Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Sunday, 18 September 2011

Poker Update | Straw Polls Update

US GOP POLITICS

I've continued updating and tabulating the data provided for the 2012 Republican presidential primaries straw polls. One interesting note in the Wikipedia entry for the CNN Tea Party Debate:

"A straw poll was held at the September 12 Republican debate, to find out who the debate audience thought were the front runners, both before and after the debate. Before the debate, Ron Paul came first, Rick Perry came second, and Michele Bachmann came third. After the debate, Ron Paul was still first, Michele Bachmann came second, and Herman Cain came third. CNN have not released the full results of this poll, instead holding an online poll which omitted Ron Paul from the choices."
 Without counting that win, Ron Paul has won 4 consecutive straw polls (one of them being a first place tie) dating back to mid August, crushing the field in 2 of those and  only having Perry for competition in the latest California poll yesterday.

Now that there have been 17 polls, I added a Win statistic to the list alongside Top 3 Finishes. I split wins as 0.5 each for polls that were basically tied such as Georgia 04/16 and Georgia 08/27. The breakdown for top three frontrunners as of today:

Average vote %
Paul 20.7%
Perry 14.4%
Romney 14.4%

Top 3 Finishes
Paul 10
Romney 8
Cain 6

Wins
Paul 7
Cain 3
Romney 2

This chart has grown substantially since I last posted and it will update as I make changes, but I thought I'd post it again for convenience. 1st, 2nd and 3rd Tiers are based on my opinions of the overall results of the three statistics I posted above and can be found at the far right side. Scroll down for graphical representations of the data.





POKER

I think I posted a while ago that I was rebuilding my BR from basically nothing ($100 playing 5NL). It's been pretty rough at some points and I have really felt like just giving up some weeks. But my game seems to have restabilized after some extensive changes I made to my overall game strategy so I'm really hoping this lasts. I think I've pulled back ahead of the curve with a lot of study and out of the box thinking. Specifically thinking about what certain tendencies and actions really mean vs what seems standard.

I haven't really talked to any poker people or frequented the strategy forums of 2p2 lately. I just needed to get away from the way that those HH threads go down with all the "standard" vacuum answers. I'm kind of feeling like if you're trying to move beyond figuring out what standard is (and after a few million hands, you have seen everything standard), threads that disregard history and detailed table dynamics are rather counterproductive.

I've built back up to my usual 50NL bankroll and have been playing a mix of 25NL and 50NL full ring. I lost my Supernova status last month but I'm fairly confident I'll get it back by the end of the year now that I'm moving up again and have a lot of motivation to put in volume. Granted I have a relatively small sample of 30k hands where my thought process is firing on all cylinders and villain lines and actions are really making sense to me so this could still all go down in flames, but I'm more optimistic about my game right now than I have been in probably a year or more.

Stars: Run It Twice

No Stars does not have run it twice despite that sub-title. From what I understand they have been avoiding it because they don't want to have to charge extra rake for the extra time it takes to deal out the hand. I think the following would be a good option. I posted the following in the Official Software Improvement Thread in the zoo earlier this week:

This is how you add Run It Twice without requiring any extra time to deal the hand out and therefore not needing to add any extra rake.

  • It doesn't affect Stars' profits based on rake/hand per hour/table
  • It doesn't affect the hands/hour of players not involved.
  • It evens out variance for people that agree they want to even out variance.

  • Add the following: "Options > Run it Twice > All | Preflop | Flop | Turn"
  • If all-in players preset settings match, the rest of the hand is dealt twice.
  • Player A = Flop+Turn, Player B = Turn only, if all-in on flop, run once, if all-in on turn, run twice.
  • When the hand is going to be run twice, split the pot and move it as indicated during the time between the closing action on that street and the next card being dealt.
  • Ideally what you want is moving chips and dealing cards respectively in unison so that it's exactly the same amount of time as running it once.

Ignore stack sizes here ldo, illustration purposes:

From a grinder's perspective I would hope they implement this. On the other hand fish that get their money in consistently bad before the river and choose to run it twice would lose money significantly faster since they are shortening the long run.

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Ron Paul

I obviously wasn't the only one that noticed the overt concerted effort by the media to stifle Ron Paul after the Ames Straw Poll (Last Post). When did we switch from terms like "journalism" and "free press" to "mainstream media" anyways? However much the latter like to portray themselves as the former, they appear to have become quite divergent professions. I can only hope that a lot of Paul's stances on fiscal issues are starting to make a lot of sense to voters, if not only because a lot of his predictions are quickly coming to pass.



Quite similar to the 2006 UIGEA to 2011 Black Friday time period, it seems as though even some of the smartest people around are quite happy to stick their heads in the sand even though from a logical, rational, captain hindsight saw this coming a long ways a way type of world view where you remove your invincibility goggles, it is abundantly clear that the status quo is unsustainable. I don't know if it's ideological apathy or just plain laziness (the term blissful ignorance comes to mind), but too many people are happy to carry on business as usual in a dysfunctional system that will inevitably crush them by design as long as the system isn't in active free fall around them. Those that can see it plain as day and try to warn us only to be frustrated beyond belief as if trying to explain the concept of gravity to people who think the world is flat are ridiculed as Chicken Little's.

If I had to pigeon hole myself into one socio-economic mindset, I'd have to go with consequentialist libertarian -- the notion that having liberty leads to results like prosperity, efficiency and peace. This is why I identify so much with his platform. If you're an American reading this blog (or an international reader looking for solid, ie. "radical" sustainable policies), definitely check out Paul's campaign website and his stance on a number of important issues.

A small sampling of his platform, most of which I agree with:

  • Repeal ObamaCare and end its unconstitutional mandate that all Americans must carry only government-approved health insurance or answer to the IRS.
  • Stop the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from interfering with Americans’ knowledge of and access to dietary supplements and alternative treatments.
  • Vetoing any unbalanced budget Congress sends to his desk.
  • Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.
  • Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.
  • Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.
  • Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.
  • Ron Paul believes no nation can remain free when the state has greater influence over the knowledge and values transmitted to children than the family does. Returning control of education to parents and teachers on the local level is the centerpiece of Ron Paul’s education agenda.
  • Fighting to fully audit (and then end) the Federal Reserve System, which has enabled the over 95% reduction of what our dollar can buy and continues to create money out of thin air to finance future debt.
  • Opposing all unfunded mandates and unnecessary regulations on small businesses and entrepreneurs.
There are a number of other issues that he addresses at length and can be found all over Youtube such as ending the ineffective war on drug and the cause and effect of moral hazard. The media has coined Paul's lectures and statements as rambling in the little coverage they have had of him. I read that as this guy thinks about concepts in well thought out logical and correlating terms rather than what fits well into a 3 second soundbite. You're bound to become a bit wordy when you're explaining the concept of gravity for the 17th time to people who refuse to accept that the entire theory they've developed to explain why they don't go flying off into space is flawed.

