].Simplecall raises [$12].Blackdan13 folds.STP21604 folds.RAllen28 calls [$6].ADSPAR raises [$12].Simplecall calls [$6].RAllen28 calls [$6].

** Dealing River ** [ 7d ]
RAllen28 checks.ADSPAR bets [$6]. Simplecall raises [$12].RAllen28 folds.ADSPAR calls [$6].

Simplecall shows [ 4d, 5d ] a flush, seven high.ADSPAR doesn't show [ Ad, 4h ] a straight, ace to five.
Simplecall wins $108 from the main pot with a flush, seven high.

Preflop there are lots of callers, so its hard to get a read on anyone, except that a big pair is unlikely.

On the flop I think my call is pretty easy. I have the inside straight draw and an Ace that might be live since nobody raised, and the pot is big. Everyone calling is exactly what I hoped for.

The turn brings my dream card. I don't raise because I can't imagine anyone has too much of a draw to beat me, and there's a good chance someone might raise behind me with this kind of weird board. Party poker players love to raise the turn on weird boards, and that is what happens, giving me the chance to limp/reraise with what I'm sure is the best hand when nobody caps it. I put the raiser on 2 pair.

The river flush card scares me a bit, because there are tons of players who would raise that turn with the flush draw. I consider checking, but I doubt the raiser would bet 2 pair in this spot, so I bet out. He raises and I have no choice but to call with this huge pot and see his flush.

Oh well, I still like the way I played this hand. Should I have maybe checked the river? Given that he raised with a weak-ass flush he probably was the type of player to bet that river with 2 pair, so I wouldn't have missed that bet by checking and calling. Hmmm. Not sure.

I'm going to go watch Tilt on my 55" HDTV.

Way back then...

I started playing online poker in September of 2000 on Paradise Poker. I played a lot and had a lot of fun with it. Over the next few years I fell into a cycle of building up winnings over an extended amount of time, and then losing them all very quickly taking a shot at a bigger game. This happened over and over from the lowest limits on Paradise, to a particularly memorable drunken incident with the $25/50 shorthanded game on PokerRoom.

In June of 2004, I found myself in the biggest hole I had ever been in: down $1,000 for my online poker career. I decided it was time for some serious self-evaluation. I had quit online poker forever several times before, but I always came back. So I didn't think quitting was really an option. What I needed was a real strategy.

So I decided to swallow my pride and play exclusively $1/2 hold'em until I proved to myself that I was a winner at that level, and then slowly move up. Much to my surprise, I didn't find myself getting bored by the low stakes. Quite the opposite, I was energized to have a specific challenge, a long-term goal I was working towards. As I grew more comfortable with each game, I'd add more tables, and then eventually move up.

From June until the end of 2004, I won about $10,000. Here are some highlights from my Poker Tracker (www.pokertracker.com) stats.

Overall
Total Hands: 34,564
VP$IP: 23.48% (which includes shorthanded play)
W$WSF: 35%
W$ at SD: 55.3%
BB/100 hands: 4.46

In 13,601 hands of full table $3/6 hold'em, I averaged a preposterous 6.29 BB/100 hands. Assuming I got 60 hands/hr at each table and played 4 tables at a time, I was averaging about $90/hour playing $3/6. Unreal!

I had been very successful so far in my brief ventures into $5/10:

$5/10 full tables - 2,295 hands ; 3.98 BB/100 hands
$5/10 6max - 3,088 hands ; 3.1 BB / 100 hands

In November I won over $3,000 in 36 hours of play.
In December I won $2,900 in 40 hours of play.

I was completely dominating every game I sat in, like some kind of low-limit poker deity. I started doing some projections. If I maintained my $3/6 win rate and played 30 hours/week I could make more than at my job. If I kept even half that win rate at $15/30 I could easily make $150,000 a year, maybe more. I seriously entertained the idea of quitting my job and playing online poker full time for a while.

And then there was January...

to be continued

OUCH

I just lost $721 in 90 minutes on Party Poker. I was playing 4 full tables of $5/10 hold'em, all of which were excellent games. I could list a dozen bad beats, but none would be worse than my top set of Kings losing on the river to a miracle quad 6s. That $230 would have helped.

I quit, not even because the bad beats put me on tilt, because I was still playing well. I just can't image myself winning right now, and this isn't fun at all. Tomorrow or Tuesday I need to do a better analysis of my recent downslides.

ARGH!!

Gotta get out!

