Robot Invasion!

For those of you who have not seen the article, you can find it on Wired Magazine's site.

My first reaction was "oh shit" and "Why do people suck?". I did a little research (very little) and found the following statement on this robot peddler's website:

Party Poker (IGM) AdvisoryDO NOT use WinHoldEm at any - IGM - skin site without using WINPP. The IGM software is scanning your system for WinHoldEm and they will suspend your account. The IGM software is taking screen shots of your entire display. The screen shot is stored in the temp folder where the files are installed. Party Poker will steal your winnings and deposits if they believe you are a WinHoldEm user even if you have not violated their license agreement. We apologize for this inconvenience. A two computer anti-detection solution is available in conjunction with WINPP.

This is followed up with a VERY in depth explanation on how to setup a network of computers to mask detection.

Yes, I am probably an idiot for further spreading the word about this program but anyone interested in using something like this would find it anyway.

I kind of knew it was just a matter of time before this happened. I suspected that there were home grown "bots" out there, but I didn't really think that anything would be commercially available. Let's be realistic, if you step back and look at the capability of Poker Tracker, its not a giant leap to take that capability to the next level. PT let's you see how you are playing, statistically analyze your play for leaks and categorize other players by their statistical play. The logical next step would be automate the play and remove the human element that is having the "leaks".

What it boils down to in reality is how good of a poker player is the guy who programmed the bot? I am not a top-quality player by any means, yet I have not run across a computer simulation that I haven't completely crushed. They aren't even fun to play against anymore. With the millions of variations and possible outcomes with each hand, it would take some SERIOUS development time and QA to automate decent play. Poker is much more than playing the correct starting hands. I suck enough to know that. Usually a good student of the game can master starting hands in a few weeks (it is utterly shocking the number of players who have not), post-flop play is infinitely more complex.

So while I still want to know why people suck, what I am more interested in is how do we combat this? Can/should we combat this? If bot play begins to run rampant, will it be the end of the online poker sites?

Poker is not a sport

At least it is not a sport according to Llyod Garver of CBS Sportsline.com.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/columns/story/8774629/rss

Do I think Poker is a sport? No, I don't but that doesn't mean it doesn't qualify for Gary's list of things that make it a sport. I will quickly summarize:

Getting in shape: A participant in a sport should get in better physical shape by practicing and playing the sport. Again, we see that poker doesn't qualify. If you can actually gain weight while playing -- and get mustard stains on your shirt -- that thing you're doing is not a sport.

You have to be in excellent mental shape to play poker at the highest levels. While I know this is not what he was referring to, I think it still qualifies. For rebuttal purposes only, see David Wells and Sydney Ponson as examples of mainstream athletes who do not qualify as being "in-shape".

Competition: In a sport, you must compete against someone who has a very good chance at beating you using the same skills you have. Here we see that bullfighting is not a sport. And -- go ahead, start your e-mails -- hunting is a dubious sport at best. When a hunter has a good chance of being shot by a duck, then it will be a sport.

What could be more competitive than a group of ten people sitting at a table trying to take each others money?

Young and old: If an 8-year-old and an 80-year-old have an equal chance of beating each other, it's not a sport. So shuffleboard is not a sport.

I have not seen very many 8 year olds on the WSOP or WPT circuit. Doyle Brunson rules so he doesn't count.

Makeup: Anything that requires a great deal of makeup is probably not a sport. This is just one of the rules that disqualifies synchronized swimming.

Annie Duke - No makeup there (j/k). According to this article tennis, golf, volleyball, gymnastics, etc are not sports...

Computers: Anything your computer can do better than you is not a sport. Thus, that annual spelling bee should not be considered a sport. Video and computer games are not sports. Here's where the "you shouldn't be able to spill nachos on your pants while you're playing a sport" rule comes into play.

There are probably a computer "bot" could possibly beat me, but not a higher caliber player. The AI needed to play Hold 'em against a pro successfully does not exist.

It's personal: There are some things that just feel like sports to me, and others that don't. Check out these examples, answer some of these questions, and feel free to add your own:
Fishing is a sport, even though you can get drunk while you're doing it. Similarly, bowling is a sport. But is lawn bowling?

See "Competition" above.

Do I think Poker is a sport? No. But according to Mr. Llyod's short list, it does seem to qualify :)...

Google does IM

Just what I needed, another IM account. I use GAIM so I won't be privy to any Google-specific features until they update GAIM. Google usually does things pretty well (See Video and Maps as examples) so maybe I will download their client and see what all the hubbub is about. In the meantime I have been able to successfully get the Jabber client in GAIM to work with my GMAIL account:

Thanks Slashdot:

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tuesday August 23, @07:22PMfrom the resourceful-users dept.smash writes "Google's new IM service is already live. All you need is a Jabber-compatible Instant Messaging client (such as Apple's iChat, or gaim), and a GMail address." This should answer, at least in part, all of the speculation that has been flying around the net over the last couple of days. Update: Many users have been eager to let us know that Google Talk in indeed live.

Loser

I had my first losing night since I started playing the Sklansky/Malmuth method of small stakes limit. I am still up on the week, but it was disappointing none-the-less. I will say that of the 106 hands I played, I saw 16% of the flops, and won 40% of the showdowns (according to PP weak sessions stats). As soon as my bankroll allows, I will be buying Poker Tracker for some more in-depth analysis.

