Draw Poker Drama

Night before last I had the task of covering one of the five-card draw tourneys for PokerStars (another SCOOP event). An interesting moment came up right at the end of that one that I thought I’d share. First, however, a little aside about covering draw games.

From the reporting side of things, flop games, draw games, and stud games all present various elements and/or challenges unique to each.

For flop games, the cards are important (of course), but a lot of the story of the hand is told via the betting. When it comes to flop games, getting bet amounts correct and keeping track of the size of the pot is easily the biggest challenge -- when reporting live tourneys, that is. (Grabbing all that from hand histories for these online events, natch.) Although at the live event, noting all of the cards in everyone’s hands at an Omaha showdown can be tricky sometimes, too.

In terms of writing up action, stud games are probably the least enjoyable (for me) if only because it can get so unwieldy describing all of the streets, explaining hands as they are being built, and recounting the betting which can change order with every new card.

Comparatively speaking, draw games are probably the easiest to follow. And -- perhaps contrary to expectations -- can be especially fun to watch and report on, too.

There are lots of showdowns in draw games, which tends to make for a satisfying conclusion to the story of a hand. Can be a little wearying recounting the discards in each round of a triple-draw game, but there are ways of communicating that information without being too tedious. Fixed limit betting (as in stud games) isn’t always so exciting to recount, either. But some of these draw games feature pot-limit or no-limit betting, which can get pretty interesting as one tries to gauge how the bet sizes plus the number of cards drawn together can suggest hand strength.

In fact, when I think about my favorite live tourneys covered, I remember the $2,500 Deuce-to-Seven Triple Draw event from 2008 -- event no. 40, won by John Phan -- as one of the more exciting events I’ve ever watched.

Lots of drama in that one, partly thanks to Phan’s endearing-slash-provoking personality, but also thanks to the dynamics of the game itself. (F-Train and I were on that one -- you can see our coverage here.) Also, sometime after that event, I wrote a bit about that final table in a post that contrasted Phan’s aggressive play to that of David Sklansky, who finished sixth in that event.

Anyhow, to get back to the SCOOP event I was covering earlier in the week. It was the “Low” version ($11 buy-in) of the pot-limit 5-card draw event. So just one draw, and just two rounds of betting. As I’m suggesting, it was a genuinely interesting event to watch, with a lot of head games going on as players routinely used position -- crucially important in pot-limit games and in draw games -- to put opponents to tough decisions.

Once the tourney reached heads-up, the final two battled for a while until the one with the historically-significant username “Benny Binion” had built nearly a 6-to-1 advantage over his opponent, “fly44.” Then came a hand in which Benny had the button. Before the draw, he raised pot, fly44 reraised, and soon they had fly44 all in. fly44 discarded three cards, which had to be a good sign for Benny. Then Benny also discarded three cards. Even before the showdown, Benny was already typing gibberish in the chatbox, the reason for which was soon made clear.

The hands were revealed,and fly44 had a pair of tens. Benny Binion showed -- a pair of deuces. Then he typed “I had KK.” When discarding, he’d accidentally clicked on one of his kings and tossed it with his other cards. Now the poor guy was miserable, seeing he’d literally tossed away a winner.

fly44 soon got back to even, and the whole thing was starting to turn into a tragedy of sorts, but Benny retook the advantage and eventually won the sucker.

Curious to see. Actually, it will happen not infrequently in the lowball draw games that players will “break” their made hands before a last draw, fearing they are behind, only to discover they’d thrown away a winner.

I particularly recall a hand from last summer, one involving Layne Flack and Eric Crain at the final table of the $2,500 Mixed Event, in which something along those lines had occurred. In a 2-7 Triple Draw hand, Crain stood pat after the last draw and Flack decided to toss one card. Crain then won the hand with a 9-5-4-3-2. Afterward, a fairly distraught Flack revealed he’d broken a hand that was in fact the same one Crain showed down, tossing the nine and picking up a jack.

PokerNews has recently reconfigured its tourney archives a little, making it easier to find hands and link to ’em -- so, if yr curious, here’s that one: “Bad Break for Flack.” And yes, there is a pun in that headline.

Anyhow, it was curious to watch Benny Binion talking about having accidentally broken his hand like that. He kept saying in the chatbox how he was rewatching it in the replayer, torturing himself for the next few minutes.

There is no five-card draw at the WSOP, as all of the draw games are lowball games. In fact, they have been for some time. The last time a five-card high draw event was played for a bracelet was 1982.

The winner? David Sklansky.

Iambic Pentameter Is Not As Easy As It Looks

Another long one last-night-slash-this-morning-slash-this-afternoon helping cover PokerStars Spring Championship of Online Poker.

I was on one of the pot-limit five-card draw events, which ended around 4 a.m. or thereabouts. I actually had a few thoughts about covering draw events I wanted to share, but will wait to do that tomorrow when I’ve had a little more rest.

The other, the “High” version of Event No. 8 (No-Limit Hold’em, $1,050 buy-in) wound all of the way down to dinner time today.

