This Derby's A Bitch

Before I launch into my Derby diatribe, I would like to add an addendum to my Oaks post yesterday. Louisville has been plagued with rain most of the week and the weather isn’t letting up. It looks as if today’s track could be less than blistering and tomorrow’s more of the same. While they will never allow a derby to be raced in the complete slop if they can avoid it (no choice the year Smarty won), I expect the strip to be a little better tomorrow. But today, eh, not so much.

As a result, I am tacking a little more credence to Autobahn Girl as she should be a decent price, is trained by Nick Zito and has the second highest Tomlinson ratings in the field. What is a Tomlinson rating? It’s Kramer’s “her mudder was a mudder” theory played out in numbers. Horses are ascribed figures for their affinity for wet tracks (and turf) based on their breeding. So if Autobahn Girl has the second highest Tomlinson rating of the field…who has the first? Rags to Riches. The favorite. Who I’m tossing.

Doh.

My bets for the Oaks:

$1 Exacta Box – 4,5,10,13,14 (Octave, Cotton Blossom, Autobahn Girl, Mistical Plan and High Again)…$20

$1 Oaks-Derby Double – 5, 10, 13/12, 18, 19, 20 (Cotton Blossom, Autobahn Girl, Mistical Plan/Nobiz Like Shobiz, Any Given Saturday, Dominican, Great Hunter)…$12

$20 win on Cotton Blossom (if above 10-1)

Good luck to me.

***

If the Oaks is the day for Louisville where everyone from the surrounding area enjoys the spectacle that is Derby week at Churchill Downs, Derby day is the day for Los Angeles and New York and Dubai and … you get the picture. Over 100,000 people buying $8 beers and $10 bloody mary’s and wagering more than they make in three months with men wearing a suit that’s more than they make in six months and women wearing dresses that would earn them more than they make in a year if they wore them on certain streets in certain cities (If they were whores…keep up).

Regardless, the Derby is wonderful. And this year will be the first derby I have missed in quite some time. Thankfully I will be watching with my dad and he has agreed to spill beer on me, charge me $6 for a hot dog from the grill and stand in front of the computer while I’m trying to make my bets reading his program for races three hours later a different track. So it’s like Louisville in Columbus.

I waxed poetic quite liberally on the wonders of the Derby yesterday. Let’s get down to business. I’ll follow the same structure for my Derby picks that I did for my Oaks selections yesterday.

The morning line favorite for the Derby is a lightly raced colt by Smart Strike named Curlin. He only has three starts under his belt, all this year. When people handicap the Derby year in and year out, there are many tidbits of conventional wisdom they like to rely on. There is a mythical statistic called dosage which takes certain breeding characteristics into account and for years there was a belief that a horse without a certain dosage could never win the Derby. Phooey. For a long-time, it was thought that geldings would never win another Derby. Roses, meet Funny Cide. Hogwash. There is a juvenile breeder’s cup winner “jinx” where no freshman champion has stood in the winner’s circle on the first Saturday in May. I think this has more to do with the way horses are campaigned and the fragility of today’s thoroughbred than a mystical curse. It’s just asking to be broken (but I hope not this year…more on that later).

But two conventions which have stood the test are time are that horses need to have raced at two and horses need at least four races under their saddle to be considered. Apollo was the last horse unraced at two to emerge victorious in the Derby…back in ’82. That’s 1882. The filly Regret was the last to be immortalized in Derby lore after only three career starts. 1915.

As a history major in college (sweet jesus what was I thinking?)…those numbers are rather dramatic and enough for me to play against Curlin on Saturday. But on paper, he is a possible superhorse. He has won his three career starts by a combined 28 lengths, including a visually striking 10-length score in the Arkansas Derby. Everyone who has seen this horse in person pontificates that he is the “ideal” thoroughbred in conformation. But in my opinion, unbettable for pari-mutuel purposes. Throw in the fact that I think 90% of the horses he has beaten so far are currently holding together the envelopes of america’s tax returns and if he wins, I will mutter, “it’s great for the sport” and grab another beer.

The other Derby darling is Street Sense. He is the aforementioned BC juvenile champ that I am hoping cannot break the curse. I will refrain from saying “I hope Street Sense breaks a leg” because I said that at the BC last year and Pine Island did just that and was euthanized on the track. SOOOOOOO…I’ll just say I hope Street Sense finishes fourth. No lawsuits coming from that. He was visually impressive in his ten-length romp over the best in the world last November at this same Churchill Downs track. But he did it from, not a golden rail, but maybe platinum…or plutonium…the rail was magic that day. And Street Sense should know. He never left it.

