Short Recap of the Borgata Poker Open + A Cool Hand

Posted on February 2, 2013 by Jason Schlachter

I recently spent approximately 2 weeks at the Borgata for the Winter Poker Open and recorded a lot of hands and thoughts which I hope to turn into blogs.   Since there were so many cash games, which is my preference, I didn’t play any of the tournaments, so I had the opportunity to put in a lot of hours and to work on improving my game.  I feel as though I have been making great strides in adjusting to the changes that people are making and though my results have been good, I hope that the changes I made and will make will cause them to be even better.  It is a bit tough to stay in rhythm when not playing regularly, and I am hoping to play more frequently in the coming months.

This hand occurred towards the end of the trip late one night:

I recognized my opponent as someone who plays big games in NYC and was a winner at high stakes many years ago.  He has also made instructional poker videos and I had a sense  that he was not afraid to gamble and was also very good.  We were playing $5/$10 no-limit, which was below his normal stakes and he had just lost a pot where he got all the money in as a 3-1 favorite, ran it twice(where you put two different turn/river combinations out, and each takes half the pot; it’s a way of reducing variance) and lost them both.  He was visibly irritated and proceeded to raise the next 4 hands, make a few bad calls, and lose a bit more money.  As we say in the business, he was on tilt.

He has about $2200 and I cover him.  He straddles (puts out a raise without looking at his cards), there is one caller and I raise to $100 on the button with QQ.  The SB calls and the villain thinks and raises to $370.  In a lot of games, against a lot of opponents, I wouldn’t be thrilled about my QQ, but I knew immediately that against this particular opponent, who was both capable and tilted,  that I would be happy to get all the money in the middle in this situation.

I thought for a minute or so about the best way to accomplish this, and felt that even though there was a sizeable amount of money out there, ~$600, that if I reraised him a small amount, instead of shoving all in, I could get him to make a bigger mistake(that he might not ordinarily make).  I decided to raise to $870 and he responded by quickly shoving all in, exactly as I had hoped, and I called immediately.  He tabled A4o, which was the sort of hand I had hoped he would have, and I was a 70-30 favorite.  It is always invigorating to make a play based on a read I feel confident about, follow through for a significant amount of money, and be right about it.  We agreed to run it twice, and unfortunately, I was only able to win 1 of 2, so we wound up splitting the pot.  Nonetheless, I left the game a few hours later feeling extremely good about the situation and the way I had played.

Posted in Poker | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Antigua vs. USA in World Trade Organization Dispute

Posted on January 30, 2013 by Jason Schlachter

This story has finally gained traction after 10 years in this NYTimes article.  Antigua has decided to sell US intellectual property without paying royalties as a result of the United States violation of free trade agreements with regard to internet gambling.  Nearly 10 years ago, the United States was accused and convicted of violating trade laws by preventing Antigua from offering internet gambling services in the US, while continuing to allow horse racing, the lottery, sports betting and all other types of gambling within its borders.  As a result, the WTO has ruled that Antigua is now free to violate US copyright laws in order to collect the damages they are owed.

The United States actions in this case have been appalling.  They knowingly violated international trade agreements because they felt they should not be subject to the internet gambling portion of them.  When challenged by, Antigua, a much smaller country, they have taken on the role of bully by ignoring the independent WTO decisions and trying to withdraw from the parts of the agreement they have been ruled in violation of.  When asked to change the laws to comply with the WTO decision, the US agreed, and then a year later arrogantly stated that they deemed themselves to already be in compliance.

The way the US has handled the situation with Antigua mirrors what has been done with internet gambling within the borders of the US.  There is no law making internet gambling illegal, and in fact, you are free to buy lottery tickets online, bet on horse racing online and to go to a casino in ANY state(except Hawaii).  The idea that the line on prohibition of gambling should somehow be drawn at gaming on the internet, when state run online and land based casinos and lotteries are everywhere is ludacris.

Here is a link to the timeline of the dispute  http://www.antiguawto.com/WTODispPg.html

Posted in Articles, Live Poker, Poker | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Lance Armstrong

Posted on January 14, 2013 by Jason Schlachter

I have been an outspoken in my dislike and distrust of Lance Armstrong in the past, and now that it seems like he will finally admit to blood doping and cheating in his sport, I am ambivalent about it.

