Observations on some of the people and the culture of poker. Also a little off topic ranting now and then.
"Having the right to continue to pursue my profession, wherever I might choose to pursue it, is very important to me from both a financial standpoint but also from the broader perspective of freedom, personal responsibility and civil liberties."
Groups like Focus on the Family are good at shaping these sorts of issues to fit their needs and the poker playing community needs to do so as well. Instead of framing this as an issue of being able to play poker we need to show how hypocritical laws actually put lives in danger. The shooting death of a mathematician and former professor while playing a simple game of poker should be branded a failure of the law the same way the rise of organized crime was blamed on prohibition. Because the legal system then has only one of two choices; they can either crack down on both the rooms and the players (which is politically uncomfortable) or look at making changes that protect poker players by adopting the law to allow it.
When talking about playing speculative hands, I often read about needed a certain number of callers/limpers to play hands such as K3s or 67s. However, I've don't recall anything specifically mathematical about such hands.
As an example, early in 180 player SNG I had K3 in the small blind. Blinds were 15/30. One caller, and it's to me with 75 in the pot.
One the one hand, there is only one limper to play a speculative hand. One the other hand, I'm getting 5:1 (75:15) to call.
Is this a call?
I often read about needed a certain number of callers/limpers to play hands such as K3s or 67s. However, I've don't recall anything specifically mathematical about such hands.
Labels: Complete Book of Hold'em Poker