"So I was sitting in my cubicle today, and I realized, ever since I started working, every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life. "

-Peter Gibbons

Here was what I actually did last Thursday afternoon. I was sitting in a meeting where I had no responsibility whatsoever, growing more and more bored, when I decided it would be fun to sketch a portrait of the guy sitting across from me. 5 minutes later I had a drawing that to my amazement actually looked like the guy. I was so proud of it that I scanned it and spent the rest of the afternoon emailing it to people and accepting their praise and laughter.

So in an apparent effort to top that, today I rolled in to the office 30 minutes late, took a 2 hour lunch at a nice French restaurant and charged it to the company, and then left 90 minutes early, making sure to leave my computer and desk lights on so that anyone walking by would think I was still there but just away from my desk. I'd say in a given week, I do about 15 minutes of real, actual work. I wonder how many bored 20-something cubicle clowns compare their life to Office Space every day?

I'm in desperate need of a change, since I clearly don't give a shit about this job any more. Its been 2 or 3 weeks since I got the non-negotiable offer letter from HR and learned that I'd be making less money in 2005 than I did in 2004 and would once again have the job title that I had when I started working here 2.5 years ago and had been twice "promoted" beyond. Ever since then I've pretty much given up on this gig. I just have to smile until my yearly bonus payout in 3 weeks.

My career options at that point:

1. Try to get a job with our competitors. I'd probably make more money and have more responsibility, but its just another 9-5 in a world that ultimately doesn't interest me.
2. Try to find some other job in something totally different. Ideally I'd find a small company where I can make a huge impact really quickly and use more of what I have to offer. The problem with this is finding the right situation is damn hard, and then convincing them that I'm right for them might be pretty hard also. I have a few years with a highly respected company, so that will perhaps count for something.
3. Go back to school. School is great, but I would have to be damn sure its what I want to commit 5 years of opportunity cost to getting a PhD.
4. Play poker professionally. I'm fairly confident, but far from certain that I could make a decent living from poker at least for a few years. This is obviously extremely high risk, not to mention socially challenging, but there isn't a better time in my life to try to "scratch that itch." I could always try it for a few months and if it doesn't work out just retreat to one of the other options.
5. Keep limping along where I am until I figure out something better.

Or various combinations of these. Melanie (who deserves an entire post sometime soon) had a quote on her desk that was something to the effect of: "If everyone waited to act until they knew their actions could be perfect, nothing would ever get done." If I subscribe to that way of thinking, I should probably scratch #5 off the list.

This isn't something I'm going to figure out tonight, but here is what I can do:

• Search through job listings and other sources to see what opportunities are out there
• Put together my resume
• Start to more seriously investigate school options
• Do some details financial planning for the poker option (which I've done to some extent, and might address in a post on my other blog)
• Talk to my friends at the local companies and see what my options are
• Keep writing about things and organizing my thoughts
• Two chicks at the same time!**
  

That's all for now. Its 5:30 and I'd just now be leaving the office, so I consider this already a victory for my personal productivity.

Oh, and I think I might forget my plans to keep this just to myself. I got nothing to hide, especially not from the people who would actually take any time to sit there and read what I write. So I probably will put a link to this one in my IM profile too. Maybe I'll write more later about that decision.

** CLARIFICATION: "Two chicks at the same time" is a quote from Office Space, a movie that I had already referenced several times as a running theme to this entry. As the final paragraph hints, when I started this blog it was only seen by a few close friends, most of whom would have recognized this memorable punchline. Like 90% of what I write, it wasn't meant to be taken seriously, which I now feel the need to make clear since my readership has expanded to people who might be on the far side of the sarchasm. Believe it or not, even I have limits to my tastelessness, and I doubt I'd ever be so boorish as to write about something as private as my sex life in a public forum.