It has been well known for a long time that most, if not all, of the top cyclists dope in ways that are illegal according to the rules of their sport.  To me, this means that if you win, 7 major titles and you want your name to be clear, there had better be NO evidence that you cheated.  This is especially important having come back from a serious cancer that left you on the brink of death.  There is a mountain of evidence against Lance Armstrong, some physical, like his old samples, some circumstantial, like his close association and payments to Michele Ferrari, who was the leader in the blood doping field(and is now serving a lifetime ban from sports) and a lot of witness testimony.  Despite all of this evidence, he continued to insist that he was innocent, that the evidence against him was wrong and that each one of the more than 20 people who accused him was a liar.  It was so highly improbable that he could be innocent that I found it difficult to believe how anyone could think he was innocent.

I was always afraid that when his cheating came to light, it would hurt the people who have been involved with and motivated by his Livestrong foundation.   Livestrong, which he founded, was created to “inspire and empower” cancer survivors and their families, and it has done exactly that for millions of people, who viewed him as a role model and a leader in the fight against cancer.  I truly hope that when all of the evidence of his cheating comes to light, as well as his enormous effort to intimidate people into not revealing it, that it doesn’t send the message that cheating in pursuit of goals and dreams is acceptable.  I hope survivors and families are able to take continued strength in the Livestrong community, despite the actions of its founder.

Posted in Live Poker | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Slate Article on Going for 2 When Down in Football Games

Posted on January 13, 2013 by Jason Schlachter

An interesting article on why teams should go for 2 points when down 14 and scoring a touchdown.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/two_point_conversion_strategy_the_late_game_scenario_in_which_going_for.single.html#pagebreak_anchor_2

Posted in Articles | Leave a comment

What the Jason Saw

Posted on January 10, 2013 by Jason Schlachter

When looking at the poker headlines, I often read how a player has won a lot of money in a short time and suddenly has the “key” to winning.  I have played poker professionally for nearly 10 years and I have seen many such people come and go.  There is always someone who is crushing the games, and who, a year later, is losing money.  I always wonder if those people are highly skilled, have gotten lucky in the short term, or if they have unknowingly stumbled on the right formula to temporarily make them successful.

In the book What The Dog Saw, Malcolm Gladwell discusses hidden luck and its role in the success of the “creative geniuses” that we have come to know.  In his discussion of Bill Gates, Gladwell discusses many of the things that had to go right that allowed Gates to both create the PC and to make it a success.  For example, he had to have access to a computer lab which would allow him to practice coding and to gain the requisite experience, and at that time there were only a half dozen in the world.  In addition  he had to be born in a specific time period so that when he created the PC, it was at a time when a)it was viable to market to consumers and b)it hadn’t been done already c)he didn’t get pushed into doing something else.  There are thousands of other examples of things that had to go perfectly in order for the PC to become as successful as it is.

Yes, Bill Gates was very smart to have created the PC, but history is littered with very smart people who created things that were ahead of their time, but who did not have luck on their side.  Elisha Gray and the Betamax come to mind as well as all of people who were lucky once, like Tamagatchi and Furby, but who could not replicate it.  There are many people who have created widgets in their apartment, but it is only those widgets that suddenly become “hot” that are looked at as being insightful and ahead of the curve.

So how does this apply to poker players?  I often see players that do very well for a short time, but over time, they begin to break even or lose.  While this could be attributed to variance, I attribute a large part of this to hidden luck.  Poker players tend to do things that they see other players doing, and as a result, their behavior is a bit like a herd.  As a result playing styles change together and adaptations made today might not work as well tomorrow.  A player can play in a way that happens to work well against the current playing style, however if they are unable or unwilling to adapt(which is often the case when they think they have found the “key”), when the style changes, they will go from being winners to breaking even, or even losing.

For example, let’s pretend that today is my first day playing poker.  I like to raise, so every time someone raises before the flop, I decide I am going to reraise.  This works well, since today, when people get reraised, they fold everything but AA, and as a result, I win.  I think the game is easy and I have the “key.”  However, tomorrow, people decide they don’t like folding all the time, so they begin reraising me instead of folding, so that I begin losing and my “key” no longer fits in the lock!  In addition, since it’s only my second day and I don’t have enough knowledge or experience to understand why reraising worked(or didn’t work), I am unable to make the correct adjustments.

The most important thing to take away from this is that you need to understand why you are taking specific actions, so that if your opponents change, you are able to adjust.  If you don’t know why you are choosing to do something, then you will only be guessing how to fix it when something stops working.

Posted in Live Poker | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment