Using Shelly's little "who links to me" tool I discovered a blogger who linked me yesterday...unfortunately he didn't have too many nice things to say. Fair enough. I criticize pretty harshly, and should expect some critcism myself. But this guy missed the mark. Talk about totally missing the point, this one zoomed right past his cranium.
Here we go, starting with his title:
Today I start my list of blogs I hate readingYou "hate" reading my blog? Why do you do it? Did my blog become required reading for some bizarre college course? Who is forcing people to read my blog? Surely some cruel villain.
“A few hands after this genius lays down all this wisdom, I get a pair of sevens in the hole at our $50NL table. I call to see a flop of 878. I slow play it, and it checks around. Turn is a K, I min bet, get two calls and two folds. River is the case 7. I bet $1, double the minimum, and get one call.”Beyond not knowing how to correctly quote someone in blogger, this guy totally missed the point that I played the hand weak ON PURPOSE. The problem with min-betting and min-raising (which I never did in this hand, and min-bet only once) is that it is incredibly weak and invites people to play back at you. HELLO? I wanted someone to play back at me. I was INVITING a bluff, desperate to get paid off on my monster hand. Even though this is BASIC level one thinking, it is obviously over this guy's head.
The above quote is from http://goberude.blogspot.com He is a donkey. The above hand is just a glimpse into how much this guy donkeys it up. This guy talks and talks about how he hates min bets and min raises in his blog and about how every time someone min raises “baby Jesus cries” Despite all this talk (and it is exactly that TALK) he posts about hands all the time where he min bets and min raises.
One of the turn offs to reading a blog is contradiction………it is bad enough to sit at a poker table with someone who does the opposite of what they say, it is 10 times worse to read about it. So to GoBeRude I give your blog 4 turds out of 4 because it sucks big time.There's the mature critcism I was hoping for. I maxed out the "turd" scale!
Now let's address the fact that this guy missed the point entirely! I could have (and maybe should have) just said I got quads and got no action despite my desperate attempts to induce someone to play back at me, but I thought that was TOTALLY OBVIOUS by the way I played it, so I didn't feel like I needed to spell it out for folks. I really need to stop overestimating my readers.
The point was that some tinfoil-wearing moron took this as PROOF that hands are juiced, even though nobody played back at me. It is actually evidence that the hands aren't juiced, because someone would have a boat or some other playable hand to increase the rake. ZOOM, right over this astro-physicist's head!
I did leave a comment on the guys blog thanking him for the link....and to my non-suprise I am apparently the first non-spam comment this guy has ever gotten, even though he has been blogging since July.
Oddjack reprinted the exact same post, and THEY got it. Maybe they just like the "online poker is rigged" idiots out there too. But at least they didn't totally miss the point of my ramblings.
When I wrote for a newspaper they said never write beyond a 6th grade reading comprehension level because you will alienate a certain percentage of the circulation base. I guess this guy is one of the idiots they were talking about. I'm sorry, but I'm still going to assume some level of poker ability in my posts. Maybe guys like him can just enjoy the comics.