Sunday, 14 August 2011

LOL Straw Polls

POKER

Long time no blog. I've been figuring out a few things here and there, a few steps forward and a couple back. Steadily making some progress but I think I still have a ton of work to get back to where I was at the beginning of the year. I've been exporting some of my HEM reports to Excel and conditionally formatting them to see what stands out in certain situations compared to others with some fairly good (if not obvious results).

POLITICS

Now I'm not an American citizen, but considering that the Canadian media covers the US presidential campaigns more than our own elections, the degree to which our economy rides on hoping the elephant sleeping beside us doesn't roll the wrong way, and my proximity to the border, I think I am allowed to have an opinion. Plus it's my blog =) Here's some foreign perspective. And I have to warn you that it's fairly narrowly focused and blatantly so because the entire process, from my perspective, is a complete sham on par with having potripper call you down with 9 high and knowing plain as day that you've been superused. You can't have a real democratic presidential campaign until this problem is seen for what it is and fixed.

*   *   * 

I continue to be baffled by the complete media blackout of Ron Paul's campaign. Quite reminiscent of '07/'08. If all you watched was the news -- from any 3 letter source -- you'd think this was the Bachman / Pawlenty / Palin show and everyone else was already an also-ran.

When you consider that Paul receives by far the most campaign contributions from members of the military of any party, doesn't have a lobbyist in sight, and has the most Constitutionally consistent voting record of anybody and is thus considered to be a radical  fringe candidate, it tells you just how far off base and out of touch the GOP -- and Congress as a whole -- has become.

So why won't the mainstream media touch this radical politician with a ten foot pole? I mean, that's what they live for. Radical, fringe, shocking, stand out from the crowd = ratings. That's why they headline cats playing with iPads instead of the ho-hum everyday people dying in Africa. There is something very, very wrong in the US when the media is making a concerted, counter-intuitive effort to guide the course of democracy by propelling 2nd and 3rd tier candidates into the spotlight and stuffing 1st tier candidates (if not the outright front runner) into an also-ran pigeon hole.

Case in point. Results as % of votes cast. Top 3 is a numerical count.
(scroll right for averages and top 3 finishes and scroll down for charts):



Standard article following the latest results:
  • "Bachman won today's straw poll, narrowly edging out Paul" [ 3 more paragraphs about Bachman ].
  • [ 2 paragraphs about Pawlenty].
  • [ 2 paragraphs about the rest of the field - excluding Paul ].
  • [ 2 paragraphs filler to end the article ].

 Seriously? Paul crushed 3rd place Pawlenty by 2:1 and was only 1% off a win and all he gets is an participatory mention in one sentence of Bachman's 3 paragraphs?

This should be the consistent top tier Paul and Romney / up and coming Bachman show with a side of Sarah Who? The people who are actually listening to the speeches and looking at platforms have given fairly clear indication of which ones they like. But I would be very shocked if you took a random public poll which resulted in Paul and Romney being the clear favourites the way their head-and-shoulders above average straw poll results would indicate.

There's something obviously very scary about Ron Paul to a lot of powerful people. Maybe it's time to find out what considering the state of the status quo broken government.

Thursday, 23 June 2011

CRTC Broadcast Rant

Access Denied
I'm trying to watch some WSOP on ESPN3. Impossible. I live in a modern, western, high-tech, democratic country that somehow manages to impose Chinese style censorship for fear of having our little Canadian minds flooded with non-Canadian content. There's a reason some people call us the friendly dictatorship.



This is the mandate of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission:
"The CRTC’s mandate is to ensure that both the broadcasting and telecommunications systems serve the Canadian public. The CRTC uses the objectives in the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act to guide its policy decisions.

Broadcasting

In broadcasting, the CRTC ensures that all Canadians have access to a wide variety of high-quality Canadian programming as well as access to employment opportunities in the broadcasting system. Programming in the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect Canadian creativity and talent, our bilingual nature, our multicultural diversity and the special place of aboriginal peoples in our society."

High Tech
The Broadcasting Act hasn't been overhauled since 1991. To put 1991 into technological perspective, it's the year Nintendo released the SNES in North America.

So here I am trying to access some great content online from around the world and I'm met with a stream of "Access Denied. This service/product not available in your region," over and over again. Here's a sample of some of my issues:

  • ESPN3 - Access Denied
  • Various live sports feeds  - Access Denied
  • Netflix Online Streaming - Reduced Library
  • Hulu - Access Denied
  • Cable TV - Somewhat decent Canadian networks unwatchable on Sundays while they try to cram every last half-assed Canadian production (ie. hunting/fishing/travel shows with about 75% dead time to boot) out there into the everyone's at church time slot to get  their required content percentage in for the week before they switch back to the ABC/NBC feed of football or golf.

I'm not really about to go the VPN workaround route since I can just fill my time up doing other stuff anyways but it's just so damn annoying that you can't do something online when you want to do it.

Government sponsored cultural engineering, based on technological rules written 20 years ago, being run by a 65 year old, ftw. In 2011. Canada needs to get with the program.

Friday, 15 April 2011

Attack On Online Poker

Note: I have changed the title of this post. It was meant to be somewhat of a dry, witty remark based on the December blackout crisis, but I don't think it helps the situation considering the traffic I am receiving and the realization of how serious this actually is. I do not think this is a good time to panic. We all know what happens when people spazz withdraw en masse and I don't want to contribute to that.

3:52 EST Friday
Pokerstars, Full Tilt and Cereus have just been charged with a litany of offenses regarding fraud and money laundering. Web sites apparently seized. So far only UB's website shows the FBI warning for me although there are many Americans stating all four show this message. American players are reporting widespread notices when attempting to sit at cash tables on Stars that US government regulation is preventing them from allowing Americans to play.




From Reuters:
Prosecutors also filed civil money laundering charges seeking to recover at least $3 billion from the companies, which are all based overseas, court documents said.
Two of the men were arrested on Friday, one is expected to turn himself in to law enforcement and eight others are not currently in the United States, prosecutors said.
Raymond Bitar, 39, of Full Tilt Poker and Isai Scheinberg, 64, of PokerStars were charged with violating the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act and other laws. Absolute Poker owners Brent Beckley, 31, and Scott Tom, 31, faced similar charges.

This could actually be the end for our American friends. It might be a while because 2+2 servers appear to be completely overwhelmed and I can't navigate there with any consistency but I will update later as more information becomes available.

As far as I've seen there has been no official statement from the PPA as of yet.

4:55 EST
Just managed to get back on to the 2+2 forum homepage.
"Most users ever online: 13,237, Today at 4:31 PM."
That's as far as I got. This is huge.

5:21 EST
Managed to get back into the Leg forum shortly with no new updates.
Made a quick perusal of the 50NL FR Stars lobby. 3 Americans, each 1 tabling. I assume this is the remnant that were still playing those tables when the shit hit the fan and hadn't sat out and closed those tables yet.
15,471 on 2+2
Took a couple of screenshots off of Pokerscout traffic counter. The first is around 3:50 PM EST. The 2nd was at 5:20 PM EST.