Likewise, in his first start of 2007, Street Sense BARELY beat Any Given Saturday after a dramatic stretch duel that demonstrated the heart of these two warriors. But he never had to leave the rail in an already short field. I think more than any other horse, Street Sense will be hindered by the field size. To make matters more shaky for Street Sense, his jockey is Calvin Borel, who while not exactly Manute Bol in the stirrups, is inexperienced in the Derby and may have some trouble navigating the horse to daylight. At least, that’s what I’m betting on. Or, rather, not betting on.

But I WILL be betting on Any Given Saturday. This 0-for-Derby number for Todd Pletcher simply cannot stand…I was reminded today that D. Wayne Lukas went 0-15 before he won his first of three. This year, like Nick Zito two years ago, Pletcher is loaded and I have landed on his poorest drawing colt.

Starting position isn’t nearly as important in thoroughbred racing as it is in harness racing, but in a field of 20, geometry would tell you starting 18^th isn’t the BEST spot to be. Others would point to AGS “weak” performance in the Wood as an indicator that he just doesn’t measure up. But that race was deceiving. If you watch the Wood:

You will notice that Johnny Velazquez didn’t exactly give AGS the perfect trip. He was wide both turns, never really moved him with authority. It screamed of a warm-up trip and he still got a 91 Beyer which is higher than many horses on their best day. To make matters worse, AGS was on “short” rest after the aforementioned grueling stretch duel with Street Sense in the Tampa Derby. AGS showed me a lot in that race and the PPs show me one other thing I like a lot…he has a VERY high Tomlinson rating. If the track comes up muddy, AGS could revel in it. Add on top of that, the best big money jockey in the sport in my humble opinion, Garrett Gomez, and AGS is my horse.

The one big knock against AGS in my mind though is that he is the “wise guy” horse this year from what I understand. Every year a horse captures the attention of the “wise guys” on the backstretch, in the OTBs in New York City, in the back of Sirens here in Columbus…or so I’ve heard. Every year that horse is touted, every year he takes A LOT of money and every year he finished up the track. I ALWAYS bet against that horse. Until this year.

One of my other Derby pet peeves is people who pick two horses out of the same prep race. Guess what? I’m doing that too. My second selection is Nobiz Like Shobiz. He beat AGS in the Wood and as you could see from the video, was very determined in holding on to win that race. The knock against him is that he is very immature, especially in the stretch drive. In his Fountain of Youth race against Scat Daddy, Nobiz refused to run straight in the stretch, costing himself the victory. As a result, trainer Barclay Tagg added blinkers and cotton in the ears of Nobiz for the Wood…to a fantastic result. I am just so impressed with his determination and progression as a racehorse. His jockey, Cornelio Velazquez doesn’t inspire a TON of confidence, but he should get Nobiz in decent position from post 12.

The horse that I just cannot help but like (although trust me, I have tried) is Great Hunter. Anyone that knows my biases in life knows that I hate strippers who wear perfume AND glitter, prefer Pepsi to coke and I hate horses from California. Great Hunter has had seven starts lifetime and this will be his second outside California. But his first…the BC at Churchill in November where he was steadied in the first turn and was quite impressive in finishing third. His first race this year was a Grade 2 in California where he took the lead four-wide into the lane and swept by Derby-entrant Sam P for the victory and a 101 Beyer.

He was bet down to second favorite in the Blue Grass, which was run over the NOTORIOUSLY closer-favoring polytrack. And while that normally would fit Great Hunter’s style perfectly, he was WAY too close to the pace and finished a dawdling fifth. The only thing that race did was pump up his odds for the Derby. I’m not a tremendous Doug O’Neil fan and he conditions Great Hunter, but he is well respected and Corey Nakatani is a solid rider who I am convinced can work out a trip for Great Hunter. If there is any kind of pace and Great Hunter can weave through traffic, I can see him getting the last call at a solid price.

The complete mystery to me in this field is another horse who drew VERY poorly and that’s Dominican. Sandwiched between Great Hunter and AGS, Dominican is a stone closer in the vein of Circular Quay. He won the Blue Grass at Keeneland in typical come-from-behind fashion, but while I might easily toss out a horse who has done that, but nothing else, Dominican very well may be just coming into his own. His race before that, also on polytrack, was more of a stalking trip where he exploded against inferior company to win by open lengths.

As a two-year-old, Dominican raced on dirt, including the Churchill surface to mediocre results, but the question about this colt is whether his improvement is due to his maturity or the change in surface. My guess is a little bit of both, but based on his bullet work at Churchill Downs and the fact that he’s being ridden by the once and still king of Kentucky, Rafael Bejarano (with apologies to Mr. Leparoux)…he will get some of my money. I think you will see three horses flying around the far turn in the Derby and one of them will seriously challenge for the victory. It could be Great Hunter, it could be Dominican and it could be Circular Quay.