Was feeling a little delirious toward the end of the latter one, as evidenced by the tweets I began sending out @hardboiledpoker:

hardboiledpoker: as this #SCOOP event I'm covering has run so long, I'm now contemplating rewriting my report in heroic couplets

hardboiledpoker: His hand crushed, Cod Meharly met his fate; / His leaving meant the field had shrunk to eight. #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: "I shove!" So quoth TheMasterJ33, / But his rival’s pocket kings was sad to see. #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: His hope had been an ace would fall from heaven; / Alas, none came, and now we’re down to seven. #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: Tens felt good to Magnifico18; / Too bad that WatchOutFish had paired his queen.

hardboiledpoker: The turn and river cards each brought a duck -- / Magnifico18 was out of luck.

hardboiledpoker: (am heading down a dangerous road here, I think)

hardboiledpoker: Sixth place is where KJulius10 ends, / Cut down by BrynKenney’s nines full of tens.

hardboiledpoker: ags104 was dealt an ace and ten / ’Gainst BrynKenney’s sevens was he all in.

hardboiledpoker: The sort of hand from Sexton would evince / “Got ourselves a race situation, Vince.”

hardboiledpoker: Losing, ags104 was shown the door, / Which means that #SCOOP 8-high is down to four.

hardboiledpoker: The turn card came, BrynKenney made his bet; / WatchOutFish called, but saw Bryn made a set. #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: With just three left, a deal was next discussed; / Terms were not reached; we’ll see who next goes bust. #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: SFitch4 is out! Only two remain! / The end is coming soon! And I’m still sane! #orsoithink #ineedadrink #SCOOP

hardboiledpoker: BrynKenney defeats gabe2323 / Which means you’ll get no more couplets from me #SCOOP

Soon after, my write-up of the event -- ultimately lasting over 21 hours, all told -- went up over on the PokerStars blog. Check that out if you want to see how it all played out, minus the rhymes.

On Deal-Making; or, Everybody Wants a SCOOP

Another late one last night. Or this morning, I should say. Then I had to do some stuff at the “day job” where I have a few last tasks to perform over the next week or so. All of which means I’m one tired gumshoe at present. The schedule lightens up a little looking ahead, though, especially once I am finally, completely done with the other.

These first two long shifts of helping cover the Spring Championship of Online Poker over on PokerStars both ended with my witnessing some end-of-tourney final table deals, as frequently happens at these things. Can get a little tedious sometimes, especially if you’re there on the rail waiting for the sucker to end and more than 24 hours since yr last snooze.

Had fun yesterday tweeting a little back and forth with Jessica Welman while one deal was being discussed. She was also up late covering SCOOP (and FTOPS, too, I believe). I proposed they should start including the reporters in such deals. I said I thought I deserved a little extra cabbage, too! She said she thought she was probably too tired to negotiate properly.

Speaking of the negotiations, I wanted to share what seemed like a sharp contrast between two such deals -- one on Monday morning, the other from this a.m.

The Monday one came in one of the “High” buy-in events and involved three players. A damn lot of money on the table -- around $640,000 total. This trio actually made three different attempts at negotiating a settlement before finally coming to terms. Probably an hour total was spent on the process, as the tourney had to be manually paused each time, then calculations made, then the talk.

Since I had nothing better to do, I, too, did a few calculations while I watched. In one instance, one player had almost exactly half the chips in play (a tad over 49%), one about a third (34%), and the other about a sixth (17%). If I recall correctly, there was still a ton of play left in this one, as even the short stack had more than 60 BBs, I believe.

Here the short-stacked guy somewhat surprisingly proposed an even split of the remaining cash (leaving $20,000 left for which to play, as the tourney’s rules stipulated). Needless to say, the other two scoffed at that notion. But the short-stacked guy kept pressing the issue, trying to characterize their stacks as basically even, and also pointing out that he was a highly ranked online player (in a major poker publication) and so believed he had a significant edge over the other two.

Was interesting to see this line of argumentation taking place. I’ve seen it before, with fairly well known online guys using that status as a kind of bargaining chip when negotiating deals.

Anyhow, that line wasn’t working here, and it wouldn’t be until much later -- when the formerly short-stacked guy had in fact taken over the chip lead -- that they were able to agree to a slightly modified “chip-chop” (i.e., dividing what was left to be determined from the remaining prize pool between them according to their current stack sizes, minus the $20K). The discussion was quite rancorous, in fact, with a few epithets thrown about by one of the players toward the other two. And when they seemed at an impasse over exactly $2,000 (of the $620,000 they had to divide), the whole thing did appear from the rail to be fairly unpleasant and perhaps a little absurd.

Contrast that with what I saw this morning at the end of one of the “Low” events. This was Event No. 3, the six-handed no-limit hold’em event with rebuys that cost only $5.50 to enter. There were four players remaining, each of whom had perhaps invested no more than $15-20 in the sucker, and there was about $107,000 left to be split among them.

Thanks to the 24,000-plus entrants and all of the rebuys/addons, there was something like 275 million chips in play. The blinds were up to 1 million/2 million (with a 250,000 ante), and all four players had between 60-80 million in their stacks.

Now I don’t know if any of these four were highly ranked online players, but I doubt it. More likely all were thrilled to be hitting such a huge score, which may well have been the biggest ever for each. Once the idea of making a deal was proposed, one player immediately suggested they just split $100K of the remaining money, leaving almost $7K for which to play.

All four immediately assented, recognizing perhaps the fact that despite all those chips they were actually all down to 30-40 BB, and that in fact even a 20-million chip difference didn’t amount to much.

Was fun to watch the deal go down so smoothly. As well as to see four clearly happy campers by that point, sort of giddy there some 18 hours after the tourney had begun and realizing they’d managed what was probably something like a 125,000% ROI.