7:30 PM EST
Played a session on Stars over the last couple of hours . American-free and the lowest number of people I've ever seen during peak Friday time. I can only imagine the feeling of dread American grinders must be going through right now knowing that this is most likely the much anticipated doomsday.

First Impression of the New American-Free Cash Games
Of course this is really preliminary and I have no idea what traffic will do once Americans are gone for a couple weeks, but it looks like us foreigners will be ok. There's a noticeable volume drop, but games were extremely good. I got crushed by a wave of ATC 2 pairs of course, but we're generally left with legitimate Euro fish and Asian half stacks. Considering that (luckily) the games are now 40bb, the current state of the game if it remains as is is tenable for those of us still able to play. If they weren't 40bb, poker would be dead at least on Stars -- read: overrun by 20bb Euro / Asian players filling 95% of the lobby with 20-50.

I think this goes to show just how many American multi-tabling TAG Supernova semi-pro seats were being taken up compared to how few American recreational seats there were. It's a sad day when the games actually appear better with Americans gone and captain hindsight can see how untenable the status quo was with the difficulties of getting money online for people that want to gamble it up and the appearance of questionable legality. It really demonstrates the need for meaningful regulation to kickstart another mini-boom in the US.

Perhaps this is the final shove needed to force US lawmakers to finally write up real regulation legislation if for nothing else than to prevent this from both going further underground and to stop the courts from filling in huge voids with their own opinions now that this fight is front and centre.

Monday, 4 April 2011

Here We Go Again: Canadian Election Primer

Here's a quick primer on the quirky institution that is the Canadian political system for those non-Canadians out there. The government is dissolved and they're off to the races. Some of them have yet to realize that the gates have opened -- at least that's how much I've been paying attention, and I'm the most politically interested person I know. Thankfully we only have to listen to the rhetorical drivel and mudslinging, I mean campaign promises, for one month. This is quite merciful compared to the 18 months Americans are subjected to. This will be a bit tl;dr but you'll get a good idea of how Canada actually (de)funtions when the veil of textbook definitions and theoretical purpose is pulled away.

When are Federal Elections held? There are 3 possible situations where an election can be called:
1) 5 years since the last election.
2) If the government (governing party) decides they want one.
3) If the government is defeated on a confidence vote (must-pass bill), such as the current situation with the budget. This isn't ever an actual disagreement with the bill, it's just when the opposition thinks they are ready for an election.

Majority vs Minority Governments:
If a party wins 50%+1 seats they have a majority government. It is then their sole discretion as to when the next election is (option 1 or 2) since everyone in the party always supports the motions of confidence put in front of them because they're obviously not going to do anything that could cost them their job. If a party wins less than 50% but garners the most seats (possible in a 3+ party system) they are traditionally given a minority government where all options are possible. A third type of government is theoretically possible in a coalition which would combine their seats to create a majority. This would cause a lot of unprecedented drama (understatement).

Pros and Cons: I'll preface this with the fact that Canadians hate elections. We hate elections in winter when we have to trudge through a blizzard. We hate elections in spring when we're dealing with flooding. We hate elections in summer when we want to turn off the TV and go on vacation. We don't quite hate elections as much in fall as the kids are back to school and we're looking for some entertainment, but most would still rather watch a few episodes of the new soon to be cancelled sitcoms. Majority governments sit back and enjoy the status quo getting absolutely nothing done - don't rock the boat - but we don't have the overwhelming dread of elections around the corner. Minority governments get a lot done because the opposition is just chomping at the bit to bring them down so they have to keep up with doing what we want them to so they don't at any point look bad if at all possible.

Political Structure - From the ground up:
The way the power structure actually works in Canada is precisely opposite of the way it is laid out in terms of authority. Messed up, I know. But the thought of having it set up the 'right' way is horrifying.

Bureaucrats: In Canada bureaucrats are typically known for being huge policy wonks and are able to hold rather long term positions because of their willingness to use any playbook put in front of them. A fairly stark contrast to the rabidly partisan counterparts who get swapped out fairly quickly en masse when power changes hands in the US. I had a political science professor who always said if you want real power in Canada, don't be a politician. Be a bureaucrat. They decide how, where and when policies are implemented and enforced.

House of Commons: We elect Members of Parliament to represent us nationally in the House of Commons in Ottawa. This is considered to be the lower house, similar to the House of Representatives in the US. Everyone votes only for their local rep who is part of a national party. The party that wins the most seats becomes the government. The leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister and head of the country, kind of like if the House majority leader would become president. Geographic distribution of the 308 seats is determined by population, roughly trying to encompass 100k people per seat with one caveat. During the 1980s Quebec thought they were so special that to protect their specialness, they needed to be more special than the rest of us and held the country hostage trying to hammer out a new constitution demanding minimum 25% of all seats regardless of their relative population. This is apparently not enough, see below.

Senate: This is the upper house, meant to be a "sober second opinion" free of the ramifications of being unpopular because they are unelected but rather appointed by the Prime Minister (GG, see below). Essentially what this boils down to is a bunch of politically rewarded old guys rubber stamping every bill that comes up because they've got better things to do in their retirement. Everyone is pretty much in agreement that this needs to be abolished or turned into a regionally based elected house. That is, except for the old guys raking in a nice paycheck for nothing and the politicians losing the utility of an effective loyalty gimmick.

Governor General: The representative of the 'official' head of state, the queen. We're still part of the British Commonwealth (royal family and all that jazz) even though they couldn't be bothered with us. The feeling is mutual. What this means is that any time the Prime Minister makes some sort of traditional or formal declaration, decision or appointment, he sends it off to the GG as a 'recommendation' and she/he reads it to make it official. Imagine Barack Obama having to be a ventriloquist and whip out the Mini-Me version of the queen every time he says something formal. However the potential for the previously reffered to coalition may actually give the GG the first real, meaningful choice they've had to make in the past century as they are officially responsible for handing over governing power.

The Parties:
This is essentially a perpetual dual between the Liberals and Conservatives with a few odd people wanting to jump into the middle of the action but haven't heard that you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight. I'll rate these on a left to right 0-10 scale using the US Democrat and Republican parties as the 0 and 10 standards.

Conservatives (5):
Led by current Prime Minister Stephen Harper. General all around control freak appearing rather cold and calculating most of the time who is fairly effective at getting his message across and getting things done the way he wants. You know it's almost election time when the snapshots of sweater-wearing, piano-playing-and-serenading Steve at the Conservative Christmas party start showing up to lighten his image. Steve and the Conservatives are as far right wing as this social program loving country allows, kind of like George W. Light. This party is the phoenix of the Progressive Conservative ashes Brian Mulroney left behind combined with the ultra-right wing now defunct Refoooooorm and Alliance parties of Preston Manning who Don Ferguson does an amazingly good imitation of. Originally combined to avoid the right wing vote splitting keeping the Liberals in power, they were to be called the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance Party (CCRAP). Also known as the Tories.



