I know it's been a minute since I've written a blog. I'd tell you that I've been really busy, which I have, but there's no place for excuses. I've been working what has been a not-so-set schedule at the bar, playing poker twice a week on my days off, reading any poker book I can get my hands on, watching my 49ers get bounced in the NFC Championship, and now shopping for a new car.
My poker play is continuing to improve and every time I sit at a table I learn something. I'm staying humble and making good decisions. Out of the nine cash sessions I've played this year, six have been winning, two have been losing, and one was a marathon break-even. Probably the most important thing I've learned is that if I sit down and play a good, solid, straight-forward game I will make at least $200. This is perfect. If I want to play poker for a living I need to make $650 a week, and making $200 a session will make that achievable. Obviously, there will be times when I make more or less than that, and I'll need to open up my game a little bit to have bigger nights and make up for the inevitable downswings, but for right now I'm encouraged by my consistency.
I've also gotten some outside interest in a couple of blogs I've written, which is something I can hopefully parlay into more of a full-time gig. Plus, it's fun to be on the verge of being able to call myself a published writer. I truly love this game and I'm fascinated by everything associated with it. If I can make a living not only by playing poker, but also by writing about it, I imagine I will be truly happy.
All this is leading me down the path towards a question that I suppose was inevitably going to be asked: Do I move to Vegas?
Right now I'm consistently winning at poker here in Colorado. But is that going to change? Will my time and success at the poker tables lead other players to not want to play with me? I've already identified half a dozen players I don't like being at the same table with. We don't have the tourist flow that Vegas does, and in the month since I've increased my play I already recognize the majority of the players in the poker room when I go play. As of right now there's no reason to try and move up to the $2/$5 game from the $1/$2 game in which I currently play, but will that change if the action dries up at $1/$2? My goal isn't to play against good players; my goal is to make money. It wouldn't make sense to move into that game and sit at a whole table of sharks. Vegas provides the anonymity and player pool to be able to take advantage of the fact that most people that sit down at a poker table, while understanding the basics of the game, aren't all that good.
In regards to my writing, I think the answer is actually more clear: Vegas would help. I can write all I want about being a $1/$2 grinder and the experiences I have, but to truly be involved in the poker community, well, there's only one place in the world for that. This summer I want to go to Vegas for a month during the WSOP. This is a task that is complicated by having a "day job." I don't know that my employer would be okay with me leaving for that long. Additionally, I'm struggling with the time-frame. If I go out for July, I get to be there for the Main Event but miss the bulk of the tournaments. If I go out for June, I'm there for the bulk of the tournaments but miss the Main Event. Easy solution that's not so easy: go to Vegas for two months. If I did that, I guarantee that I wouldn't have my job when I came back. But I think being in Vegas for an extended period of time during the WSOP is vital to continuing to develop my writing career.
My goal is to have one year's worth of expenses in the bank before I quit "working" altogether and play poker for a living. Right now I'm 1/33rd of the way there, so losing my job to stay in Vegas for two months to write about stuff I'm probably only going to be posting on my blog doesn't seem very prudent. Granted, I'm also going to be playing a ton of poker, but what if I go on a losing streak? Then I'll be stuck.
The comforting part of all of this is that I do still have my "day job," Vegas will always be there, nothing is going to stop me from writing, and we're still four months away from the beginning of the WSOP and a TON can happen between now and then.
It's something I need to keep on the back burner and be ready to move to the front burner if the opportunity presents itself.
Showing posts with label WSOP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WSOP. Show all posts
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Loving the Live Streams
I recently made a conscious decision to improve my poker game so that I can stop "working" for a living and earn money doing something I really enjoy. I've purchased a few books and I've been doing my best to play as much as possible so I can practice what I learn.
While I've learned a lot from those books, I've discovered (something that is totally obvious, I suppose) that the books can't cover everything. They try and give you a general understanding of theories and such with the hope that you'll be able to apply them to your real life play. The problem this creates is that while I'm trying to wrap my brain around all of these strategies, some of which include math and game theory that is fairly complicated (I am but a humble writer), I'm also trying to follow along with the example scenarios presented in the books to show how the strategies work. Then the author will try and mention every variation on those examples, further jumbling the information I'm reading. It's like double exponential homework for my brain. Then, when I finally get to a poker table, I'm busy trying to figure out if the situation I'm in is similar to an example I saw in a book and I forget the math/game theory side of it or vice-versa. Honestly, I think it's caused a slight regression in my game.
