<BLOCKQUOTE>
"But, sir! The odds of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately 3,720 to 1!"
- C-3PO, The Empire Strikes Back
</BLOCKQUOTE>
If you've played online poker for any length of time, you've seen or been involved in hands that play out something like this:
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Dealt to EWILLERS [Qc As]
robertino666: raises 800 to 1600
bob_lukas: calls 1600
EWILLERS: calls 1600
*** FLOP *** [Ts 9s 7s]
robertino666: bets 1600
bob_lukas: raises 1600 to 3200
EWILLERS: raises 1600 to 4800
robertino666: calls 75 and is all-in
bob_lukas: raises 23161 to 27961 and is all-in
EWILLERS: calls 9075 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (14086) returned to bob_lukas
*** TURN *** [Ts 9s 7s] [Js]
*** RIVER *** [Ts 9s 7s Js] [Jc]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
bob_lukas: shows [Th Jh] (a full house, Jacks full of Tens)
EWILLERS: shows [Qc As] (a flush, Ace high)
robertino666: shows [Td Ad] (two pair, Jacks and Tens)

from PokerStove...
Preflop:
49.243% { AsQc }
21.799% { AdTd }
28.958% { JhTh }

Flop:
43.928% { AsQc }
38.944% { AdTd }
17.128% { JhTh }

Turn:
91.270% { AsQc }
00.794% { AdTd }
07.937% { JhTh }
</BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE>

"Inconceivable!"
- Vizzini, The Princess Bride
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Entire forums are devoted to bad beats. Beats like these cause some players to proclaim that online poker is "rigged." I don't necessarily agree with that contention; that in some manner, some hands are programmed or designed or rigged to clash with improbable upset outcomes. Of course, online poker generates a tremendous volume of dealt hands which doubtless is bound to generate equally high volumes of bad beats. As the myriad of uncanny bad beat stories seem to invite, however, this is a spectacle that might warrant a moment's consideration.
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Zaphod leaped out of his seat.
"Then what's happened to the missiles?" he said.
A new and astounding image appeared in the mirrors.
"They would appear," said Ford doubtfully, "to have turned into a bowl of petunias and a very surprised-looking whale..."
"At an Improbability factor," cut in Eddie, who hadn't changed a bit, "of eight million, seven hundred and sixty-seven thousand, one hundred and twenty-eight to one against."
- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Its worth noting for any new or inexperienced players, that there is a difference between a bad beat and just being beat. An A-K vs. pair coin flip is generally a regular beat. A bad beat is more of something powered by the starship Heart of Gold's Infinite Improbability Drive from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. When only one card in the deck on the river can make a hand actually arrives, or only limited or specific runner-runner turn and river cards can turn the tide, comes to pass -- uncannily and seemingly against all probability -- it likely qualifies as a bad beat.
<BLOCKQUOTE>
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy says that if you hold a lungful of air you can survive in the total vacuum of space for about thirty seconds. However, it does go on to say that what with space being the mind-boggling size it is the chances of getting picked up by another ship within those thirty seconds are two to the power of two hundred and seventy-six thousand, seven hundred and nine to one against.
By a totally staggering coincidence, that is also the telephone number of an Islington flat where Arthur once went to a very good party and met a very nice girl whom he totally failed to get off with...
- The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
</BLOCKQUOTE>
A hole-in-one or amazing shot in golf may be improbable and rare, but not impossible. Even in live poker, the rare does occur, like the quad Aces running into a Royal Flush at the 2008 WSOP or the crazy hand in this match in Europe where in one hand was dealt, Qs, As, 5s, 7s and Ks. My own live poker experience is less than many others' I'm sure, but I have seen some (small) number of uncanny live hands. I have to acknowledge that the seeming volume of unnatural beats online may be, in some measure, merely a product of perception combined with, well, high-volume.
<BLOCKQUOTE>
The equanimity of your average tosser of coins depends upon a law, or rather a tendency, or let us say a probability, or at any rate a mathematically calculable chance, which ensures that he will not upset himself by losing too much nor upset his opponent by winning too often. This made for a kind of harmony and a kind of confidence. It related the fortuitous and the ordained into a reassuring union which we recognized as nature. The sun came up about as often as it went down, in the long run, and a coin showed heads about as often as it showed tails. Then a messenger arrived. We had been sent for. Nothing else happened. Ninety-two coins spun consecutively have come down heads ninety-two consecutive times..."
- Guildenstern, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead
</BLOCKQUOTE>
On a more technical note, I think some of the uncanny-ishness of at least some of the bad beats can be explained by the limitations of programmers and programming structures at generating true randomness. I have some limited programming knowledge, know some programmers, and have a rudimentary understanding of the difficulties involved in random number generation. Computers are given more to logic and order and sequencing rather than chaos and randomness. Of course, I'm sure programmers smarter than myself have developed algorithms to the best of their ability to create the best randomization they can. To that extent, I don't think the game is rigged; just slightly flawed perhaps.
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Kirk: But what you're after is a Royal Fizbin. But the odds of getting
a Royal Fizbin are astr... Spock, what are the odds in getting a
Royal Fizbin?
Spock: I have never computed them, captain.
Kirk: Well, they're astronomical, believe me.
- Star Trek, A Piece of the Action
</BLOCKQUOTE>
I am looking forward to the release of Real Deal Poker to see if their high hand volumes show similar levels of infinite improbability or not. (Actually, that might make a good name for a poker site: InfiniteImprobabiltyPoker.com.) Or if the perceived volume of improbability we see is, in fact, a logical degree of normality. It should prove interesting either way. It is an unfortunate truism that it seems Americans will not be able to play for cash on Real Deal when it launches, until their owners say they allowed to. Sigh.
<BLOCKQUOTE>
[All-in after the flop...]
*** RIVER *** [4h Ah Ts Tc] [Td]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
river0077: shows [Kd Th] (four of a kind, Tens)
EWILLERS: shows [9c Ac] (a full house, Tens full of Aces)
JoenyPlatsci: shows [5d 5c] (a full house, Tens full of Fives)
</BLOCKQUOTE>
In the meantime, fire up the Poker Stove for roasting the nuts, strap yourself into your chair, start up your favorite poker site, engage your Infinite Improbability Drive and hang on... its liable to be an inconceivably wild, tilt-worthy, rollercoaster ride. And try to enjoy yourself along the way.