Liberals (0):
Pretty much the definition of a US Democrat, considered slightly left of centre here (fun fact: English Canadians use the French spelling of center). Led by Michael Ignatieff, Cambridge / Oxford / Harvard professor known for thinking rather highly of his intellectual self. This is the party of more well known Prime Ministers such as Jean "a proof is a proof" Chretien and Pierre "just watch me" Trudeau. Also known as the Grits.



New Democratic Party (- 4):
These are your run of the mill union heroes. Current leader is Jack Layton. The very existence of this party is what prevented the Liberals from grasping a permanent majority government by splitting the left wing vote and allowing the new Conservatives to get a foothold. Kind of ironic that they're the ones giving the right wing party they ideologically despise the opportunity to form government. For that, they are eternally doomed to shout from the far side of the House and current forecasts state they don't have any reasonable chance at actually becoming the government in the next 100 years. The Bloc has more seats and a better chance at 0%. Exercises in futility repeated election after election. Insanity.

Bloc Quebecois (?):
Somewhat of a ragtag group led by Gilles Duceppe. This party only runs in Quebec. I admittedly don't know a lot about this party because of that. It's tough to say exactly what kind of ideology they represent as they tend to be supported by rural conservatives and urban unions. I do however find it odd that not only is a political group who's stated goal is the destruction of the country not charged with treason, it is welcomed with open arms into the House. Democracy at it's finest.

Current Seats
Conservative
Liberal
Bloc
NDP



There's a few other odd parties, notably the Green party who runs across the board and are obviously left wing environmental types yet to be elected to a seat, but these are the important players.

The interesting situation here is that we've been in this stalemate where we have election after election after short stints of minority government for the greater part of the last decade and everyone's getting sick of it. My suspicion is that if we get the same result again, the 3 opposition parties will be trying to catch a good public vibe on proposing a coalition majority government of Liberals, NDP and the Bloc for stability's sake as opposed to the instability of another minority Conservative government -- at least that's what they'll say to the GG. This could also easily backfire if the vibe comes down as a government no one voted for takes over by ironically installing the Separatist Bloc as the ones propping the whole thing up. We'll have to see what the 3 Stooges have in mind.

Wednesday, 5 January 2011

Decisions give me headaches

2011 has started off as a literal migraine. I'm not really sure what to do. I have so many options, but they all seem to suck:

  • Stars 20-50 small stakes FPP pro with very marginal winrates
  • Stars 40-100 small stakes FPP pro with reg infested tables
  • Stars 40-100 micro stakes UGL at 25NL
  • Euro sites with good winrates but beyond horrible software
  • FTP with a scummy changed rakeback deal

Stars 20-50 small stakes
Games are decent but winrates are low with reduced skill edge to add to the CAP shove/fold game that the 20bb stacks insist on mixing into an NL game.

Stars 40-100 small stakes
I have never seen more reg infested tables in my life. This is unsustainable and regs are going to eat each other alive until there's nothing left. Additionally I have never seen this many regs moving down which I think is clear evidence of what's going on.

Stars 40-100 micro stakes
Maybe I need to just move down and make some money as well. I seem to have a small edge at 50NL. I have a large edge at 25NL. I can probably beat this game for a decent clip.

Euro Sites
Tried out a short stint on RPM on the Merge network. The software makes me think that pulling out my teeth with pliers for donations on Youtube would be a more viable option. Granted Merge isn't really a Euro site since it accepts Americans, but it has Euro site software and I was quickly reminded of why no one plays there even with great rakeback. I found it difficult to follow action on 6 tables and the betting section of the GUI is pretty much the opposite of how it should be designed -- it has way too many buttons that are spread out over a large area requiring a ton of mouse movement and avoiding misclicks shouldn't be a chore. I also found it extremely annoying just trying to get tables going even against the same 5 bad regs on every one.

FTP
Games are decent from what I can tell but the rakeback hit is enormous if you consider me coming from my 42% 2x Supernova down to an estimated 22-25% + Iron Man. I also don't like the idea of being chained to my computer 25 days a month. Yes I play that many days a month, but eff them if they think they get to make that decision. I'm starting to realize why even the good LAGs haven't seen a benefit from the weighted contributed shenanigans since they end pots early and play a ton of small ball. It's only the calling stations that are seeing any "benefit" from this but unfortunately they don't have rakeback and I have to assume Howard's stacking bills in his basement laughing hysterically at everyone.

What to do?
It looks like my best options are to either beat 25NL 40-100 or to FPP pro 100NL 20-50. In terms of my mental state, 25NL might be the better option. In terms of winnings + bonus, the 20-50 games are going to provide more but with a much bigger headache than the relative ease of micros. I'm so undecided. I just know that I'm addicted to Stars software to the large detriment of the other options. Plus they suck you right into that annual program so that once you have made it, you can't give it up because it was a damn lot of work getting there.

If I started a new site...
I think the following system, while not optimal in short term profits, would still be profitable and keep the majority of people happy. It's my opinion that all of the overhead with servers and security and support staff pales in comparison -- by far -- to the net profits of any large site out there. My wish list for JH1 Poker in case anyone wants to donate 6 figures to help me start it up (btw on a serious note, here's to hoping the community run open source project actually takes off if for no other reason than to force this price fixing stalement back into competition):

Rake: 4bb cap at 50NL and lower. $3 cap at 100NL and higher. Keep it stake relevant. Money needs to flow up the ladder. The current state of things really dilutes the poker economy and people are forced into playing the same stakes way too long to build their BR because the rake is tough to overcome when the games get tougher. You can't call 10bb rake in a 200bb pot at 25NL and lower anything but highway robbery. No one noticed when you had droolers calling down with J high. Lower rake would be a shot in the arm to boost the economy and would at least be a bandaid until sites were able to effectively recruit brand new players again. Static rake with declining skill edge is a recipe for disaster. At some point the game will become unbeatable and I think people are starting to realize it will be long before the game is  solved and everyone plays game theory optimal solely because the rake is too damn high.

Structure: I do think that the argument that 100bb poker has too much of an edge over fish has some validity. They want to see flops and all the regs out there complaining about shortstackers are doing exactly the same thing and making shortstacked postflop scenarios with their rampant 3-betting in 100bb games. Everyone knows that preflop sizing dictates how big the game plays. Lowering the max buyin lowers effective SPR. Lower SPR makes it less correct to fold thus regs will have to scale back wide 3-betting as they have less room to maneuver. That said, I also strongly believe that the argument that fish bleed slowly at 100bb poker is true in that they can win a large pot to keep themselves going for hours compared to winning a small pot at 20-50 that gives them a few more orbits. 20bb needs to be stuffed into its CAP game place. From a skill/luck ratio, I don't know if the remaining NL game should be 30-100 or 40-100 or 30-70. I would be fine with any of these and I would hire someone smart to figure out the correct ratio. All I know is 20bb min is too low and 50bb max is too low while 100bb max may be too high.