With 20 horses, it becomes painful to go through horse by horse to find ones to include, especially in the exotics. To help you in that, allow me to give you some horses that do not even require 30 seconds of attention.

Sedgefield is a turf horse. The Derby is run on dirt. While nobody has discussed this angle, I think he is solely in here to ensure a solid pace for stablemate Dominican.

Storm in May is a beautiful, gray horse who is blind in one eye and virtually unbettable to any handicapper with TWO eyes.

Cowtown Cat is another Pletcher entry with three wins in four starts, but appears to be drastically overmatched in here. Great for Jara to get a chance to ride in the Derby…now if Pletcher will just put him on a contender.

Liquidity will be about 60-1 and should be 100-1. He ran a 102 Beyer in a bogus California race in February. It takes more than that to win the Derby. And David Flores is his jockey. It takes more than that to win the Derby.

Teuflesberg deserves a medal for being raced 11 times since last July and still standing upright. He doesn’t however deserve a blanket of Roses in May.

Bwana Bull just keeps showing up every 3-4 weeks, racing and producing mediocre results. Mediocre wins Grade 3 races at Bay Meadows. Not the Derby.

Sadly…that still leaves us with nine horses!

Zanjero is a somewhat chic longshot pick and he does have a decent turn of foot, but will need one clean run and rarely is that trip available in this race. Imawildandcrazyguy is improving and broke poorly in his last start, giving him an excuse. Hard Spun turned in an almost world record work and many are concerned it took too much out of him. I’m concerned there wasn’t enough in him to begin with. His best win was at Turfway Park for God’s sake. Sam P. is a Pletcher pupil who could mix it up a little in the early and middle stages of the race. I am slightly intrigued by him and if my brother from a Hispanic mother Ramon Dominguez can work his magic, he could conceivably be a factor in this race. Scat Daddy is THE horse that I am throwing out for the most part that scares me the most. He just looks like a winner. I hate tossing horses like that. Edgar Prado is in the saddle. I HATE throwing horses like that. If I can get decent odds on him, 8-1 or higher, I might have to include him. Tiago is another wise-guy horse as he is the brother to Giacomo and has a similar running style…but maybe even better acceleration. I just don’t think he’ll get a good trip in here and it will be a rude awakening with horses of this caliber and a field of this size. Circular Quay has been off too long for my tastes and I don’t like his running style as a rule. Stormello will likely be battling for the lead early with Sedgefield and Teuflesberg and will likely be battling for the booby prize with Sedgefield and Teuflesberg late. And no, that prize is not awarded in the infield. (Rimshot please…those however ARE often awarded in the infield)

Phew. That does it. I’ll post my actual Derby plays tomorrow. To give you something to play against.

I will lose all "Table Cred"

But it's a risk I'm willing to take, even with the Mookie tonight.

So here it is. I am a ridiculously low-limit player with minimal success in my past performance line. Wow. It feels better to get that out there.

Now that we've established that, anyone reading this (my mother and some ridiculously bored inmates...thank you Iggy) has context for what I'm about to say.

I cashed last night in the $10 Daily Double A tournament on Full Tilt, finishing sixth out of over 1,100 entrants for a cool $400, taking my Full Tilt bankroll over $500 for the first time ever. Yes, you read that right. Not only is this my biggest cash ever in online poker, but the first time my account has been over $500. I have never deposited more than $125 in FT at any one time and have been grinding, grinding and grinding and playing WAY above my bankroll.

This cash was satisfying for several reasons. First of all, I finally have a legitimate online cash on my resume...popping my cherry if you will. "You're my Cherry Pie..." sorry...Warrant flashback. Secondly, it is the first time I have ever loosened my play up enough in the late stages of a large tournament to do anything other than bubble. Because I have been playing so far over my head, every $15 is important so instead of pushing with those pocket sevens, I make a limp-wristed call and fold when the 10-6-2 flop comes down. Yeah, I suck.

But more importantly, it drastically underscored the importance of bankroll management, even for a recreational player. The comfort level I had playing in that tournament, playing to win, not to save enough for the next .05/.10 PL Omaha table took me into a completely different mindset and completely elevated my game. I had always viewed bankroll management as simply a financial issue. Sure, I felt a little more tight when playing above my head (read: could barely breathe in the $5 PL Omaha game at 9:45), but I convinced myself that it didn't affect my play. Ha.

The scary thing is that now I don't have an excuse. I have $500 to play with, plenty of tournaments and tables that fall within that range and I need to practice what I'm currently preaching and play within that bankroll. We shall see. However, I can foresee an epic battle in the near future between my newfound view on bankroll management and my aforementioned quest for respect. With FTOPS on the horizon and the WSOP looming in the distance, I fear for my bankroll's safety.

And not just from that "Brazen Beauty" inmate.