I have no grand generalizations to add to this here comparison. I will say it wasn’t surprising to see the bigger prize pool appear to cause bigger headaches when it came to striking a deal. Could’ve also just been the personalities involved, though. If you’re curious, here’s the recap for the first (“High” one) and here’s the one for the second (the “Low” one).

The Brain Kept a-Rollin’ All Night Long

Late posting today. Everything ran late today. Was covering a couple of different Spring Championship of Online Poker events last night for the PokerStars blog, one of which ended up running on and on and on, not completing until nearly noon today. Thus the sleep deprivation. I did manage to catch a few hours this afternoon and will be back at it tonight, but thought I’d pop in over here for a moment just to touch base.

When I say everything ran late today, I’m also including a somewhat momentous left turn I took around lunchtime (that “detour” to which I alluded last week), in which I finally, finally, finally made it official regarding moving on from my longtime place of employment. Had wanted to do that first thing in the morning, but I was spending those hours watching three guys not making a deal at a final table instead. (Some interesting stuff there, actually, about which I might write a little later in the week.)

A bit of situational irony, I suppose, that I would stay up working the whole night before I finally really did go in and leave the “day job.”

I say it was a “momentous” turn because, well, it was. Doing anything for a long time (we’re talking many years here) then deciding not to do it anymore, can be tough. You get ideas of yourself, your identity, how you introduce yourself to the world -- that stuff is hard to shake.

Sort of like developing a particular playing style that seems to work for you for a time, perhaps even a long time, then finally realizing it just isn’t going to cut it anymore. For whatever reason, you just know you can’t continue doing what you have done. So you know a change is in order, but it takes a while to make it. Then even when you do manage to change, you continue to think of yourself as before.

The fact is, I didn’t mind so much staying up all night being occupied with SCOOP, given that I might well have had a hard time relaxing and getting to sleep anyway, anticipating the move I took today.

Don’t worry -- I’m not going to go on too much further with the abstract navel-gazing here. Will have plenty of pokery stuff to talk about in the coming days, I’m sure, between SCOOP and the fast-approaching WSOP. Incidentally, if you want to see what I was up to last night/this morning, click here for the epic recap of that more-than-22-hour-long SCOOP Event No. 1-H (No-Limit Hold’em, $2,100 buy-in, 6-max.), won by Raj “BadcardsAA” Vohra.

Meanwhile, let me say thanks once again for all the nice comments on my “detour” post last week, as well as for the other support and feedback I’ve gotten, too.

Time to go brew some coffee. Work awaits!

Here’s the SCOOP (PokerStars Spring Championship of Online Poker)

Looks like the Full Tilt Online Poker Series XVI is wrapping up today with their Main Event, for which they’ve brought in their newest red pro, Annette “Annette_15” Obrestad to host. And as one big online series concludes, another gets underway -- the 2010 Spring Championship of Online Poker over on PokerStars. No shortage of opportunities for the online tourney crowd these days.

I have to admit that when it comes to FTOPS, I get a little less excited simply because it seems the series is always either ongoing or just around the corner. Indeed, FTOPS XV just concluded back in February, and I think that MiniFTOPS generally runs just after the regular series, so there really is something happening with FTOPS pretty much all the time. Meanwhile, over on PokerStars the SCOOP is a once-a-year affair, as is the World Championship of Online Poker (WCOOP) that tends to come around each September.

This is the second year for SCOOP, while the WCOOP has been around since 2002. My understanding is that the SCOOP originated in part thanks to the massive popularity and growth of WCOOP. The latter began as a summer event, then moved into the early fall (around the time the WSOP moved its schedule from the spring to the summer).

Was looking at the crazy numbers for the WCOOP over the eight years it has run. Check ‘em out:

2002: 9 events, $799,050 total prize pool
2003: 11, $2,716,200
2004: 12, $6,002,300
2005: 15, $12,783,900
2006: 18, $18,674,300
2007: 23, $24,218,600
2008: 33, $39,958,000
2009: 45, $51,652,800

Last year was the first for SCOOP, which is also sometimes called the “Spring Championship of Online Poker - All Stakes.” The idea was to do something to make SCOOP distinct from the WCOOP, and so a schedule was created that included a wide range of buy-ins -- from as little as $5.50 (a rebuy tourney) or $11 on up to the $10,300 Main Event and the $25,500 NLHE Heads-Up event.

Last year there were 22 events, each with a “low,” “medium,” and “high” buy-in, meaning 66 tournaments in all. The total prize pool for all 66 added up to $38,324,830.

This year PokerStars has nearly doubled the schedule, with 38 events (again each with “low,” “medium,” and “high” buy-ins), meaning 114 SCOOP bracelets are up for grabs. The guaranteed prize pool is $45,000,000, although if last year is any indication, the prize pool will likely exceed that. (Last year SCOOP sported a $30 million guarantee for the total prize pool.) It is possible, I suppose, that the prize pool may ultimately eclipse that $51,652,800 from the 2009 WCOOP, the biggest ever for an online tourney series.