This summer, however, I discovered something truly amazing: The Live Stream.
The geniuses at ESPN and the WSOP decided to live stream Main Event action and have a well-known poker pro do commentary on the action. This is also around the same time that I began a Twitter account, so there may have been numerous live streams of many tournaments prior to the WSOP, but I didn't know about them.
The benefit of the live stream is that a poker player can watch the action (what would be an "example" in a book) and listen to a poker pro (the "author") analyze the hands as they progress. This is truly great for someone like me who doesn't really have a math brain. I'm much better at applying things I learn when I see them in front of me rather than trying to create a scenario in my head and play it out.
One particular hand I remember involved Olivier Busquet(@olivierbusquet) doing the commentary. He talked about what the action at the table meant in relation to each players' range of possible hands. As the hand progressed through the flop, turn and river, he constantly adjusted his thinking, just as if he were at the table himself. By the end of the hand, he had deduced that the player in the small blind had pocket sixes and had flopped a set. Then when the showdown came...BOOM!...Busquet had nailed it.
I continued watching the WSOP coverage with Busquet, Antonio Esfandiari(@MagicAntonio), and Phil Hellmuth(@phil_hellmuth) and constantly learned more and more. Then during the fall I read that the WPT would be live-streaming the final table of their Foxwoods stop. This live stream was manned by Tony Dunst(@Bond_18), Nick Brancato(@NickyNumbers) and Jonathan Little(@JonathanLittle), and again, I was blown away by the comprehensive analysis they provided. Then my feelings about watching a live stream were cemented during ESPN's broadcast of the November Nine, with Esfandiari in the booth.
This is such a revelation in poker viewing. To be able to get walked through a poker hand and get shown how you have to adjust your thinking each step of the way and how you can influence how your opponent thinks about you is the greatest thing since Super System. With the books that I've read giving me a good strategy base, I've been able to develop my game much more thoroughly by watching the live streams of final tables.
It is definitely the next evolution and revolution in my poker education.
While I've learned a lot from those books, I've discovered (something that is totally obvious, I suppose) that the books can't cover everything. They try and give you a general understanding of theories and such with the hope that you'll be able to apply them to your real life play. The problem this creates is that while I'm trying to wrap my brain around all of these strategies, some of which include math and game theory that is fairly complicated (I am but a humble writer), I'm also trying to follow along with the example scenarios presented in the books to show how the strategies work. Then the author will try and mention every variation on those examples, further jumbling the information I'm reading. It's like double exponential homework for my brain. Then, when I finally get to a poker table, I'm busy trying to figure out if the situation I'm in is similar to an example I saw in a book and I forget the math/game theory side of it or vice-versa. Honestly, I think it's caused a slight regression in my game.
This summer, however, I discovered something truly amazing: The Live Stream.
The geniuses at ESPN and the WSOP decided to live stream Main Event action and have a well-known poker pro do commentary on the action. This is also around the same time that I began a Twitter account, so there may have been numerous live streams of many tournaments prior to the WSOP, but I didn't know about them.
The benefit of the live stream is that a poker player can watch the action (what would be an "example" in a book) and listen to a poker pro (the "author") analyze the hands as they progress. This is truly great for someone like me who doesn't really have a math brain. I'm much better at applying things I learn when I see them in front of me rather than trying to create a scenario in my head and play it out.
One particular hand I remember involved Olivier Busquet(@olivierbusquet) doing the commentary. He talked about what the action at the table meant in relation to each players' range of possible hands. As the hand progressed through the flop, turn and river, he constantly adjusted his thinking, just as if he were at the table himself. By the end of the hand, he had deduced that the player in the small blind had pocket sixes and had flopped a set. Then when the showdown came...BOOM!...Busquet had nailed it.