Follow-up

I’ve been thinking about my last post and I think I have a solution. Someone needs to write a book about online play. Not the online play of “BodogAri” or the infamous “Waffles.” But solid, perceptive online play and things like bankroll management, how to detect betting patterns, how to recognize the “squeeze play” and benefits of deep stack tournaments (tricks to avoid the inevitable suck-out). So many of these principles are crucial for the $1-$2 limit live games too...these games are just online ring games played in person, aren’t they? You’ll find people of all skill levels, hiding behind relative anonymity and completely clueless to bet and pot sizes. You find tells are virtually worthless, hand valuation is a lost art and “all-in” is as common as “fold.”

All of this makes complete sense. Where are these $1-$2 players coming from? Where did they learn the game? Super System? Nope. Sawdust-infested card halls in the Lone Star state? Nope. More likely Party Poker. Freerolls even. And yet, here we are reading everything we can from the best in the world. Soaking up every CardPlayer article on the intricacies of playing pocket pairs from middle position.

Know thy enemy, right? Now…where can we find a bad rounder with enough time on his hands to tell us all he doesn’t know? Hmmm…I just might know one.

A new chapter...

I am preparing to embark on a new chapter in my life, one that will hopefully change the lives of my entire family for the better. No, I’m not learning Triple Draw 2-7. Although there’s money to be made there. In the next month I am planning on leaving the public relations firm with which I am currently employed and starting my own business. I am planning to parlay the experience and client-base I’ve accumulated to start my own public affairs firm.

I am clearly scared out of my mind, but provided the clients are there, it should allow me to spend more time with my family, make dinner and MAYBE a little more time for poker.

In addition, I am planning on doing a little freelance writing as well to supplement the other income. Maybe some poker, maybe some horse racing and maybe a book. Who knows. But if I do write a book, I think there is a serious gap in the poker literature. There are plenty of beginner books…thank you Phil Gordon and thank you Poker for Dummies, i.e. Negraneu’s treatise. There are plenty of “advanced” books…thank you Cloutier, McEvoy and Brunson. But who is writing about the “wild, wild, west” that is the $1-$2 NL tables in Vegas and the mid-level tables and tournaments online? In my opinion, nobody. And I think I know why.

Who can give advice on how to play against such a wide-range of, ahem, styles? Yeah. Styles. Really, think about many of the poker truisms that can be thrown COMPLETELY out the window.

In many of the standard poker books, one theorem oft repeated is that you play the player, not the cards…that the cards become irrelevant. Really? So you KNOW that guy called the $12 raise in the $1-$2 game with a 5-7 and flopped his straight? I mean, clearly they were suited. That explains it. You MAY be able to tell by his betting patterns, but there’s no tell in the world that can scream, “I played 5-7 and your pocket 10’s are no good here.”

Here’s one of my personal favorites. Raises are crucial to obtain information. Maybe if you raise $100. I was playing in the Cherokee Casino in Tulsa, OK yesterday…$1-$2 NL. I raised $15 from UTG +1 with AK. I knew it may fold around to me, but I was okay than that. But I really thought I would get one person willing to take a stab with that KQ. At a nine-handed table and the UTG already in the muck, guess how many callers? Five. Flop came K-6-2 rainbow. Somebody held 6-6. That was expensive. Was it my fault for over-valuing top pair? Maybe a little. But I had watched my opponent long enough to know that he would play any two cards to the river. This time he just happened to have a hand. Trips and he never raised. Yeah, the pre-flop raise and all the subsequent raises really gained me a lot of information.

My point is not to deride the play of anyone. Don’t tap the tank. I get it. And most of them time, I will reap the benefits. I know all of this. I am just pointing out that while the beginner books are worthwhile for beginners to learn about blinds, starting hands and chasing inside straights and advanced books are good for high-level play, I think these books are perhaps even detrimental to the mid-level players.

But what do I know? I’m starting my own business. Maybe I’ll re-think that 2-7 Triple Draw.

I can't believe I'm posting something positive about Barney Frank...GO BARNEY!

Frank bill would repeal ’06 Internet gaming crackdown

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) will introduce legislation today that seeks to reverse a controversial crackdown on Internet gambling, which the Republican-led Congress passed in 2006.

While passing the bill will be difficult, there is a big financial incentive for Democratic leaders to pass it.

The chairman of the Financial Services Committee is looking to raise tens of billions of dollars with his new bill, which could be used to pay for expensive tax, healthcare, or other domestic legislation Democrats want to move this year.

The introduction of the bill and its expected movement in the 110th Congress shows how much has changed in the nation’s capital since the November elections.

With Democrats in the majority, the power of social conservatives diminished and new pay-as-you-go rules, supporters of a repeal believe the time to strike is now.

Frank, a longtime critic of regulating Internet gambling, opposes the law on philosophical grounds.

“It’s a terrible idea and there are a large number of people who think it is a terrible idea,” Frank said yesterday. “I don’t know how it ends. The worst that happens is that enough anti-gambling busybodies will be less inclined to interfere in people’s lives.”

Gambling lobbying groups were more than pleased by Frank’s announcement.

“We’re incredibly excited. I’m very interested in what the final version will look like,” Michael Bolcerek, president of the Poker Players Alliance, said. “But from what we understand, it will do the right thing for poker players and at the same time protect the public interest.”

The group, led by former Sen. Al D’Amato (R-N.Y.), was formed to overturn the gaming law.
Frank believes that the GOP is hypocritical in saying it wants to reduce government intrusion but then passes legislation that regulates certain personal freedoms.

In 2000, Frank said, “It is important that people be able to do what the Republican Party wants them to do on the Internet. If the Republican Party has no objection, then they can do it. But if the Republican Party thinks there are pictures they should not look at, or perhaps booze they should not buy, or bets they should not make, then freedom for the Internet goes away.”

Because the law significantly affects the financial services industry, Wall Street is closely monitoring the Frank bill.

Friedman Billings Ramsey, an investment firm, wrote in a strategy memo that the Frank bill could raise more than $20 billion over five years.

The bill is expected to call for the Internet gambling industry to be taxed through a structured system.

Frank’s proposal, however, could face an uphill battle in the House, which passed the stand-alone measure 317-93 last summer. A less stringent version of the bill was later folded into a port security measure that was signed by the president last fall.

One source said that leadership officials in the House are on board with Frank’s plan, though Frank said he did not seek clearance from them.

Several members of leadership voted for the House bill last July, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.). Meanwhile, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) voted no, as did Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.).
Republicans, who spent six years attempting to pass the Internet bill, are mobilizing against Frank’s effort.

“We’re going to fight it,” said Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), a leading proponent of the crackdown on Internet gambling. “I’d be surprised if the new leadership would want to bring back an issue that took six years, because of one Jack Abramoff, to resolve.”

In 2000, then GOP lobbyist Abramoff, now a convicted felon, marshaled his conservative allies in the House to defeat a bill that included a ban on Internet gambling.

The law prohibits Americans from using credit cards and checks to play on-line poker, place bets and engage in other forms of gambling.

The proposed legislation could benefit the offshore gambling sites that saw their U.S. customer base disappear when Congress stepped in last year. Hedge funds helped to drive down their stocks in anticipation of the curtailment of online gambling.

The share prices of PartyGaming LLC and 888 Holdings, two online gaming companies that are traded on the London stock exchange, have fallen more than 50 percent since last year.
The stocks have started to claw their way back in recent months, as hedge funds and other investors came to believe the government would falter at stamping out such a popular online activity. PartyGaming has seen its stock roughly double in the past three months.

Some U.S. companies also stand to gain from overturning the 2006 law, including Cryptologic, which provides software and services for internet gambling sites, said Andrew Parmentier, a senior analyst at Friedman Billings Ramsey.

Lobbyists for banks and credit card companies that would have shouldered much of the burden of enforcing the gaming crackdown, reacted favorably to Frank’s announcement.

“We’d be very pleased to see that law repealed simply because it would remove a potential burden on the financial system and especially on community bankers,” said Steve Verdier, the senior vice president for congressional affairs at the Independent Community Bankers of America.

“We also understand it will be a little bit of a road to get a repeal,” he added.

Bob Cusack contributed to this report.

The Hill (04/26/07)

Biggest Flaw in Your Poker Game?

No, I don't mean, "Well, 76% of the time when I get KJo in the hijack and flat call, I find myself vulnerable to pocket pairs 33-99..." I will leave that to PokerTracker. I mean mentally. Psychologically. What is your biggest flaw? Mine is easy. My desire for respect.

This may sound odd (or slightly Rodney Dangerfield-esque for anyone old enough to remember Rodney Dangerfield or brilliant enough to recognize the genius of Caddyshack)...but hear me out. I assure you, it is an even bigger problem than your inability to fold the KJ. I am slowly beginning to realize that this perfectionism and childish focus on praise and acceptance is self-destructive in my professional life, but I am painfully aware of the -EV as it relates to this particular game of skill.

My yearning for respect at the poker table, either on the virtual or visibly stained felt, manifests itself in several ways. First of all, and most glaringly, I WAY overuse the continuation bet. I want respect for the hand that I am pretending I am holding. Nice, huh? There are just sometimes where a check is prudent, necessary or at the very least acceptable. Not me. I fire. Everytime. I just can't help myself.