Today things kick off with two events (six tourneys) -- the No-Limit Hold’em 6-max. & the start of a two-day No-Limit Hold’em event. Here’s the full schedule (all times are Eastern):

Sunday, May 2, 13:00
Event No. 1: No-Limit Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 2, 17:00
Event No. 2: No-Limit Hold’em (2-day event)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 14:00
Event No. 3: No-Limit Hold’em (6-max., rebuys)
Low -- $5.50 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $55 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $530 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 17:00
Event No. 4: Badugi
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 20:00
Event No. 5: Pot-limit Omaha (turbo, 1 rebuy/1 add-on)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 14:00
Event No. 6: Pot-Limit Five-Card Draw
Low -- $11 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 17:00
Event No. 7: No-Limit Hold’em, Heads-Up Match Play
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 20:00
Event No. 8: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $11 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 5, 14:00
Event No. 9: Mixed Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $400,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 5, 17:00
Event No. 10: Seven-Card Stud
Low -- $33 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 6, 14:00
Event No. 11: Pot-Limit Omaha, Heads-Up Match Play
Low -- $22 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 6, 17:00
Event No. 12: No-Limit Hold’em (w/knockout bounties)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 14:00
Event No. 13: No-Limit Hold’em, Ante Up! (antes, no blinds)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 17:00
Event No. 14: Limit Omaha/8
Low -- $55 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 20:00
Event No. 15: No-Limit Hold’em, 2X Chance (turbo, one rebuy if bust in first hr., no add-on)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 14:00
Event No. 16: No-Limit Hold’em Shootout (10-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in (quadruple shootout, i.e., max. 10,000 players), $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in (triple shootout, i.e., max. 1,000 players), $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in (double shootout, i.e., max. 100 players), $200,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 17:00
Event No. 17: Pot-limit Omaha (6-max., rebuys)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 20:00
Event No. 18: Limit Hold’em (turbo)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 9, 13:00
Event No. 19: No-Limit Hold’em (big antes)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 9, 17:00
Event No. 20: No-Limit Hold’em (2-day event)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 14:00
Event No. 21: Pot-Limit Hold’em/Pot-Limit Omaha
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 17:00
Event No. 22: No-Limit Hold’em (4-max.)
Low -- $33 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 20:00
Event No. 23: No-Limit Hold’em (turbo, rebuys)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 14:00
Event No. 24: Triple Draw Deuce-to-Seven
Low -- $11 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 17:00
Event No. 25: Seven-Card Stud/8
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 20:00
Event No. 26: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $11 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 12, 14:00
Event No. 27: Razz
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 12, 17:00
Event No. 28: No-Limit Hold’em (rebuys)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $400,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $600,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 13, 14:00
Event No. 29: 8-Game Mix
Low -- $33 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 13, 17:00
Event No. 30: Pot-Limit Omaha/8
Low -- $11 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 14:00
Event No. 31: No-Limit Hold’em (one rebuy, one add-on)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 17:00
Event No. 32: Limit Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $55 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 20:00
Event No. 33: No-Limit Omaha/8 (turbo)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 14:00
Event No. 34: Pot-Limit Omaha (6-max.)
Low -- $55 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 15:30
Event No. 35: No-Limit Hold’em, Heads-Up Match Play (2-day event)
Low -- $270 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $2,600 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $25,500 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 17:00
Event No. 36: H.O.R.S.E.
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 16, 13:00
Event No. 37: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $22 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 16, 17:00
Event No. 38: No-Limit Hold’em Main Event (2-day event)
Low -- $109 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $1,050 buy-in, $3,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $10,300 buy-in, $5,000,000 guaranteed, $1,000,000 guarantee to winner

I’ve somehow managed to score a couple of tickets to low buy-in events, and so will be participating some. I’ll also be helping cover the sucker over on the PokerStars blog, where a group of folks will be writing up reports of every one of the 114 events.

Gonna be a lot of late nights here over the next couple of weeks for your humble gumshoe, though I have to say I’m looking forward both to the writing and the playing. Kind of a tune up, I suppose, for us reporters, too, as we start thinking about heading to Vegas at month’s end for the WSOP.

Check out that PokerStars blog for them reports.

Poker Blogs, ca. 2010

Writing that post earlier this week marking four years of Hard-Boiled Poker got me thinking once again about poker blogs -- most specifically how the poker “blogosphere” has changed over that period. I mentioned there how when I started mine there were a number of poker blogs already out there to serve as possible models. Back then it seemed just about anyone who played poker and enjoyed writing even just a little had a blog goin’.

I remember writing a post very early on -- titled “An Existential Pause” -- in which after just a few months of blogging I tried to explain the various purposes I thought a poker blog could serve. I had heard an interesting conversation on the old Lord Admiral Card Club podcast between Cincinnati Sean and Iggy, a.k.a. the “Blogfather” of poker blogs thanks to his long-running Guinness and Poker blog. I took their conversation as a cue to offer my own thoughts about what a poker blog was, or could be.

At a time when I was still trying to figure out what kind of blog mine would be, I suggested “a blog can be any number of things -- a personal diary, a virtual soapbox, a promotional tool, a news outlet, a discussion-starter, a confessional . . . you name it,” concluding that, “ultimately, a blog shapes itself according to the personality of its creator.”

I also added at the end that I had already found the process of writing the blog to have been somewhat illuminating, insofar as it required a bit more self-study than I might have otherwise performed. I was speaking mainly about my poker game, really, although the idea would obviously apply more generally. “Writing a poker blog is like being a detective,” I suggested. “Raymond Chandler once described the detective story as ‘a man’s adventure in search of hidden truth.’ All poker bloggers are shamuses, really. Investigating themselves.”

