Wednesday, December 15, 2004

Sadly Ecstatic

I'll paraphrase the response that the PSO poster had to my posting:

"I know I can't play this way in bigger games, but I have no interest in playing in bigger games."
I just don't get this. Why would you never want to play in bigger games? Why would you be content to only being able to beat bad players?

I guess the poker explosion has spoiled a lot of people. There is a seemingly endless supply of horrid players out there to fleece. I guess if you always look for the right table and the right situation you can always find one where the play is bad enough that you can win playing the same tight game raising only with Aces or Kings every time. They need to be pretty bad, because they need to be completely oblivious that you are only playing nut hands.

But even then it's no excuse. If you are getting 10 to 1 pot odds on a hand but you still lay it down because your cards don't fit into your predetermined set of "acceptable starting hands" you are costing yourself money. And why would you be resistant to a play that is proven by SIMPLE MATH is the right thing to do? To preserve table image? You have already put yourself into a situation where table image MUST be meaningless because you only play nut hands. To get any action at all, people need to be pretty ignorant of your image.

I don't get it. But what really bugs me is when they comment on other people's play and assume they are a fish because they won a hand with less than a top ten starting hand? "How could he have stayed with Jack-Three? Please tell me his name so I can add him to my buddy list." It never even occurs to them that playing Jack-Three might have been a perfectly acceptable play. And after flopping quad threes, all that's left is the complaining.

When we were playing on the cruise, Krager and I overheard from some random table yeller that "Half of poker is complaining," or some such comment. I wish I could remember the actual quote, because both of us thought the same thing at the same time, that has to go on the list of funny comments heard at the poker table.

Please people. Don't be satisfied by the fact that you make money playing poker. Always be trying to get better. Always be working towards playing in BETTER games and beating BETTER opponents.

Anyway, I added some folks to my blogroll at the right.

SirFWGALMan is the most prolific blogger in the universe. He rambles on and on, even when he's taking a poker hiatus. But it's usually pretty fun and funny stuff.

Felicia is a must read for anyone. If you're reading this, there's a pretty good chance you've read her blog. She's taken comments off her blog because she has been getting rude comments. She needs to know that the HUGE majority of people that read her love her and her commentary. She's highly critical of the poker industry, and that's a GOOD THING. Too many people just go along and take abuse from every direction. Felicia stands up for poker players. If I were to start a Poker Association that represented players, I'd make Felicia the leader WITHOUT HESITATION, except that I think the job might kill her. Felicia, you are one of the good guys. (A certain STRIPPER can shove her twentysomething know-it-all attitude up her ass.)

Life's A Grind was on the PSO Cruise. He's a good ring player and a great tourney player. Also a really great guy who knows how to have fun at a poker table.


Ryan said...

Great post. I most certainly don't want to sit and play $.50/$1.00 for the rest of my life, just because the player suck. I'd much rather be able to make alot more money by making alot better plays. I'm just not to that point bankroll-wise yet.

Sloejack said...

I'm of a like mind with you on this one. To that end I've decided to tke the OIC that Halverson was blogging about and put it to practice to force myself to adapt to the different types and levels of games as well as push me into playing higher (more profitable in money and learning?) level games.