I continued watching the WSOP coverage with Busquet, Antonio Esfandiari(@MagicAntonio), and Phil Hellmuth(@phil_hellmuth) and constantly learned more and more. Then during the fall I read that the WPT would be live-streaming the final table of their Foxwoods stop. This live stream was manned by Tony Dunst(@Bond_18), Nick Brancato(@NickyNumbers) and Jonathan Little(@JonathanLittle), and again, I was blown away by the comprehensive analysis they provided. Then my feelings about watching a live stream were cemented during ESPN's broadcast of the November Nine, with Esfandiari in the booth.
This is such a revelation in poker viewing. To be able to get walked through a poker hand and get shown how you have to adjust your thinking each step of the way and how you can influence how your opponent thinks about you is the greatest thing since Super System. With the books that I've read giving me a good strategy base, I've been able to develop my game much more thoroughly by watching the live streams of final tables.
It is definitely the next evolution and revolution in my poker education.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Why I Hate the November 9
First, let's get a few things straight: 1) I'm nothing more than an amateur poker player. 2) I've never lasted past day 1 in a multi-day tournament. 3) I have no idea what it's like to play for the kind of money that is up for grabs in the WSOP Main Event.
That being said, I don't really like the idea of finishing a tournament four months after it started. When I started playing poker I was intrigued and enamored with everything surrounding the WSOP. It was a month to a month and a half of total poker geekdom. Not that I ignore poker during the rest of the year, especially now that I'm really trying to make strides towards playing for a living, but the bacchanalia of poker that is the WSOP was always the best time of year.
Back in 2008, the first time the WSOP finished the Main Event in November, I remember hearing a big-time pro saying that he liked the idea. He thought it was great that players could get coaches and sponsorships and rest up. I remember feeling like I disagreed with him, but I couldn't pinpoint why at the time.
The problem I have with the November Nine is that my impression has always been that the WSOP is all about who is playing the best poker right now. It's about who has the stamina to outlast a massive field of players over the course of seven to eight days. And obviously, since Black Friday, the sponsorship part of the argument sort of goes away. Although, it did seem like sponsors were able to get their hands on the players they wanted with no problem at all, so why did we have to give them four months?
I think it would suck to have been playing a great WSOP, make a great run in the Main Event, get featured on almost every airing of the WSOP on ESPN, then have one of my opponents take four months to study my play and figure out ways to beat me. What am I supposed to do to combat that? Unless they're also featured on ESPN, I really have nothing to go on. The other player then has a distinct advantage.
All that being said, I'm still going to follow the November Nine this year. Why? Because it's still the most prestigious tournament in the world. I still love poker. And I hope to one day be there.
That being said, I don't really like the idea of finishing a tournament four months after it started. When I started playing poker I was intrigued and enamored with everything surrounding the WSOP. It was a month to a month and a half of total poker geekdom. Not that I ignore poker during the rest of the year, especially now that I'm really trying to make strides towards playing for a living, but the bacchanalia of poker that is the WSOP was always the best time of year.
Back in 2008, the first time the WSOP finished the Main Event in November, I remember hearing a big-time pro saying that he liked the idea. He thought it was great that players could get coaches and sponsorships and rest up. I remember feeling like I disagreed with him, but I couldn't pinpoint why at the time.
The problem I have with the November Nine is that my impression has always been that the WSOP is all about who is playing the best poker right now. It's about who has the stamina to outlast a massive field of players over the course of seven to eight days. And obviously, since Black Friday, the sponsorship part of the argument sort of goes away. Although, it did seem like sponsors were able to get their hands on the players they wanted with no problem at all, so why did we have to give them four months?
I think it would suck to have been playing a great WSOP, make a great run in the Main Event, get featured on almost every airing of the WSOP on ESPN, then have one of my opponents take four months to study my play and figure out ways to beat me. What am I supposed to do to combat that? Unless they're also featured on ESPN, I really have nothing to go on. The other player then has a distinct advantage.
All that being said, I'm still going to follow the November Nine this year. Why? Because it's still the most prestigious tournament in the world. I still love poker. And I hope to one day be there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)