I continue to subscribe to a number of poker blogs today, although if I had to generalize I’d say that the idea of starting and maintaining a poker blog occurs much less frequently now to players than it did four years ago. Folks are much more likely to start Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, or find other ways to satisfy that impulse to chronicle and/or communicate their adventures, if they have that impulse.

Still, there are plenty of good ones out there, demonstrating that same variety of approaches and angles to all things poker that keeps me following along. Just to give a small sample, let me mention ten bloggers who are among those I tend to click on first over in the reader whenever I see they have published something new. While I’m at it, I’ll mention particular, relatively recent posts from each which are indicative of why I like following ’em.

I always click on a new post from Tommy Angelo whenever I see he’s added something to his blog. Gonna reach back a few weeks to March to point you to a little poker anecdote-slash-riddle of his, which itself saw Angelo reaching back several years to share the story: “You No Gamble” (March 15). Speaking of Angelo, Episode 13 of the Gambling Tales Podcast went up earlier this week and on that one I joined Special K and Falstaff to discuss Angelo’s book, Elements of Poker. Check it out.

Amy Calistri has sort of moved out of the “poker blogging” game, having entered the so-called “straight world” of business investing. She still commments from time to time on the poker/gambling world, though, bringing with her the perspective of someone with a lot of poker reporting experience. Earlier this month she wrote a neat post titled “Frugal Detective Work” (April 4) which wasn’t really about poker (although it begins with an anecdote about Andy Beal), but provided a nifty little example of puzzle-solving that I think should appeal to poker players. And fans of detective stories, too.

Julius Goat’s blog is a great one for fans of the TV show “Lost” and/or video clips demonstrating examples of “awesome” or “crazy.” Other fun stuff there, too, including a new installment of his long-running, award-winning Stupid System strategy guide, “Stupid System 013: Rush Poker” (April 7). Okay, I made that up about the award. Although really, I think anyone who has been following the series would agree the sucker deserves some sort of recognition for its important contribution to our collective poker knowledge.

Most of you know the prolific Poker Grump, I assume. Lots of good stuff from him again this month, including more stories from his adventures at dozens of different Vegas cardrooms. I especially liked one such recent tale, “Beware the Newbie” (April 16), which concerns his having recently played with an absolute novice. The newbie experienced some especially good fortune in the session, thereby producing some very entertaining moments along the way. A well-chosen picture of Mr. Magoo illustrates that one.

Pokerati celebrated its sixth birthday not too long ago. Dan Michalski’s site (to which I occasionally try to contribute) is a great one for breaking poker news, one recent example being his post reporting “Rogue Payment Processor Arrested in Las Vegas Accused of Laundering Full Tilt, PokerStars, UB Money” (April 17). Many times the comments to posts over there add quite a bit to the stories, such as was the case with that post.

Dr. Pauly’s Tao of Poker is of course always a must read, for many reasons. I’ll point you to his “Dispatches from the Mohegan Sun” from a couple of weeks ago: Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3. Kind of a preview of the sort of thing we can probably expect to see from Dr. P. once again from the WSOP -- namely, the sort of off-the-beaten-path, stuff-you-can’t-get-elsewhere reporting on poker that often reveals much more about what really happened at a given event than one can get through the usual channels.

F-Train is another blogger whose posts are consistently thoughtful and thought-provoking. He’s also one who will sometimes report or comment on matters one doesn’t generally find being talked about elsewhere. For example, his recent post titled “Tilt Transfer OK?” was an eyebrow-raiser, I thought. There he commented some on Full Tilt Poker’s current legal tribulations, most specifically that federal grand jury investigation we heard about a few weeks back.

There have been a few more eyebrow-raisers over on Haley Hintze’s blog over the past week, too. Haley continues to add to her “Just Conjecturin’” series regarding the insider cheating scandals at Absolute Poker and UB. In the past week, she’s moved over to provide some startling evidence regarding the AP scandal in “Just Conjecturin’, Volume 11: Meanwhile, Over at Absolute Poker, It Seems Scott Tom Really Did It” (April 24) and “Just Conjecturin', Volume 12: The Absolute Scandal and the Day Occam Rolled Over in His Grave” (April 28). I know I’m not the only one hastily clicking on her feed whenever a new post arrives.

Since having covered the NAPT Venetian back in February, I’ve been enjoying following Thomas “gnightmoon” Fuller’s blog. Fuller made the final table of the Main Event there, which finally turned up on ESPN2 earlier this week. He took that occasion to write a little something about the experience in “NAPT Venetian TV Premiere” (April 25).

Finally, I also like checking in over at the ESPN Poker Club to read what their bloggers, including Gary Wise and Andrew Feldman, have to say. Yesterday Feldman opined a bit on the low turnout at the WSOP Circuit event at Caesars Palace this week in “WSOP Circuit Continues to Struggle” (April 29), providing some insights into what’s going on with that tour and with the professional tourney circuit, generally speaking.

That by no means covers all of the blogs I’ve been following of late, but those were some posts that kind of stood out for me as particularly interesting and/or entertaining.

Two more blogger-related bits of news to pass along. One, I am working on creating a separate page here for my ever-growing “Blogroll.” Have a few too many outgoing links here on the main page, and so am doing a little bit of tidying up. Will keep you updated on that.

Also, in the near future my weekly Betfair poker column will be including some contributions from a number of your favorite poker bloggers offering their thoughts about the upcoming WSOP. Will let you know about that, too.

