Monday 03/05/07

Evening -

Another day/night in the penitentiary. Nothing really going on. It is like mot of the time. Working inside a maximum state prison is many long days of nothing (good days) and some days that are beyond belief. After 17+ years as a prison guard, you really do appreciate the good days. There is a lot of friendships, but only at work. Most officers are very private people, and they associate with their like kind. We are very skeptical and not trusting. So friendships are formed and kept inside the walls. It is funny to see. When I first started, back in 1989 at Corcoran State Prison it was called the “killing fields”. Back in those days convicts got shot, and shot at a steady pace. It was no joke. I saw what the state had to offer in terms of shear violence. One becomes immune to violence, and the insanity of a segregated and world full of hate. That is one of the distinct differences between street cops and prison guards. When a street cop shows up, someone is generally happy. However, we a guard arrives no one is happy, and the guard is hated. Makes for a difficult day sometimes. So anyway, as I reflect back to the days of stabbings and shootings, I appreciate this one. All dressed up with nothing to do. Just the way I like it. PRISON!

I was reading an interview with Mike Matasow in Poker Pro magazine (gift from Party Poker [Party Points] as I was kicked off for being a “slimy” American) regarding moving up in limits. He suggests that if you are beating the game you play 70–80% of the time, and then move up until you struggle. This is one method I guess, but I have also heard that you should manage the bankroll and not move up until you have at least 30 buy-ins. Well the hell! I really don’t understand the whole moving up thing. Let’s look at the two.

Moving up by beating the game 70-80% of the time. What does beating the game really mean? How can you realistically determine if you are beating the game? If I play a single table, and I buy-in for $100.00 at the .50/1.00 table and I play for 1 hour, is beating the game showing a profit. If I turn $100.00 into 150.00 is that beating the game? What about $125.00, is that beating the game? What if I multi-table and play 4 tables at the 25NL table, if I show a profit at 3 of the 4 tables, is that beating the game? I mean really how do you know? Is any profit beating the game? I say it is, and therefore I must be able to move up because I have shown a winning session in 70 out of 100 sessions. If I play and quit every time I make a profit, however small, then can I move up? Doesn’t seem practical.


Now for the bankroll principle. Looking at the 30-40 buy-in rule, one can surmise that a very wealth player could make a deposit and play at any stakes he desired. I am sure many players would love to see this. However there would be a struggle. Players who are new or “fish” have no particle style of play; they often call instead of raise, or raise little and play in a very unorthodox fashion. This is what us low limit players deal with. We see videos and read articles by professionals who play with people who “understand” the game. I have read stories about “this is optimal play over the long run” But in the short term you have lost 3 buy-ins. And you chalk that up to variance. But you are still you are down 3 buy-ins today, and have to win 3 buy-ins in the next session to make break even. Now is that how one manages his BR? Up today, down tomorrow even the next. It seems that all poker is winning a few select hands with the right cards. It is clearly understood that you can not win a big hand (money) without someone having a big hand. And although your hand was a big hand to start with, it is now a big hand to pay off with. And once you have won those big hands, do you quit so you have a winning session? There is a real understanding of stealing blinds, but when you have the blinds, someone steals from you. So it is back to square one. So I ask anyone who may stumble across this article, WTF! POKER!