Miscellaneous Whatnot

• 4 years ago I lived and breathed Maryland basketball. I went to every home game and showed up 3 hours early. I spent hours every day scouring the internet for articles and message boards. I owned www.juandixon.com and updated it daily. Yesterday I completely forgot about our game against Georgia Tech. Wow.
• Holy shit this kid is good. No right foot yet, but for most of this he is like 7 years old. FUTBOL JESUS! http://www.bercasio.com/movies/jean_carlos.wmv
• I still haven't done my first poker post, cause I haven't wanted to acknowledge the vicious losing streak I was on. But now that I'm starting to win again, maybe I'll get on that. Does that make me a fair-weather fan of myself?
• Ha, reminiscing about the good old days of Maryland basketball reminds me of my favorite false rumor ever. After a particularly bitter loss in the last game of the regular season (must have been 2001) at Virginia, the fans rushed the court as the Terps were walking off. Within an hour after the game, there was a rumor that Steve Blake had gotten into a fight with a fan, which would clearly lead to a suspension in the upcoming ACC tournament, but that Matt Hahn, the walk-on benchwarming son of Assistant Coach Billy Hahn, was going to take the fall for Blake and say he did it. Such a great rumor because it was so believable. Steve Blake doesn't take shit from anyone, so it was easy to believe that he'd punch some drunken Wahoo. And Matt Hahn was the ultimate team player who knew the best way he could help his team is to take the bullet. Plus, all white people look alike so the league would never know the difference. I love the ACC.
• Coach K looks like Fredo. This is well-documented.
• I had a 9pm basketball game tonight, and I have a 10:40pm soccer game tomorrow. I get so fired up during the games that it takes me hours to calm down enough to sleep. I'm going to be tired by Friday.
• Speaking of false rumors, I read a hoax article that said John Goodman died. Another easy to believe lie. Damn those bastards. To spite them I am going to watch The Big Lebowski this week.
• Its pretty funny that I'm posting links here like anyone reads it. HA!

I hate losing

I hate to lose more than I love to win.
Jimmy Connors

Our basketball team just lost a close game to a team that beat us earlier the season on a buzzer-beater. It really brings out that nagging feeling that Connors noted, something I've felt in sports, poker, and any other competitive endeavor.

If that is really true though, why would I play? Or better yet, why wouldn't I just play against 12 year old girls so there's never a risk of losing? Well in poker I'd actually gladly do the equivalent that a lot of the time and happily rake in the cash. That's pretty much what I did for 3 years of college, and the last 3 months of 2004 on PartyPoker (more on this in another post, this one is about competing). But with sports I guess I just love playing against good competition too. I love the feeling of improving my game, and I love when my vision of a play becomes a reality.

You hear cliches like "play as a team," or you read about the effects a great coach can have on a team, or you talk about how "team chemistry" is so important. In team sports you have several people all working together towards a common goal, the most effective way to reach that goal and win the game is to have everyone playing with one mind.

Any NBA team would easily crush even the best college basketball team, because the players are bigger, stronger, faster, and smarter. But if there was some alternate reality where 5 bodies could share one mind, I think the smaller, weaker, slower athletes could easily beat even the best NBA team. If everyone on a team knew exactly what everyone else on the team is going to do and has the exact same vision, they have an insurmountable advantage over a team of vastly superiour athletes. I don't know exactly where the line is - the high school JV girls team isn't going to beat the Lakers no matter how many minds are involved - but the point is that 5 bodies work so much more effeciently controled by 1 mind instead of 5.

Obviously in this world we can't share a mind between several bodies, but you try to get as close to it as possible. The point guard flashes 3 fingers to run a baseline screen play; the coach switches to a zone defense during a timeout; defenders call out a switch to cover a pick-and-roll; I make eye contact with you and then I make a backdoor cut for a layup. Communication.

Teams run plays so they know exactly what everyone is supposed to do. You practice them over and over and understand all the options. You scout out the competition and prepare a game plan to defend against their strengths and exploit their weaknesses. Everyone knows the plan. Everyone knows their role. Everyone is on the same page, and the best TEAM wins the game, at least thats what us purists believe.

The most frustrating thing about this basketball league I'm in with my boys is that we just go out once a week and run and thats it. I don't mind if people miss shots or fall over, but I hate it when we don't play smart. And I don't by any means intend to exclude myself - tonight I scolded us for taking bad shots, and promptly went right out and took a contested 3.

I try to get us to throw together a quick gameplan before we start, but we struggle to stick to all but the most basic strategies. If I map out a quick play during a timeout, everyone forgets about it by the time we walk back out on the court. I bark out orders on the court and from the bench because communicating is our only hope of playing with one mind. I don't know if my ideas are better than anyone else's, but everyone acting on one decent idea is better than 5 people acting on 5 different great ideas, and nobody else is speaking up.

By no means should this be interpretted as my busting on anyone on the squad. We all just signed up to come out and run, and I'm grateful that they listen cause I talk way too much. Everyone has a great attitude and is open to everyone else's suggestions. Every once in a while we even manage to execute on a plan. It is damn hard to have 6 people show up 10 minutes before a game after a long day of work and play well together. I love basketball and I love playing with these guys.