Meanwhile, click on some of them links above and enjoy yourself. Then go have a good weekend.

On the Unwritten Rules

I mentioned a few weeks back that I’d been watching more baseball this year than I have been in the recent past. Am still doing so, and while I don’t necessarily have a fave team anymore (used to be the Braves, long ago), there are a handful of teams I’ve been following a little more closely than others, mainly because they’ve turned up on the tube most often.

One of those teams getting extra coverage, of course, has been the New York Yankees, off to a hot start this year although currently trailing the surprising Tampa Bay Rays in the American League East. And speaking of the Yankees, there was an interesting incident last week in a game between New York and the Oakland A’s you might have heard or read about, if you follow baseball, too. The incident involved Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez, Oakland pitcher Dallas Braden, and a lot of talk about so-called “unwritten rules.”

To summarize what happened briefly, in the sixth inning of the April 22 game, Rodriguez had been on first base when Braden was pitching to Robinson Cano. Cano hit a high pop-up, during which Rodriguez had rounded second and was halfway to third when the ball landed foul. A-Rod then trod over the mound as he headed back to first base, kind of a no-no insofar as pitchers tend to be a bit fastidious over their workspace.

Braden saw what Rodriguez did, and was not a happy camper. When the inning ended he gave A-Rod an earful, yelling at him to “stay off my mound.” There’s a video of Braden’s outburst and more details of the incident over on the MLB site, if you’re interested.

When asked about it afterwards, Rodriguez expressed surprise that Braden had gotten so upset, adding that he didn’t think “a guy that has a handful of wins in his career” should be barking so loudly, anyway. Braden has been a major leaguer since 2007 and currently has 17 wins to his credit. Rodriguez, meanwhile, has been around since the mid-1990s, is a three-time MVP, is closing in on 600 home runs, and for the last decade has been the highest paid player in baseball.

Rodriguez has failed to acknowledge certain unwritten rules before. There was an incident in 2007 when he yelled out at Toronto outfielder Howie Clark causing him to miss a pop-up. And back in the 2004 playoffs versus Boston there was that play in which Rodriguez slapped the ball out of Red Sox pitcher Bronson Arroyo’s glove as Arroyo tried to tag A-Rod while running to first (see picture). Rodriguez was called out for interference, and then was later called out again by Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling who described Rodriguez’s action as “junior high school baseball right there, at its best.”

Schilling’s shot referred to the fact that besides breaking a written rule there, Rodriguez had violated another of those unwritten rules, too, by doing something major leaguers shouldn’t do. Of course, A-Rod has long been a lightning rod -- pun intended -- for other reasons, too, including his gaudy salary, his high level of achievement (something that always draws haters), and his admission to steroid use back when the policing of such was so badly managed by the MLB.

The whole episode reminded me a lot of the many unwritten rules in poker -- i.e., that sometimes elaborate code of conduct players and sometimes others (dealers, poker room managers, tourney directors, reporters, etc.) all are expected to know and follow. What sometimes gets referred to as “etiquette” and which tends only to get attention when someone fails to follow the code.

Slowrolling would be an obvious example at the tables -- not technically disallowed, but a clear violation of an unwritten rule. Other examples would include acting in a timely manner, refraining from verbally abusing the dealer or others, not “hitting and running” (i.e., winning a big pot quickly and then immediately leaving), or not speaking or interfering with play when not involved in a hand.

I suppose what Rodriguez did when he crossed Braden’s mound was a bit like touching another player’s chips unnecessarily. Not cool, man.

And, as a few commentators have been pointing out, Rodriguez’s response afterwards -- a kind of incredulity borne from the difference in experience between himself and Braden -- suggests another unwritten rule, namely, that seniority allows one greater freedoms. Such also often seems to be the case in poker, where the “name” players sometimes seem to get away with more egregious behavior and/or are given the benefit of the doubt more readily than are others when it comes to violations of etiquette. (Scotty Nguyen, Phil Hellmuth, and the 2008 WSOP spring to mind.)

Interesting stuff, and perhaps indicative of something more profound -- and paradoxical -- about human nature and competition. We like to compete, and perhaps have a kind of natural instinct to do so. But we also tend to surround our competitions with all sorts of guidelines (rules, written and unwritten) that not only ensure fairness, but a kind of decency as well. We want to beat each other, but we want to get along with each other, too.

Most of us, anyway.

Detour: Four Years of Hard-Boiled Poker

Four years ago today I decided to start a poker blog. Was pretty much a total whim. I’d been playing online for a while, had read a number of books, and was following a few different magazines and news sites. Was also starting to listen to poker podcasts, was spending some time reading around in the forums, and had begun to visit some of the other poker blogs.

At the time, many of those poker blogs seemed to take the “journal” approach of chronicling one’s own progress as a poker player. Lots of hand histories and discussions, along with reports on how much the player/blogger was up or down. Some would include anecdotes and other fun poker-related stuff, too. And a few would diverge entirely from poker to discuss just about anything of interest to the writer -- e.g., an update on the writer’s relationship status, a review of a movie recently seen, a report from a recent vacation, what have you.

It was clear there were many ways to go when it came to poker blogs. Having little clue which way I’d be heading, I thought it would be fun to try one myself.