Max Tables: I would actually consider lowering this quite a bit. I would want to see actual reg:fish ratios in the site's database to make a decision but it should generally result in at least 6.5:2.5 FR and 4.5:1.5 6max. I'm going to take a wild guess that 12 tables would be way better than 24.


Rakeback: I'm kind of torn on whether the VIP system to make people work for their bonus is better than straight up rakeback. The former is better to keep fish playing longer. I will forever remember the guy on my right at a 50NL table that burned through $250 to clear the last $40 of his bonus and had a VPP countdown going in chat. The latter is perceived to be better from a grinder's point of view although I think in reality they benefit equally either way and just have to wait a bit -- I mean, they're playing anyways. Stars VIP program is fairly linear although I might flip it around and offer more rewards to the bottom to keep them feeding the pool like reload bonuses and faster/better bonuses.

State of the community
I've never seen the informed poker community in this much disarray. Everyone seems pissed off at someone. Shortstackers and fullstackers sniping at each other like never before. Fullstackers vs Stars. Everyone vs FTP. It kind of feels like the sites have gone all out for bottomline and to hell with their loyal customers who complain but are met with a wall of silence or stonewalling. You all need to get back to keeping people happy.

 *************

Poltical Sidenote: I had to restart my PC after posting the above (SplitSuit's comment below is on the state of the community) so I sat down and watched some Parker/Spitzer on CNN. I happened to jump into the middle of Spitzer's interview with Alec Baldwin and I was kind of blown away by how well-informed and in tune he seemed to be with regular people and the state of the middle class, especially considering the fact that he accurately described how 22 years of the US being run by out of touch Yale and Harvard grads has had a significant effect on the middle class. When asked, "How do we know you're not just acting?" he responded with a fairly profound statement implying that the American public is not given enough credit for being able to read people. I have no idea what his ideology is but he sure sounded like he knew what he was talking about so I just subscribed to his blog and am eager to read through it.

Sunday, 19 December 2010

lol Poll Spinaments

I was just reading an article on CNN headlined "Bad News for Palin" in which a new poll stated that 6/10 Americans would not consider voting for Palin. I'm personally not for or against her as I haven't really paid much attention to her policies. My initial impression in 2008 was that she was a bit of a gimmick, and my 2nd impression is based on the only episode I watched of Palin's Alaska in which she seemed like that loud relative that is often out of line but is someone you can depend on to stick up for you when you're in trouble.

Anyways, I just found the spin on the poll results to be kind of silly. I'm going to round this to make it simple. 6/10 said they would not consider her. 3/10 said they would consider her. 1/10 said they would definitely support her. This is apparently bad news for Palin if you believe the media. I'm no statistics or poll expert but a little bit of rational logic works wonders here.

Assumptions to keep this simple:
The US is 50/50 Republican and Democrat
All Democrats said they would not consider her.
All people that said they would consider her are Republicans.

If 50% of the no consideration results are Democrats, that means the remaining 10% are Republicans that would not consider her. Lets then break down the Republican vote which will double the remaining numbers to total 100% of the (R) vote:

20% will not consider her.
60% will consider her.
20% will definitely support her.

Now maybe the general US population has not been exposed as much to the effect of splitting the vote among multiple candidates as we are here in Canada with 4 major parties and 1 or 2 legitimate fringe parties which lets you form majority governments with less than 50% of the vote, but these poll results are hardly bad news when you consider the number of candidates in the primaries.

Lets say there are 10 candidates that make it to the debates. Her 20% definite support alone is double her fair share. If she were then to receive only her fair share of the 60% considering her, she'd be sitting at 26% of Republican support. This definitely puts her into contention when you split the vote. If she were to receive no extra share of support from the 60% considering her, she would still have more than her share of total support until they were down to 4 people due solely to the 20%. 25% can put you in the top three vs two other 25% support candidates with the remaining 25% split up between a number of long shots.

So already, 2 years before the election, she's already ahead of, if not leading, the pool of Republican candidates. And in the end if she were to win the nomination, it's most likely those 20% of Republicans that said they would not consider her would suck it up to prevent a Democrat from winning, or at least not vote at all, it's not like those 20% are ever going to vote (D).

No one would say, wow Phil Ivey only has 5% of the chips at the final table of the WSOP, yet he's estimated to win 20% of the time, that's terrible news for him. Contrary. That's great news for him. Yes it's true that Phil Ivey and Sarah Palin will both not win the majority of the time. That holds true for all politicians as a whole. The majority will lose most of the time in races when there's one seat and more than 2 people running for it. Simple math.

Kind of reminds me of the financial 'experts' they put on the news saying XYZ stock is probably going to drop today. They base their analysis on the fact that the stock is expected to drop 70% of the time. They then go on to ignore the pertinent fact that if it drops 70% of the time and loses 10% of it's value, but goes up 30% of the time and gains 100% of it's value, it's a better bet to buy it than not due to expected value. Of course the experts are more concerned with appearing right most of the time than actually saying something right most of the time.

I find it odd that these are the people that we let govern mainstream thought and public discourse. Whether through shear ineptitude or outright playmaster spin they somehow always make statistics and polls say whatever they want them to say, even if it's exactly the opposite of reality.

Sunday, 8 March 2009

Continuing to play well

I've been playing pretty decently for the past few weeks now without any major downswings, almost all of it at 50NL and 100NL. I'm keeping my sessions a lot shorter which helps since I've noticed I tend to plateu after about an hour at which point the downswing is inevitable.

Sometimes I'll just close the client, and other times I'll take a 5 minute break and fire up new tables. I think one of my biggest problems is leaving tables once they became unprofitable with too many regs and/or shortstackers. So since I suck at table selection while playing, I just automatically uncheck my blinds on all tables regardless of whether the table is good to stay at or not after an hour. I'm thinking about adding a 2nd monitor where I can keep the lobby open at all times to spot good tables to possibly fix this leak of mine.

And I've been in the non-spew state of mind which plagued me a bit during February and December. I finally thought, "You know what? It's not personal when they 3bet you. It's not personal when they float you. I do it to other people not because I'm trying to tilt them. It's all just strat." And that seems to have gotten me out of the tilty-spewy mode that I sometimes find myself in. Filter your databases to see how profitable just calling river bets and raises is. Then filter to see how profitable calling turn raises is. It's quite an eye opener.

And on a political note, I found this interview quite interesting:

Tuesday, 2 December 2008

Canadian "Coalition" Majority

Canadians will be preparing for the hostile takeover of the government that we elected only 7 weeks ago. On October 14th, Canadians elected the Conservative Party to a 2nd minority government.