Less obviously, I become obsessed with any kind of standings. In my monthly poker league, I would rather finish third every time and end up with high points for the league (but toward the bottom in ROI) than win twice and flip-flop the deliverables. I played virtually EVERY BBT event until this week. I was one of the leaders in events played and one of the bottom feeders for points per events played. With $0 to show for my efforts.

I find this quixotic quest for respect to be even worse in live play than in online play. The thought of getting up first from that tournament and walking out of the room, knowing I got all of my money in with the best of it is terrifying. I would much rather finish in the middle of the pack and have folded that middle set because I was just SURE the other guy had top set and I didn't want to bust too early. I even play for the "story." You know, the story you tell your poker-retarded friends and loved ones. The one where, "I got all of my money in as a 60% favorite, but the donkey sucked out on me and I was first out" = LOSER. But "I was just card dead...I fought and fought and finished 32nd out of 195" = ersatz credibility. Could you HAVE a more destructive philosophy? Aside from a style of play which earns you the nickname "Mr. Inside Straight" of course.

I enter this confessional because last night I expended a hard-earned $75 token to enter a satellite for the 100-seat Main Event Extravaganza on Full Tilt. I won a nice pot early on and found myself sitting near the top of the 19 person field. I proceeded to play not to lose and subsequently bubbled fourth when top 2 got seats and third got $250. In a tournament where the top three get paid, my honest to God goal after that first pot was to make the final table. Not to win. Not to earn a seat. To best less than half the field and watch my full tilt background morph into the bastardized WPT final table set.

Why? Because I recently uncovered the poker database where you can check your stats and I felt my final table percentage was a little too low. As MTTs are my passion when it comes to poker, this is the one mental flaw I simply MUST overcome if I am ever to become profitable. As any highly-paid and equally fucked up shrink will tell you, admitting it is the first step. Now...if I just knew what the second step was...

"I hear this place is restricted, Wang, so don't tell 'em you're Jewish, okay?"

Greg Norman...Jean Van de Velde...Wippy1313

I have a love/hate relationship with Golden Tee.

I love Golden Tee, the machine. I love that I can now use my credit card instead of interminably feeding $1 bills into a finicky machine when I could be saving them for Destiny or Sugar or Victoria. I love that I can waste money on different clubs and different balls that have no impact whatsoever on my game. It's so true to life.

I love Golden Tee, the machine. I hate Golden Tee the game. I'm not too bad at the game. Decent "handicap" ... can hook and shape the ball with the best of them. The calluses on my swing hand are strong enough from a variety of activities that I don't get many of the dreaded GT injuries. My problem? I am ALWAYS good for one disasterous hole. If there is a hole where you can be completely in jail and mark up the 10, I'll do it. It doesn't matter how hard I try to play smart golf, fairways and greens, I will end up in some crevace that will cost me $5 or $10 to the lucky stiff playing me heads-up.

And to make matters worse, I KNOW this about myself and I am constantly WAITING for this hole. It's in my head on every tee. "Is this the hole?" I am never as aggressive as I should be because I'm afraid of that hole. And yet invariably, I'll be on hole 13 or 14, playing well, usually leading and I will start to get a little cocky. I start to try to clear some trees I know full well I can't clear with a 3-wood. And I end up picking pine needles out of my teeth, marking double-digits on the scorecard.

What's the point in relating this short-coming of mine? It extends to my poker game as well. Last night I was in a 30-person MTT. A WIDE range of skill levels. For example, one guy has played in a few WSOP events and one guy flipped three diamonds and two hearts and declared he had a flush because they were all red. ALL skill levels. It makes for interesting table changes. That's for sure.

This is usually a re-buy tournament, but last night we bumped the buy-in and the freeze out was on. With a flat blind structure, I appropriately played tight early and hit the first break about average in chips. Following hitting a few flops pretty hard, I almost doubled-up and I began thinking about the final table. There were two short stacks at my table that had been nursing them rather tightly and we were all looking for opportunities to take advantage.

One of them was directly to my left and in this particular hand, he was in the BB. He had about T5,000 with blinds at 300/600. The action was folded around to me and I looked at 4c5c. I raised to T1,500 figuring was was all-in or folding. He called. Ummm...okay. Flop came A-J-3 rainbow. I checked. Mistake #1. Well, mistake number one was probably being in the hand at all for a "min" raise...but let's just say this is mistake #1 to make me feel better. He checks behind. The turn is a 4. I pair-up, but not exactly a powerhouse. I check again. He splashes $1,200 in the pot. Being a somewhat inexperienced and weak player, I thought he was just trying to take it down. How could a 4 have helped him and if it did, why that bet? So I called.