-EW

<BLOCKQUOTE>
"I need a hand, dealer. Ya gotta have the cards."
- Brad Garrett, Celebrity Poker Showdown
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Orbit after orbit after orbit with rags after rags after rags. Its poker at its dullest and most frustrating. I was watching a Poker After Dark episode where Doyle Brunson lamented not catching many hands to play. During the match he joked with Daniel Negraneu, who had shown Js and Qs (I think) "How do you keep getting these hands?" Daniel replied, "I just wait for them," to which Doyle quips back, "I wait for the them too, but I don't get them," and everyone shares a laugh.

Next to losing with a big hand, a hole card dry spell might be the most frustrating thing in poker. Watching others build big stacks and showing down big hands while you toss a seemingly endless parade of 3-7, 2-6, 3-9, J-2, etc. is disheartening as hell. Sure, you may find spots here and there for some modest larceny of blinds or small pots, but you know you're not likely to make a deep run without having the goods at some point -- and you certainly can't fold your way to victory.

I don't know if there is an art or science to picking spots with these rag parades to make something happen. If there is, I have yet to learn it, much less master it. Very lean on chips (from lack of playable hands/spots) and faced with some 5x raise, how do you get yourself to pull the trigger with that J-3? Odds are slim on hitting the flop regardless. Then there's the added bitterness on those rare (1%?) times after folding when the flop comes 3-3-J -- even if the turn brings an Ace and the guy who raised with his pocket As would have sent you packing. Other times, maybe the J-3 would hold up. The poker gods are fickle indeed.

In a recent tourney, during one of those rag parades, the poker gods granted me on of those rare and memorable rags to riches moments. At $100/$200 blinds and on the BB, I looked down at an unimpressive 3-7 suited. I heaved a sigh and awaited the action that would bring me to fold another monster rag hand. Folds followed to the late middle position who min raised to $400. The button called and the SB folded. Looked like I'd see a flop for a change. I called the raise and the flop came 7-2-7. I checked, hoping to see some action develop and was not disappointed when the raiser made a near pot-sized bet. The button folded and I smooth called the bet, bringing a semi-scare card K on the turn.

At this point, if he was holding a small or middle pair, the K has probably killed the action. If he was holding A-K or K-Q then I might still be in business, as long as it wasn't K-7, which didn't seem likely. I made a 2/3rd of the pot-sized bet to see if see if he'd fold outright, or re-raise with his K or deuces. He called the bet. The river came a benign enough 5, the board disjointed of flush or straight draw possibilities.

The call confounded me a bit, though I was still fairly certain that I had him beat. The initial min raise seemed to rule out pocket Ks. The real threat seemed more likely to be in the form of pocket 2s, or possibly, though less likely, now 5s. A weakly played full house if 2s were the case. But it had really become academic by then; I was playing out of position and I'd become pot committed and needed to try to take it at all costs. So I shoved all-in... and he called, showing pocket 4s. Since I had marginally more chips than he, I had eliminated him, where he proceeded to berate me from the rail for calling his "raise" (double my BB) with a 3-7 and telling me what a donk I was.