The trio of parties that lost the election have decided that the voters' decision was not good enough. They don't understand what "no" means. They are claiming that aid to jump-start the Canadian economy will not come fast enough under the Conservative stimulus plan.

Their solution: topple the 7 week old government and lead us down one of two paths.
1. The governor general will dissolve parliament and we will plunge into yet another election campaign.
2. The governor general will accept the unprecedented modern era proposition by the 3 opposition parties to form a majority government.

Option 1 will be the fairest option to Canadian voters although it will be expensive.
Option 2 will end in the largest political crisis this country has ever seen.

The fact that the opposition Liberal Party has decided to join forces with not only the socialist NDP but also the seperatist Bloc will mean that democracy, at least for the time being, is dead in Canada. Liberal voters did not vote for seperatists. NDP did not vote for Liberals. Seperatists, well, what can I say about them?

Economic aid will actually end up taking longer if we do wind up with either an election or a coup and between campaigns and transition of government, the earliest we would see any stimulus package from the coalition would be by the end of February. The Conservatives plan to roll out their plan shortly after seeing what the new Obama administration is going to do and would be in full effect by the last week of January. This renders the coalition raison d'être moot.

Bloc Quebecois
The thing that has me madder than hell is that this deal will put the seperatist traitors of this country in charge of my government and really shows what kind of power hungry maniacs we have working the opposition benches. They'll do whatever it takes to get that power including aligning themselves with the people who's purpose in life is to destroy this country.

The sole purpose of this party is to seperate the province of Quebec from Canada and now they want to run the country? They haven't been able to seperate yet so they have been intent on sucking every tax penny they can get and morsel of political power away from the rest of us that live in this country. This must be the only country in the world where we would even hesitate to throw treasonous POSs in front of the firing squad nevermind allow them to be voted into government.

Enough is enough. It's time to decide Canada. Are we going to keep putting up with this blackmail and hostage taking that these traitors have put us through for decades? Are we now going to allow this group to control our country? We've put up with "gimmegimmegimme or else" since 1982 and now they are going to be able to give themselves whatever they want. How is this in Canada's best interest?

I for one would be in favor of having our own Canada-wide referendum asking if we want to kick Quebec out of the country - and I do realize the severe economic consequences if that were to actually happen. It would still be better than having these guys run my country. I don't know why we all worked so hard to stop them from seperating last time they voted on it.

The 62% of Quebecors that did not vote Bloc in the last election would be more than welcome in the rest of this country. Let them have their Quebecois Nation as long as I don't have to kowtow to whatever they want anymore.

If we put up with this, we might as well refer to ourselves as the Banana Republic of Canada from now on.

Political Rant Imminent

Warning: Canadian Political Rant will be incoming in the next few hours. I will gather my thoughts on this "coalition" government and will be posting when I get home.

On a poker related note: 100NL is off to a good start for the month with 4 buyins.

Wednesday, 5 November 2008

Congratulations USA

Congrats to President-Elect Barack Obama. I was actually quite inspired by the US Election Day yesterday. Not necessarily because of the results - I wasn't particularly moved by either campaign - but by the reaction of Americans around the country. Most notably the voter turnout on all sides of the political spectrum.

Perhaps people are coming around and starting to actually think about the political process and want their voices heard again; a stark contrast to the growing apathy that has taken place over the last decade or two. The enormous lineups of eager voters were amazing - as if Americans had once again discovered democracy and felt that they could each make a real difference. This should actually be a congrats to the people of the United States in particular more than congrats to any particular winning candidates.

I hope that this trend continues and that the US can once again reclaim its status as democratic leader of the world. Someone to once again look up to. I don't know if Americans realize it or not, but the rest of the world is watching every move you make.

Lead by example, not by force. Make the rest of the world want to be like America, not have to be like America. A lot of us that live outside of the US are ecstatic to see the American spirit that seemed dead and misguided for the past 7 years revived.

To President-Elect Obama: I hope that you continue to inspire Americans and urge them to make a difference. Be true to your promises and honest with the electorate rather than reciting sound-bite rhetoric - we've all had enough of that kind of governance for a lifetime. I sincerely hope that you can Change America, perhaps Restore is a better word...

Thursday, 30 October 2008

Thoughts on "Energy Independence"

Both US presidential candidates are proposing a so-called energy independence plan. I'm not a foreign policy expert but this just plain sounds like a bad idea. The reasoning behind it is that the US has to import oil from countries that apparently hate the US.

This sounds like a good idea when you spin it up with all the rhetoric and the new fake patriotism brand. But if you really look at what happens, it's not as smart as it appears on the surface. Besides this being an isolationist policy, for which Ron Paul was slammed when he's not even an isolationist and was the last chance to save the integrity of the US government and avert a total superpower meltdown, it really doesn't make any sense when you take these points into consideration.

1. US oil imports do not come from countries who are branded as anti-American for the most part. Only 20% of total US oil imports are imported from the Persian Gulf and 60% of those imports from the Persian Gulf are from a US ally - Saudi Arabia. In comparison, a full 20% of oil imports are from Canada alone. Another 11% is imported from Mexico. The argument about America's enemies being in control of exporting oil to America just does not fly.

2. The majority of so-called American enemies can not shut off the tap without ending up in a full scale economic and political breakdown in their own country. Most of these countries rely very heavily on revenues generated by exporting oil. Unless they are able to switch all of their exports to China overnight, they are going to be facing food shortages at home, and when that happens, governments fall. Take Russia for example - threatening to shut off the tap to the UK. It's a total bluff and Putin wouldn't dare compromise his or his party's position of power in Russia to do this. If Russia can't shut the tap off, no one can. The global economy is far too inter-connected for any country to halt their main export.

3. Making America energy independent would require using up American oil, ldo. This is very important. What happens 30 or 40 years from now when that oil is starting to become harder and harder to find and becoming more and more expensive? Go back to importing? Hope and pray that technology finds a new solution by then? Are the American oil companies going to shut down that new solution again for the umpteenth time? That's quite a gamble when you apparently have enemies of America currently controlling America's oil supply already today. Are they even going to turn the tap back on in the future?

Right now the US can use it's own oil reserves as backup - insurance if you will - in case an "enemy" would be stupid enough to cut them off. So what happens when you decide that you are going to use up that insurance instead of saving it for - here's a thought - insurance?

Americans will be sitting ducks. You can't wage any wars when your enemies won't give you any oil because they've found new buyers and you've used up all of your own. The logical conclusion would be a new era of desperate resource wars, which would be a sad, sad state for the world to end up in.

This is just an average joe's opinion on the fallacy that is energy independence. I sincerely hope that Obama/McCain and Co. have actually looked at this viewpoint instead of hyping up the rhetoric to sound good and get elected. Rhetoric is for people that can't think for themselves and need someone to motivate them into thinking something... anything... regardless of its merits.* It sounds good with a little spin and would probably benefit Americans for the short run. But the long run would be disastrous.