As I say, it truly was a whim. The title of the blog came to me at the end of no more than five minutes of meditation on the decision, inspired by an anthology on my bookshelf, Hard-Boiled: An Anthology of American Crime Stories edited by Bill Pronzini and Jack Adrian. I’d long been a fan of those stories and writers, guys like Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, Jim Thompson, Charles Willeford, James M. Cain, and so forth. And when it came to writing myself, most of my attempts at fiction had been in the same vein -- including a draft of what eventually became my novel, Same Difference.

So when I thought of writing, I thought “hard-boiled.” And there seemed a reasonable connection between poker and these sort of detective stories. All poker players are detectives, more or less, right? Some very good, some hopelessly inadequate. And every hand is a sort of miniature mystery with its own dramatic arc of exposition, climax, and resolution. Some potential there, I thought.

The “Shamus” character was also pretty much an on-the-spot-type invention. A “shamus” is a detective. My understanding is that it’s a slang term that originated early in the 20th century, probably first used with reference to New York City cops, some of whom were of Irish descent. It’s an Americanization of the popular Irish name “Seamus.”

Some have wanted to argue that the word also has a connection with the Yiddish word “shammes” which comes from the Hebrew “shamash” or a synagogue beadle. The idea there is that the beadle -- a parish officer -- is a person who knows everyone and thus is a good one to go to for information about what is going on (i.e., like a detective). I’ve always thought that was a bit of a stretch, but there could be something there.

In any event, writers of hard-boiled fiction picked up the word and routinely used it to refer to their detective protagonists. Comes up in the movies a lot, too. Go watch the beginning of The Big Sleep, where Humphrey Bogart (as Philip Marlowe) introduces himself to Carmen Sternwood by saying “I’m a shamus.”

So I started the blog, and in fact thought early on I’d try to write “in character” and employ more of that hard-boiled lingo in my little first-person narratives of my pokery adventures. Found it hard to keep that up, though, and so soon settled into a voice that came a little closer to my actual self.

However, as part of that “character” I was creating, I decided to borrow the mug of Tom Neal as Al Roberts in the 1945 noir film Detour. Shot in less than a week for practically nothing (around $20,000 say most), the movie tells the story of Al’s efforts to hitchhike across the country to meet up with his fiancee, though as the title suggests those efforts get sidetracked along the way.

Lean and mean, I recommend this 68-minute gritty marvel directed by Edgar G. Ulmer every chance I get. I liked Neal’s look in the film (I mean, really, doesn’t the poor sap look like he’s short-stacked?). Additionally, the film is in the public domain, which made me less hesitant to borrow them there images. That also means Detour can be easily found online, if you are curious to see it.

I also soon decided I didn’t want exclusively to write about my own low limit struggles. There was a lot else of interest happening in poker. Indeed, not long after I began the blog, we were all blindsided by that Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, and for a short while there I actually thought I wouldn’t even be able to play online poker anymore. Suddenly there were other topics to discuss, and somewhere in there I came up with the different “sections” (On the Street, The Rumble, Shots in the Dark, High Society, and By the Book) for which I’d write.

Those first six months or so I had very few readers, and even though I got a great deal of enjoyment from writing, I did wonder sometimes why I even bothered. Vera Valmore encouraged me to continue with it, though, and so bears a lot of responsibility for my having kept at the sucker.

After a year or so I’d picked up a few more readers, and soon after that got the chance to do some poker writing for other sites, too. Then came an invitation to go cover the World Series of Poker (in 2008), something I described to many at the time as one of those “life detours” I never really would have expected even a few months before.

Other opportunities came along, and now I find myself about to head back to the WSOP for a third time. There’s been another significant development, too. For a variety of reasons -- this here freelance writing career being just one of them -- I’ve decided to move on from the current “day job” to pursue other possible futures, most of which involve doing a lot more writing.

Not quite at the moment of official transition yet, so I won’t go into other specifics. But the decision has been made. I’ve put on the turn signal. Just waiting for that green light and I’ll be going down a different road.

It has been apparent to me for a while now how that choice of the film Detour to help flesh out the blog’s motif has turned out to be weirdly prophetic, given that Hard-Boiled Poker has itself had a lot to do with the change in direction I’m now taking. Am excited, for sure. And a bit anxious, too. But again, I’ve encouragement from Vera. And, less directly, from many others, too, including all of you who have stopped by here from time to time.

So thanks again, everybody. Will let you know where this detour leads.

ESPN and the 2010 WSOP

Watched some of the coverage of that North American Poker Tour Venetian last night on ESPN2. Kind of drifted in and out during the first hour, though I did see the final hands of that $25,000 “High Roller” Bounty Shootout event won by Ashton Griffin. I was on my way home from the Venetian by that point (back in February), and so hadn’t really followed too much of how that had gone down at the time.

Enjoyed seeing my bud Marc Hodge (with whom I helped cover the first round of the High Roller event) sitting there in the front row sweating his bud Brett Richey. Lots of camera time for Marc last night as he sat there with Bryan Micon.

Also watched some of the Main Event final table, although had to hit the sack before it was done. I do want to go back and see those last couple of hands, though, which saw Tom Marchese end up taking it down against Sam Stein. Some might recall how Stein -- chip leader for the entire final table up until that point -- made two curious calls against Marchese to end the tourney. Read here for details of that somewhat surprising finish to the event.