As disappointing as the loss was, I was very happy with my play. I did Not tilt (much), I actually did tilt for about five minutes when my pocket queens got beat by pocket Aces, but it was short and I actually won a pot on my tilt. I am getting better at accepting my losses, that is why it is called gambling.

While I was happy with my play in general, I think I played too long. I was VERY tired but kept going anyway, trying to re-coup my losses. Instead I actually ended up compounding them more. I guess that was a tilt in itself.

Back to the books.

As per normal - IGGY has good advice today.

Shamelessly stolen from Guinness and Poker:

#1 Never, ever tap the glass.
#2 Don't make the mistake of playing directional poker - focusing your action on one guy.
#3 Lose the sunglasses - they smell like fear - save em for the WSOP
#4 Feeling ANY sense of immediacy in poker is a BAD thing. I'm talking cash games, here, obviously.

Let me say that again. Immediacy in poker = bad thing.

From my perspective, bad beats are the sign of a good game, damnit. I want players chasing. I want players calling two bets cold on the flop without proper odds. It's why I don't have to work for the Man anymore. Just accept it when they hit and move on. Don't freaking tilt, damnit.
In my first month of blogging, I posted this:
1) Other players bad play will make me far more money than my fancy or brilliant plays.
2) The guy that leads with a bet on the turn, after not betting previously, often has a big hand.
3) Folding costs me nothing pre-flop. If it's a close decision, I can't go far wrong by folding.

/end stolen content

Tournament!

The wife and I held another No-Limit tournament this past weekend, this time we had a record setting 29 attendees!

Thanks to everyone who attended (mike pass along your contact through info so I can invite you next time), we had a great time and were glad you could all make it.

I apologize that we ran so late but we had some problems getting started coupled with some technical difficulties with the blind clock. Our goal was to end at midnight and we missed that by a long shot, but lessons have been learned and the next tourney will be more punctual (just keep me away from the scotch!).

Yours truly did not make it past the second table, going out on KhJh with top pair, only to lose to a set of queens.

Congratulations to the top 5:
5th place - Shelly
4th place - Don
3rd place - Kara
2nd place - Kristin
1st place - Lauren


It was a grueling heads up match between Lauren and Kristin at the end. Kristin played valiantly but Lauren came out victorious with her pocket Jacks, making a set on the last hand.

Small Stakes Experiement

I played last night using Sklansky's recommended pre-flop hands and (to the best of my recollection) his recommended post-flop strategies. I started off getting killed.

I had a king high flush on my second hand (KQs) that I jammed the pot with only to lose to 4 of a kind (3's).

Bad beat.

My set of 6's got beat by a set of Jacks.

Bad beat.

My two pair (AJs) got beat by a set of 8's.

Bad beat, but I should have seen that one coming.

The mighty AA got cracked with a set of J's.

Bad beat.

So a bunch of bad beats and $25 later, I changed tables. I did not, however, tilt. The temptation to play K9s came up several times, but I was committed to this new strategy.

I was down to my last $1.50 on my second $25 buy-in when things started to change. I kept playing with "my" strategy and starting winning pots. I got all the way back to where I started (with my second buy-in) and was going strong. Unfortunately it was about 1am and I was having trouble keeping my eyes open so I decided to call it a night.

What did I learn? I am not sure really, but I will sum up my observations.

• The sklansky starting hands are a wider range than what I expected and what I have been told to play with in the past. They seem to be very effective. (I never stuck to the more strict guidelines anyway).
• Playing less hands makes your bluffs/semi-bluffs more effective, especially after you have taken down a couple of pots with a showdown.
• People will call you with anything on the flop and as little as third pair with no backdoor possibilities on the turn in small stakes.
• You need to be committed to your hand all the way to the river if you think it is good enough or you have enough outs.
• You will always have bad beats, sometimes several in a short time frame. Do not use this as an excuse to tilt or start playing a wider range of hands to try to make up for it.

I think time spent reading has helped me, but there is just so much to learn...

Tight = +EV

Playing tighter on the ultra-low limit tables is paying off. Well, paying off in percentages, not necessarily monetarily. I have moved up 3 levels and am continuing to be successful. I even moved back over to Party last night and had a little luck. I will continue to move up as fast as my bankroll will allow and try not to let my reach exceed my grasp.

In short I am up about 30% over the past week and I owe it to simply to playing about 50% less hands. I am starting to also see why people play multiple tables. Folding so many hands can make for a very boring evening at times (I don't think I am quite ready for that).

The wife and I are hosting a Poker Party on the 13th, maybe my tighter play will keep me from splashing around as much as I have been lately and thus causing me to go out early. I remember when I was always in the top three at these parties, its been a while since I have even placed.

Thanks again to everyone who has made suggestions regarding the reading. The Sklansky/Malmuth book: Small Stakes Hold 'em: Winning Big with Expert Play has been a wealth of knowledge and I high;y recommend it to anyone just starting out - wait no I don't, I mean don't read this book... :)

See you on the $1/$2 tables or on the the 13th.