Teams that succeed in leagues like this are usually teams that have been playing together a long time and thus know each other very well, or teams with one or two excellent players with a ton of experience who are leaders for the team. These teams play with one mind better than the others.

An idea I'd really like to try is to find somebody who would coach us. It sounds funny for a league like this, but it would really help us so much to find an older guy who knows ball to watch from the sidelines and run the game. We can't really spend hours scouting opposition, cooking up schemes and practicing them. But we could have a respected leader who we all respect and follow.

Now I'm going to go watch the Maryland-Duke game. I think one reason among many that I'm not as into Maryland ball as I used to be is because I hate when we lose more than I love when we win. But I do love basketball.

I've fallen and I can't get up

So the snow gods and the comedy gods rumbled, and comedy gods were victorious. Stephen Lynch was very very funny, but Hedberg stole the show.

He must have been drunk or high out of his mind. Most of what was so funny about his act was that you couldn't believe that this was what you paid to come watch - he spent 5 minutes pushing back the curtain that hung behind the stage to see what was back there, he spent 5 minutes telling jokes from backstage cause he wandered back there and seemed to forget to come back out, he spent 15 minutes lying on the ground begging them to close the curtain or drag him offstage so the audience could go home, and he spent 5 minutes arguing with his manager that he didn't want to end the set. I couldn't tell if that was par for the course with him, or if we were witnessing some kind of rock-bottom. It was a bit sad though. Sean and I decided that he'd probably be dead within two years.

My concern would be that I'm too much like Mitch. He's a fairly intelligent guy with a lot going for him, but he's a complete mess. He staggers around the stage like standing is almost too much effort. I'm not wasted all the time, but I wonder if I've fallen over and can't seem to figure out how to get back up either.

I know that I could do a lot with my life, but I don't know what I want to do and so far I've been too lazy to figure it out. I have started to try though. In the next entry I will start my career musings.

See For Yourself

Don't believe me because you see me as your teacher. Don't believe me because others do. And don't believe anything because you've read it in a book either. Don't put your faith in reports, or tradition, or hearsay, or the authority of religious leaders or texts. Don't rely on mere logic or inference, or appearances, or speculation. See for yourself what is true- that's the only way you can genuinely know anything.
-Buddha

I think I saw that quote in someone's IM profile years ago, and I've kept a copy of it since then. I don't know where it came from, but I like it. My intention is to use this blog to explore the serious side of some of the lighter things in life, mostly poker and sports, hopefully with a lot of humor thrown in. If I can mix in elements of HDouble's poker blog( http://cardsspeak.servebeer.com/) with half the humor and insight of the Sports Guy ( http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/simmons/index) and have as much fun as the Sports Junkies (http://www.junkiesradio.com/) I'll be proud of this. And if it is none of those thing, it is still my way of seeing for myself what is true.

Definitions

If I tore your legs off, you'd look like snowmen
- Mitch Hedberg (talking to the ants in his ant farm)

I'm supposed to go to a comedy show tonight featuring Mitch Hedberg and Stephen Lynch, but it is pouring down snow so it looks like it might get cancelled. Too bad, those are some funny dudes.

I started this blog because I want to do more writing. Defining one's audience is crucial to effective writing, so I've decided to actually set up 2 blogs.

This one I will use like a personal journal and write about whatever is on my mind. I'll assume that I'm writing this just for me. I'm not even sure how this service works, so I'm guessing there's a chance that I'll have random people reading it, which is fine with me. I don't intend to publish this to my friends, so I suppose the point of this one is to write just for me, and anyone else who happens to read it should know that is its intention. I'll be curious to see if I truly write just for me, or if I shade my language knowing there is a chance that strangers might read it, or a smaller chance that friends might read it. We'll see.

Then I'm setting up another one that I will plan to share with people, writing specifically about poker and sports, and maybe some other lighter topics. Ideally it will look like the Sports Guy (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/simmons/index) meets the Sports Junkies (http://www.junkiesradio.com/) with some of this guy too ( http://cardsspeak.servebeer.com/).

Topics I'd like to address here in the near future:

• Career, including my recent incident with HR
• That girl in Ohio
• Evolutionary Pyschology

But for now I'm going to set up that other blog. I need a clever name for it. Hmmm....

And it was good

I had to start writing somehow, and now I have. Its 3:30 in the morning, I just lost $190 playing No-Limit Hold'em, and there's a girl asleep somewhere in Ohio. I'm exhausted and exhilarated, and life is so damn good.