River was a 9. No help. But if he did have a four, this was an over. I ask for a chip count and put him all-in for his last $2,300. As tight and weak as he had been playing, I expected it to be an easy fold. But without much hesitation, he calls. And flips A-2. His betting patterns make ZERO sense, but what POSSIBLE reason did I have to play this and the way I did? Just like Golden Tee, I was sailing along, doing relatively well, thought I could just get this guy to bend to my will and next thing I know, my tournament chances were dashed.

Made the final table, but finished eighth. If I routinely donked off my chips or one bad beat after another or whatever, that's one thing. But to play good poker for 2.5-3 hours and routinely waste it all with one bad hand. Is this just a lack of concentration? Is it a psychological flaw? Does anyone else experience this? Have any thoughts? More importantly...anyone have any singles? I have a date with Destiny.

Nostradamus-like Prophecy...

Self-knowledge is a scary thing. You never want to be blinded by your self-image so that you cannot adequately "Know Thy Self."

But sometimes knowing yourself too well can be even more painful.

Due to familial obligations, I was unable to grab a token for last night's MATH on Full Tilt. So thanks to my PLO winnings from the weekend, I went ahead and bought-in...something that physically pains me. I LOOOOOVVVEEEE to satellite. I won't break out into Dave Matthews here no matter how much I may want to.

I went into the tournament knowing full well it was going to be a disaster in some way shape or form. Mentally, I was not prepared to play. I was allowing my ego to get the best of me and even though it means NOTHING, I was playing for points in the Battle of the Bloggers.

That invariably leads to disaster. But I held my own through the first few levels, maintaining a relatively static chip count (as is my Modus Operandi). Sensed weakness in one button raise and re-raised with nothing...maxed out at around $3,600 chips. Made it through the first level and promptly tightened up more than A-Rod's A-Hole in the playoffs. I was getting blinded to death (as is my Modus Operandi) when I got KcQc in middle position. I had been playing rather tightly and when the action was folded to me, I raised 3.5xBB. All folded to Joe Speaker in the big blind. He had a healthy stack of chips and popped me. I thought for a minute, but as I had a small stack by this point, I figured he was trying to bully me...or if not, hopefully I had two live cards with straight and flush possibilities. I thought maybe a middle pocket pair...and pushed all-in.

He insta-called and flipped A-K. Doh.

The flop came A-J-x with two clubs. Straight possibilities, flush possibilities...TONS of outs. Soemone even said they smelled a suck-out. Alas...it was not to be. The ironic part of this sad, pathetic tale is the end of my blog posted yesterday. Scroll down. I'll wait.

"But these darned bloggers are too well-versed in the re-raise and my enormous ego is terrified I might have to lay down that KdQd or worse yet...call with it."

See it? Yeah...so I had the suit wrong. Kill me.

Gravedigger...when you dig my grave...won't you make it shallow. So that I can feel the rain?

Couldn't resist Dave that time around.

Thank you Shamus...

As a wide-eyed newbie to the world of poker bloggers, I am frolicking from site to site, adding multiple sites to my trusty google reader. Some I keep for days...some for mere hours. One can only stare at so many screenshots of bad beats before they all start to run together. I have found that I can pick up little "nuggets" from almost everyone, however...even if it's a not so subtle reminder of what NOT to do.

But in the last week, one of the most helpful blogs I've run across is "Hard Boiled Poker" by Short-Stacked Shamus. His approach is intelligent, varied and most importantly he understands that poker and NL HE are not exactly synonymous and all encompassing.

One of the most difficult aspects for my taking poker seriously is the lack of discernible results, especially in cash games. Somewhere a highly paid shrink will say this has "something" to do with my perfectionism. But I digress... I played basketball in high school. If I scored over 20 points and/or the team won, I considered it a successful outing. In poker, outside of a tournament victory, how do you measure success? How do you walk away from the table feeling that you played your best?

Many people consider outcomes/profit to be the barometer. But that is flawed in so many ways. Pure variance/probability will dictate that you can play the best poker in the history of this horrible, neh wonderful game and still finish down for a session or a month's worth of sessions. And conversely, as we're all too painfully aware, the biggest donk in the history of equidae can come out ahead in the short-term.

So if money can't be used...and you sit down at a .25/.50 PLO table...what can be used to measure success? Mentally, over the past year or so, I have told myself that if I could walk away from the table feeling like I "out-played" those during my session, then it would be some sort of ephemeral victory. Sure...maybe I bluffed at a $10 pot with my last $8 to my Full Tilt name...but by taking the chance, I outplayed that guy who called with the runner-runner but flush to felt me. And conversely, if I played spandex-tight poker and just took advantage of those willing to risk their stack with TPTK in a nine-handed Omaha game, I was somehow stooping to their level.