*People that spew rhetoric go to the bottom of my list of reliable, trustworthy and honest people. They either think the average person is too stupid to understand wtf is going on because they have an ego problem or they have an agenda that is contrary to the good of their audience or both (in most cases both). If you can't tell me flat out what the deal is without spinning it and telling 1/2 truths in politico-speak, I have absolutely no use for you.

Friday, 19 September 2008

US government bailouts - LOLtheFED

I thought this deserved it's own post so I moved it. This kind of stuff just makes me kind of pissed off and it's not even in my own country. So sad to see how uninformed people are to the workings of their own government and national financial systems.

I just saw on CNN that the US federal government is now set to take over $10s of billions in bad mortgages (Edit: it is now confirmed that Bush is asking for a whopping $700 billion). Wow. This is what happens when you let a private group of banks aka The Federal Reserve control the nation's currency (misleading name 'eh? Nothing Federal about it and nothing in Reserve to back up the currency).

Just so you know, private banks generally try to make themselves money, not protect the public interest. And then you get the moral hazard effect because you have banks bailing themselves out by printing money out of thin air and loaning it to themselves. They can take all sorts of crazy risks because the buck is always going to be passed on to the tax payer.

When they say on the news that the federal government is bailing out these banks and insurance groups what does this really mean? The federal government has no money to loan out besides what is supposedly in the treasury that is supposed to be used to run the government, military, and services they provide. In reality they borrow from the FED as well so it's oxymoronic to call this a government bailout when the government has no money to bail anyone out. This is a FED bailout, passing the debt on to the "government" ie. the tax payers.

Kind of weird how the banks can loan money out to the public and private corporations, screw up and lose it because they are reckless, print more money to cover losses and charge you the interest on the money they just created to bail themselves out. You wind up with the FED and the government saying, "National Debt? Inflation? How did that happen? We have to throw more money at it to avert financial disaster," like this totally blindsided them instead of actually fixing the system, ie. get rid of the FED and revert to the pre-1913 sound financial policy. I'd like to see the results of a poll asking people whether they think the FED is a federal government agency or a group of private banks. People don't listen:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
- Thomas Jefferson

Thursday, 18 September 2008

Canadian Election Bonanza and Electric Cars: Round Eleventy1

The Conservative Party has gone into their patented full swing 1 promise per day campaign. Some interesting ideas coming out. $750 rebate to first time home owners. $1000 more in tax free income for seniors.

And best of all: Maternity/Parental Leave for self employed people. Currently in Canada, if you are self employed and want to take some time off to start a family you have to save like mad or you are SOL. One thing they should really be looking at though is the outright fradulant charging of mandatory Employment Insurance premiums on part-time workers' wages, but denying them benefits if they lose their job because they don't qualify. LOL is all I have to say to that.

The NDP are promising to throw money at things and to set up rediculous social beurocratic programs like usual: $1 billion for more doctors, $1 billion for home care, ad nauseum.

The Liberals are just trying to get off the ground. Literally. They have had a lot of trouble with their leased campaign jet. That and the Green Shift can't get off the ground either because no one, not even themselves, understand how it works, nevermind be able to explain it to voters. And good luck trying to sell a new tax as your platform for why we should vote Liberal. And $70 billion for infrastructure.

The one thing I don't get is why they throw around numbers for these massive projects and programs. What does $70 billion really buy you? Is this a lot or not much? I have no idea. I get the $750 rebate and the $1000 income tax free for seniors. Those are numbers that you can apply directly to your budget. But seriously $1 billion here, $70 billion there... this means nothing to me other than politicians throwing around the words million and billion and gajillion to grab attention. Wow, $1 billion, that's 40 million buyins... and completely ambiguos and irrelevant.

Oh and I'm also looking forward to this:
That's if the electric car doesn't get torpedoed again like it did in the 90s (GM's EV-1). They always act like this hasn't been done before. This documentary was very imformative: Who Killed the Electric Car


Edit: I just saw on CNN that the US federal government is now set to take over $10s of billions in bad mortgages. Wow. This is what happens when you let a private group of banks aka The Federal Reserve (misleading name 'eh?) control the nation's currency. Just so you know, private banks generally try to make themselves money, not protect the public interest. People don't listen though:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
- Thomas Jefferson

Thursday, 11 September 2008

Non-poker post: Canadian Politics

So our election is well under way for the next government. For those of you outside the country, what basically happens in Canada is that we vote for a local representative to send to Ottawa. Whichever party ends up with the most reps in Parliament becomes the government and the leader of that party becomes Prime Minister.

Some highlights so far:
  • The Liberal Party is trying to figure out exactly what their Green Shift platform is exactly about. So far it's another tax on gas and diesel to get us to stop driving around. We don't exactly have another way of getting around out here in Western Canada, but hey, the Black $ Hole that is Ottawa knows best, maybe we'll get battery powered super bikes or something. They claim these taxes will be offset by reductions in business and income tax. LOL global warming, Kyoto, et al. I suppose our SUVs are also causing the global warming on Mars? Just my opinion.
  • The Conservative Party is actually going to reduce tax on diesel and jet fuel. Totally opposite of the Green Shift. They say that this will reduce costs on every product that gets shipped (everything) but we'll have to see if this cost reduction is actually passed on to the consumer or if business gobbles it up as profit.
  • The New Democratic Party is still shouting about their pie-in-the-sky utopia and that they are in fact the ones that have been fighting for the environment the longest. The Liberals have basically co-opted every NDP thought worth thinking and the NDP is not doing much besides splitting the left. Not much new there, everyone just tolerates them basically and says "there there."
  • The Green Party, who have never elected a member to Parliament yet, has been shut out of the soon to be televised debates. Debatable. They do have probably ~10% support across the country so maybe their leader should get a spot. The leaders of the other 4 parties have basically hijacked democracy and said they are not showing up if the Greens get a spot in the debate. I say, run the debate, let the Greens in, have 5 podiums and let whoever wants to show up. If there's 4 empty, that's their problem. They seriously can't be afraid of a party that's never won a single seat. Not sure exactly what the Greens are all about except that they are another environmental gung-ho party.
  • For some reason the Bloc is still considered a national party even though they only run in Quebec. For some reason they are also still considered a party instead of traitors to the country. I guess Constitutional over-representation in Parliament is not enough. Oh well. What can you say for Canadian appeasement...
  • Also very hilarious. Background: Last election, the Conservatives promised to start giving out $100 every month to the parents of every child under age 6 with the idea that it be used for childcare. If a parent stayed home, they keep the $100 and do whatever with it. If they go to daycare, they could spend it on that. Free money, well... our tax money given back to us. And they came through and I'm getting a check now for that. But, the Liberals at the time said that the public (us irresponsible parents across Canada) would waste the $100 on "Beer and Popcorn." Wow. Nothing like telling us we can't manage our own money when they blow it on all sorts of useless stuff in Ottawa. Anyways, now the Liberals like the idea so much that they are campaigning saying they will DOUBLE it to $200. Lol Wut? More beer and popcorn in my opinion.
We actually just had legislation passed last year, which was the Prime Minister's idea, that would have set election dates in Canada, similar to the US and was set for October 2009. The idea was that the opposition would still be able to defeat the government and at that point we could have an election outside the legislated time frame, but that the Prime Minister couldn't call snap-elections whenever he felt like he had the advantage.