There is another lesson here about knowing when to fold, but I'll save that for another entry.

I wish I could say that was the beginning of an epic comeback that would be recounted in song by poker bards down through time immemorial. Although I don't recall how that particular tourney ended, I'm sure it was no happy fairy tale ending... but rather a grisly slasher ending, perhaps involving pocket pairs being brutally hacked to death by A-Ks. I'm sure it wasn't a pretty sight.

As for me being a donk for calling his min raise... well, the epitaph gets thrown around often enough, and is certainly appropriate sometimes. Other times...
<BLOCKQUOTE>
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
- Inigo Montoya
</BLOCKQUOTE>
That's how it is; serious about working on my game... but you gotta have some fun along the way. For now, back to the grind...

-EW

At last, here is my not-really-long-awaited poker blog that has been anxiously anticipated by few or no poker players around the world, country, state, county or zip code. But that's alright and even as it should be. My only goal with this blog is for a forum to air some of my experiences, musings and thoughts about the game in general, and some specific hands and matches and hopefully have some fun along the way.

A little about me...

I've been playing poker for about ten years. The majority of that has been online with some small live play here and there. Online I followed the path many online players do, starting with play chips for awhile before playing for cash. I became quite wealthy, play chip-wise, and decided to deposit and play for cash and try to do the same.

Like many players, perhaps, I consider myself a reasonably good, reasonably solid player. But even taking into account the vicissitudes of fortune, the actual cash results of my efforts indicated otherwise. After some up and down variance, my initial $50 deposit was effectively lost. Unwilling to simply give up, I made another $50 deposit with eerily similar results. After being laid-off at work, further deposits were out of the question, so I was relegated to returning to playing for play chips.

I continued to work on my game, did some reading as well as watching the pros when possible. I also began playing some freerolls - where the top 27 won a seat in a cash tournament. Moderate successes, but never a resounding winning performance.

In the beginning of 2009, I found that I had $.40 in my Pokerstars account and some FPPs. Left with a low-paying 9-5 job and bleak prospects for the future, I decided to see what I could do with my $.40. Playing a little .01/.02 cash table play got me back to $1.50. I also found the Stars had these $.10 360 entrant SNGs that paid the top 36 spots. Long before I ever heard the term "micro grinding," I started grinding these $.10 SNGs. Often I'd only cash for $.20, $.30, $.50, etc. But with some improvement and plain determination, I began making more final tables, taking the $8.50 and $6.00 prizes too. I even took first in a $.20 buy-in tourney with 945 entrants good for $35.

So in some ways, it is a real micro grinding success story; by the beginning of 2010, after a year of micro stakes SNGs, I had recouped my initial two deposits - a 250% BR increase.

Its been a mixed bag so far this year. I've "graduated" myself to slightly higher micro stakes; $1 and $2 tourneys and SNGs. I made a deep run in a 1215 entrant tourney recently for 7th place.

As much as I enjoy the game for the game itself -- as I heard Doyle Brunson say in an interview during the last WSOP [paraphrased]; its all about the money.

These days it truly has become... I don't know if I can call it a part-time job, since I do it more than 40hrs a week, it may be a second full-time job. Suffice to say, its my only other means of earning a living, as nobody seems to hiring these days.

This brings up a last thought I want to address in this inaugural blog entry -- something other micro grinders have likely encountered as well. Although you find kamikaze-style players anywhere I suppose, they certainly seem to thrive in micro stakes games. It often seemed that whenever some clown shoved or called an all-in with his 27 to beat someone's As or big pair or whatnot, the comment would inevitably be made along the lines of, "Its just a .10 game, what do you expect?" Oddly, I heard (read) chat recently in a $2 tourney saying something similar - "Well, its just a $2 tourney, nobody's here for the money."

I used to wonder why rich people played the lottery. What would winning matter to them? Why does somebody, who's dime means nothing and the $8 top prize means nothing, play a dime tourney? And with top prizes in the $2 tourneys being several hundred or a grand (depending on how many entrants) why would someone not care about turning their $2 into $1,000? Or since their money means nothing to them, they assume that nobody else cares either?

I don't get it, and I don't suppose I ever will. I know that a grand or a few hundred bucks would do wonders for me and my family. So whether I've staked a dime or a dollar and invested some hours of my time, it means something to me. And from what I've seen, the kamikaze players don't appear to last very long. But like real kamikazes, they can do some damage on their way down.

While trying to steer clear of kamikazes, I try not to shoot myself in the foot and will just keep working on my game and grinding away.

Until the next entry, see you at the tables!