What a destructive and bankroll killing line of thought when you're a self-avowed low-limit player who's more worried about paying for the next pack of Huggies Pull-ups than the next "Bracelet Race." And for some reason, it took reading Shamus' blog about low-limit PLO and just overplaying the nuts to make me come to this seemingly brutally obvious conclusion. So Sunday, I sat down for two short sessions at .25/.50 PLO...waited for what I felt were the nuts...and ended up with a $150 profit for the day thanks to those who were just SURE that middle and bottom two-pair were good on the flop. Did I outplay them? Not necessarily. Did the $150 prove that I'm a better player? Nope. But does it allow me to keep playing the game that I love without wrapping my three-month-old in an old OSU t-shirt to avoid paying for diapers? You better believe it.

*******

The Big Game last night was highly enjoyable, entertaining and predictably mediocre in terms of my participation. As I have in virtually every blogger event, I held my own, got points and bled myself dry somewhere around the middle of the pack. I would like to blame the cards...I would like to blame the Layer Cake Shiraz...I would like to blame the Sopranos...

But in reality, I am just playing too darned tight in the second stage of these tournaments. I'm not talking about blind steals, but I need to trust my post-flop play and see a few more flops. In larger MTTs, I know I can count on a 3xBB raise to perhaps not thin the field as much as I hoped, but does ensure I can set the cost of seeing the flop. Or fold to the all-in. But these darned bloggers are too well-versed in the re-raise and my enormous ego is terrified I might have to lay down that KdQd or worse yet...call with it.

In the sordid "straw poll" that is my life, I have found virtually everyone's response to Barry Greenstein's book, Ace on the River, almost identical: readers were left unfulfilled. However, there are two distinct reasons for this feeling of emptiness.

One camp was apoplectic that he hardly spent any time on starting hands. Not only that, but there wasn't a single prop bet story that ended up with anyone fighting Thai women or with anyone else name tattooed on their nether regions. They kept skimming chapters looking for a "how to play poker" section...a road map. Eventually, they tossed the book away in favor of an issue of All-In magazine or Daniel Negraneu's purely topical treatise. These are the people you see in the $1 SnGs dreaming of running that non-existent bankroll back up to the $50 they started with, the observers popping into the higher buy-in tourneys online begging for that extra $6 so they can prove to the "donkey" that busted them who has seen more episodes of High Stakes Poker, or worst of all, the 20-somethings with I-pods in their ears, Oakleys perched on their noses and a "No Fear" card protector at the $2-$4 games.

These are not poker players. These are degenerate gamblers...or fad chasers...or idol worshipers. Now don't get me wrong. I'm not tapping the tank, deriding these "poisson" so that they run away to something more "now" like the housewife staple: Bunko. No. I'm just outlining that I do not intend to write this blog for these people. And if that keeps my readership at one or two, I am fine with that.

When a person overcomes stigma and convention and visits a psychologist...whether for depression or anxiety or a sex addiction...a therapist will not tell you how to live your life. They will arm you with tools, with thought processes, with an approach that will help make you successful. They will not say, "Hypothetically speaking, if the government were to ever so invade your private life that, against the advice of every other country on earth, they take away your right to enjoy your favorite, legal, past time and tie up thousands of dollars in red tape...I want you to act like this." That doesn't happen. People don't expect it.

But so many people are looking for the silver bullet to make them a winning poker player. If only they play pocket 10s a certain way, they will go from a kitchen table to the final table. A book, a blog, a conversation with David Benyamine on Full Tilt while he's trying to earn a living...none of these are going to provide the answers to making you a winning player. That responsibility lies within each person's psyche. You take the information you get from the books, from the blogs, from David, from hours playing online with a baby in one arm and the mouse in the other...you put that information into the prism that is your psychological approach to the game. And depending on the maturity and development of that prism, your poker play will either be a refined, solid product or a distorted and destructive by-product.

Just to clarify...in no means am I comparing myself to Barry Greenstein. Or a board-certified psychologist. I am simply indicating my belief in the importance of perspective and the mental approach to the game of poker. Perhaps this is because I was forced to face the importance of the aforementioned in my real life. I just hope that through these babbling posts and putting my words and thoughts on paper, I will be able to overcome tilt and destructive sessions as I am working to overcome the same at work and at home.

*********

Tonight is Sunday...and thanks to my successful attempt in my very first token frenzy, I'll be playing in the Big Game tonight. I hope to see everyone there...these blogger events have brought me tremendous enjoyment and serve as constant reminders of how far I have to go to elevate my game.

*********
The Blue Grass and the Arkansas Derby have done NOTHING to clear up the Derby picture. Wow. Didn't I say that last week after the Wood and the Santa Anita Derby? Polytrack has forever changed the importance of these preps and the unconventional routes being taken by trainers these days has made the Derby more of a guessing game than it ever was. Will we ever see two contenders race against each other on dirt, at a legitimate distance, on dry conditions ever again? I hope not. It's what makes this game fun.