Well, turns out there's a massive loophole you can drive a campaign bus through. There is no way to write out the Governor General's privilege of disolving parliament. The GG is basically the Queen of England's rep in Canada, a very outdated symbolic position and we pay A LOT of money to keep up this antiquated tradition. We used to have to get the Queen's permission for everything, even after we became a country - no outright revolution here. So yeah, the PM goes and "asks" the GG to disolve Parliament (even though she actually doesn't do anything but spend money on trips around the world and really has no say in anything) whenever he feels like it and then we get to vote. Kind of totally sidesteps his whole idea...

We basically need a rewrite of the Constitution to write out the monarchy et al. But guess what, here comes the Bloc with a long, unreasonable list of demands if we try to do that. It basically consists of "gimmegimmegimmegimee." So it will never happen. Somebody seriously needs to call a whaaambulance for these guys.

So there's 3 leftist parties running on environmental issues, 1 right-wing party that sort of is but in reverse, and the other party is primarly based on the idea of Quebec leaving Canada even though the seperatists aren't really thinking about seperation that much anymore. I have no idea who to vote for. Would be nice if they had a spot added at the bottom of the ballot that said "none of the above" and counted these. I wonder if we'd have increased voter turnout? There's a few fringe parties out there as well such as the Canadian Action Party, Communist Party of Canada, and the Christian Heritage Party. I would prefer not to vote for any of these clowns without spoiling my ballot. A protest vote. That's what I want.

So that's my little politics/history rant for the day. I don't mean to offend anyone out there in my country if you happen to support any of these clowns. Just a little disgusted with the whole system.

Sunday, 7 September 2008

Yeah! NOT Breakeven

Yes this is still my blog. I changed the template because I'd like to start posting some more HHs and it wasn't working out so well on the black one with spades and clubs - it looked so messy. Leave a comment if you find the blue easier/harder to read. I've also added Happy Pixel's blog to my list. From what I've read of his blog and his posts on 2p2 so far, he seems to be in the same spot as me: in the process of moving to 50NL.

Finally decided enough is enough: I'm going to have a winning session and swong myself back up! Positive thinking = run hot. If only there were a real technique for this =) I actually did manage to swong myself back up though.

Got away from this VERY cheaply. Not sure exactly what villain is thinking, but he's running 65/25/1 and not raising AA? Weird. I suppose the strategy is to limp the top 40% of his range and raise the bottom 25% and then just call down postflop ;)

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP1 ($26.15)
MP2 ($24.65)
CO ($22.55)
Button ($24.05)
SB ($15.50)
BB ($7.95)
UTG ($5.25)
Hero (UTG+1) ($25.55)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with K, K
1 fold, Hero raises to $1, 4 folds, SB calls $0.90, 1 fold

Flop: ($2.25) 6, 6, 9 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $1.50, SB calls $1.50

Turn: ($5.25) 4 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $3, SB calls $3

River: ($11.25) 8 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks

Total pot: $11.25 | Rake: $0.55
SB had A, A (two pair, Aces and sixes).
Hero mucked K, K (two pair, Kings and sixes).


I also came to a new conclusion that cbet stats are overrated thanks to ship_it_trebek. He was basically saying in the FR chat forum that we should be looking for boards to cbet rather than at cbet stats. I tried a couple of sessions without them and noticed I was thinking through hands a lot better and not spewing on wet boards as much. There is absolutely no point in cbetting a QJ9ss flop against almost anyone regardless of stats unless you hit it pretty hard or you have an ultra-weak-tight villain. To summarize: cbet stats are over-rated, texture is under-rated.

I had also been targeting TAGs who have high-ish fold to cbet stats, but who I don't really want to play with because some are capable of playing back and putting me in tough spots. Thanks to this idea and NLTAP, I've tailored my game a bit to target weak-tighties and loose-passives to steal pots from on good flops and turns and I'd like to think this is responsible for the 1 day swong back to the highest point on my graph for the month.

In other news, the Prime Minister asked the GG to disolve parliament and called an election this morning. Weird how the US can campaign non-stop for 2 years, but here in Canada, the PM calls an election and we vote within 40 days. Also weird how he comes up with an idea of fixed election dates so the PM can't pick an election date, then sidesteps his own legislation through a massive loophole rendering the legislation irrelevant...

Stephen vs. Stephane vs. Jack and Gilles. Let the snooze-fest begin - and I'm a politics nut.

Monday, 11 February 2008

US Presidential Race

This being a poker blog and all, I won't usually venture outside the realm of the game, but I think this is important:

Being a Canadian, I find the way American's choose their president to be somewhat better than our way of choosing a prime minister. And whomever American's pick for their president actually has an effect on my life due to our countries being linked so closely economically and politically. I like the fact that American's get to vote directly for whom they want to have as president, but I am a little troubled by the role that the media plays in all of this. I watch and read a lot of mainstream news and I took a lot of socio-political/history classes when I was working towards my degree.

From the start of this race for party nominations, the media has consistently told their audience who the "top tier" candidates are and many out there have accepted these as the only viable candidates. In effect, the media is choosing who you get to choose as your president.

I am not going to hide who I feel is the best, and I feel only real choice in this race; unfortunately I cannot vote. I have been watching and reading about Ron Paul's campaign and platform and it is the only one that makes sense to me.

That being said, the media and the Republican party seem to be absolutely terrified of having Ron Paul as president. The media has basically censored him out when they are not asking him irrelevant questions. I have read articles and watched news stories regarding the Republican nomination where he is not even mentioned and it is now being written as if it is a 2 man race.

Take for instance the first 2 debates. Online polls from the host news sites showed that he won both debates. Then there was the FOX debate which he was excluded from even though his support was higher than Guiliani, who was in the debate.

And the sealer for me that the Republican party is actively working to make sure he is not the nominee among other things was Romney's withdrawl from the campaign being in 2nd place and still very viable according to the media, effectively squashing the chances for a brokered convention in which Paul might actually have a shot. Who does that? This speaks volumes about the morality and integrity of the party as a whole. As Ron Paul said, "The party has lost its way."

Because of this media blackout and work being done to censor Paul, many are still out there saying Ron Who? without even getting a chance to hear what his platform is nevermind think about voting for him in a primary.

IMO he is the only candidate that would fit the role of a president that could get American policy, foreign and domestic, back on track as he is the only one who has shown by his voting record and his platform that he will actually uphold the oath of office, that being to defend the Constitution.

I encourage everyone who is still asking Ron Who? to check out his campaign site and find out what his platform is www.RonPaul2008.com