I’ll echo F-Train’s positive assessment of last week’s NAPT coverage by ESPN, adding another kudos for what I saw of it last night. Fun stuff, and hopefully the tour will gather some momentum via these episodes and continue to thrive. The next couple of weeks (May 3 and May 10) will feature coverage of the NAPT Mohegan Sun. Then the following week (May 17) there will be two more hours devoted to the High Roller event from the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure, also dubbed a “NAPT” event.

That’ll take us right up until the WSOP essentially. Speaking of, there was news last week of ESPN’s plans for their 2010 WSOP coverage. Looks like they’ll be following the pattern of recent years by forgoing most of the preliminary events and almost exclusively concentrating on the Main Event.

According to Poker News Daily, ESPN will start airing WSOP stuff on July 20, just days after we all go home from the Rio. After a 2009 WSOP recap show that week, it looks like the plan is next to show the final table from the $50,000 buy-in “Poker Player’s Championship” event (Event No. 2) on July 27. Then the following week (August 3) will come the final table of that WSOP “Tournament of Champions” -- that “all-star” game for which voting continues over on the WSOP site.

And that’ll be it as far as non-Main Event coverage goes. From August 10 right up until November, ESPN will once again take us though all of the days of the ME, leading up to the “November Nine.”

For the last couple of years, whenever the new ESPN sked has been announced, I’ve written posts here offering some opinions regarding the shift in coverage away from preliminary bracelet events and the increasing emphasis on the Main Event. Those posts -- “ESPN’s 2008 WSOP Schedule -- The Main Event (Mainly)” & “On ESPN’s Coverage of the WSOP” -- both express a desire to see more than just the Main Event (and just no-limit hold’em). But they also show some enthusiasm, too, over the expansion of the coverage each year in terms of total hours.

This time around I find myself having become more acclimated to the current focus on the ME as far as ESPN goes. Thus am I not really pining so much to go back to 2004-2005 when we got to see all of those preliminary events (even Razz!). I suppose I’ve also pretty much accepted the November Nine, too, an idea which I didn’t like initially and still think mucks way too much with how the tourney should be played.

But given all the current legal machinations going on with regard to online poker, as well as other uncertainties regarding the game’s future, I think I’m mostly done with lamenting the lack of this or that kind of coverage, and am simply glad to see coverage at all.

’Cos really, it is easy to see that ESPN’s continued involvement with the WSOP -- and its adding things like the NAPT to their poker offerings -- is ultimately very good for poker. For those who play and for those who write about it, too.

An Exciting Future Awaits

Interesting times around here at Hard-Boiled Poker. Lots of “life stuff” happening, about which I am going to be entirely vague today, I’m afraid. Will try to be less so as the week goes along, however. Wednesday -- an anniversary for HBP -- seems like it might be a good day to try to start being more specific about some of these changes concerning yr humble gumshoe.

Glancing a little further down the calendar also reminds us that Wednesday is momentous in another way, as it will be exactly one month until the start of the 2010 World Series of Poker (on May 28th). I think I’ve mentioned that I’ll be back at the Rio once again helping cover the sucker for PokerNews. Will also have some other things happening this summer, including a quick excursion down to Lima, Peru in early June to help cover the Latin American Poker Tour event.

Before we get there, though, there is the PokerStars Spring Championship of Online Poker which starts this coming Sunday (May 2). That’s also going to keep me plenty busy as I’ll be helping cover several of the events for the PokerStars blog.

The SCOOP schedule is a monstah. There are 38 separate events, each of which has a “low,” “medium,” and “high” tournament associated with it, meaning 114 distinct tournaments happening over a two-week period. The total guaranteed prize pool is $45 million, although it is probably safe to assume there will more than that ultimately won.

I’ve managed to score a seat in one of the “low” events -- a limit hold’em tourney -- so I’ll be fighting for a tiny share of the cabbage myself. Click here to see the entire SCOOP schedule, including all of the buy-ins and guarantees.

In other tourney news, I’m afraid I don’t have much to report concerning my so-so showing in that Battle of the Bloggers Tournament 5 Invitational last night over on Full Tilt Poker, where I busted relatively early on (in Level 7).

I logged on right around start time and found there was a new update to install. Took a few minutes to complete, actually, which meant I had to miss the first orbit or so. Kind of indicative of my tourney as a whole, really, as I found myself having a hard time getting anything going pretty much from the beginning.

(Come to think of it, when it comes to my jingle brain & tourney strategy, I probably could stand to install an update there, too.)

Actually picked up pocket kings twice during the first three levels or so, though got zero action despite the fact that I had been quite active otherwise. Had slipped below the starting stack a little when the chip leader joined our table two seats to my left, thereby making blind stealing a less simple matter.

Finally I was moved to a new table, although by that point I had fallen below 20 big blinds and was starting to look for a spot to double-up.

One such opportunity soon came. The hand began with poker author and Full Tilt Poker blogger Michael Craig opening with a 3x raise UTG to 360. Craig had built up a stack early on last night -- in fact, he had over 13,000 when this hand began, which put him in second place, I believe.

A player in middle position called Craig’s raise, and it folded to me on the button with A-K. I shoved my remaining 1,800 or so, Craig quickly called, and the third player folded. Craig showed pocket fives, the board ran out jack-high, and presto! that silly little frog avatar I use had vanished.

Thanks again to AlCantHang for pulling together the BBT5 and especially for the invite. (Get all yr BBT5 info here, by the way.) Will try again next Sunday!

Lots of other stuff to occupy me between now and then, though. More to come!