Poker Blogs by Popularity

Poker Blogs by Type

Poker Blogs by Wonk

Recent Blogs

Poker Articles by Blog

Write about Poker. Read about Life. Welcome to PokerWonks.com.

Lefort's Poker Blog Friends

Back in Toronto and Braceletless..

Date: Fri, Jun 27, 2008 Professional Internet

Well my WSOP '08 came to a disappointing end by finishing 138th place in the $1500NL Event #36. I went into day 2 with T36,600, just slightly under average with sick-high blinds of 800/1600 and 100 antes. The very first hand I open KTss in EP for T4400 and an older European man calls behind me. I busted him in an earlier event and have a bit of a read that he likes to play pots and gamble so I know his range is probably fairly wide. The flop comes QJ5r and I ask him how deep he was to start the hand and he says "about 23k". I proceed to shove, and he tank/folds. Good start, up to T45,000. I steal the blinds once over the next 2 rotations and am down to about T43k when I open QQ from MP. A guy who's played a few pots and is about T32k deep quickly raises me to 13k from late position. I decide that I'm just never folding QQ for 20bbs on any poker table in any country in any world so I shove and he snaps with AA. His AA holds up and I'm down to 12k. I actually should have been down to 10k but the dealer made a mistake and I wasn't about to let the table know about it. Very next hand I pick up KJo UTG and shove, and get called and lose to AKo. Such is life. It's super deflating to go deep in a tournament like this and get cold-decked but that's the nature of the WSOP events. Once you get to the money, edges are far smaller as stacks get shallower and the game becomes a shovefest.

I've been home for a week and have spent the bulk of it tearing down the walls, ceilings, and floors of the old house I purchased in downtown Toronto. We plan on renovating and flipping the house, hopefully by the end of September. The project should take up the majority of my time but I still plan on dabbling at mid-stakes during slow times. It's nice to have potential non-poker income in my future and thus have zero pressure on poker results.

I'd like to congratulate both Vanessa Selbst and Phil Galfond for winning bracelets this year. Both are fantastic people and the bracelets are well-deserved. As I write this, my roommate-for-a-week Max Greenwood is in the lead of the $1k NL rebuy event with 3 players left. Go Max!

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Back in Toronto and Braceletless..

Date: Fri, Jun 27, 2008 Professional Internet

Read Full Poker Blog Post

In the money in Event #36...

Date: Fri, Jun 20, 2008 Professional Internet

Well after a long day of maneuvering through another huge yet ridiculously soft $1500 NL event field, I've had my first cash in the '08 WSOP. I'm heading into tomorrow with T36,600 in chips which should be just under the average stack with 187 players remaining. Blinds are high, so things will change extremely quickly. Progress should be reported here: http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/tourney/tournament-chip-counts.asp?tid=4930&grid=411

Plenty of funny/interesting hands to talk about but I'll leave them for later and get some sleep.. bracelet one time!

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Vegas Update...

Date: Mon, Jun 16, 2008 Professional Internet

I've now been in Vegas for almost a week. I spent the first few days with my girlfriend Lauren doing completely non-poker activities. It was a fantastic few days and really enjoyable for me to finally spend some time in Vegas which wasn't totally poker-related and/or with poker friends. I saw three Cirque du Soleil shows this week and all of them were quite enjoyable. My favourite was definitely "Mystere", as some of the athletic feats were just mind-boggling and I was thoroughly entertained for the entire show. "KA" was also very good, with "Love" (the Beatles musical) being my 3rd choice. If you were to see only one, I would definitely recommend Mystere.

I've also managed to spend a lot of time in the World Series poker room this week. I've played in 4 events, with zero cashes. In fact, I haven't even made a dinner break yet. It's been fairly disappointing, however cash games have gone well so I've basically been freerolling the tournaments which is nice. To be honest, I didn't really have many interesting tournament hands. Although, my bust-out hand in today's $3000 NL Event was especially frustrating...

We started with T6000 chips and I've run it up to ~T11,000 fairly early. Amir Vahedi arrived late at our table and had since run his chips up to roughly T12,000. He opens from UTG to T300 (blinds 50/100), and I 3bet KK from MP to T825, he calls. Flop comes Q73hh. He check/calls a 2/3pot bet. Turn is an offsuit 2. He checks and then shoves all-in (effectively a pot-sized raise) over my turn bet. This is not a fist-pumping situation for me as he can definitely have a set of 7's or 3's here, but its still a pretty automatic call. I call, and he rolls over Q2cc for two pair. The river bricks and I'm left wondering how this amazingly terrible poker player has won a WSOP bracelet and is known as one of the "poker professionals" that 99% of America thinks is "world-class". He's terrible.

One semi-interesting tournament hand I played was my bustout hand in the 3rd event I played, the $1500 NL. This event sported 3000 of the worlds finest donkeys and fish. The field was amazingly soft, as to be expected in a weekend small buy-in event. Although, the disappointing part is that the structure is so poor that it's still fairly difficult to navigate through such a large field with very shallow stacks. Here's my bust-out hand with a bit of analysis:

I managed to run my T3000 up to roughly T6000, a little under average after the 2nd break. Folds around to a nice early-30's-ish whitewashed Asian guy I'd been talking to occasionally and he opens the button for T900 with T150/300 blinds and a T25 ante. I have A9hh in the SB and without much thought, I ship it all-in. My play here is pretty standard because he's definitely opening the button with a wide range and the pot is quite big with the raise/blinds/antes. Folding is just too tight and we're not deep enough to just call. He tanks (lol) and then finally calls with AKo and it holds. To validate my play, lets toss some numbers around:

After his raise, the pot is T1675. So I'm putting up roughly T6000 to win T1675. I'm fairly certain he opens the button with any pair, any ace, and any broadway. He also probably opens some other junk for a generously small total of about 27% of all hands. The fact that he TANKED with AKo leads me to believe that he's only calling my shove with AK/66+/AQs. This accounts for 5.6% of the time, or roughly 20% of his button-opening range. So 80% of the time, I will win T1675 without showdown. The other 20% of the time, I will be a 35% underdog against his calling range.

Summary:
80% of the time he folds and I win +T1675.
7% of the time, he calls and I win the showdown, +T6675.
13% of the time, he calls and I lose the showdown, -T6000.

So... Chip EV = .8*1675 + .07*6675 - .13*6000 = ~ +T1225

So in the long-run we increase our stack by roughly 20% every time we make this play, given the worst case scenario for his opening range.

As expected, the deepstacked cash games I've played have provided way more interesting hands than the straightforward tournament play. Here are a few that I can remember, all at NL10/25 no max buyin at the Rio:

Hand 1: Bit of history: AEJones is at the table, a very good online player. It's my first day living at a house full of online poker players including AEJ, and he doesn't know it yet as we haven't been introduced. However, I knew who he was as someone had pointed him out. He's playing/raising a ton of hands and as expected, both the old nits and loose-passive terrible players are all mumbling and muttering about how the "young kid" is "playing fast/speeding/wild/etc.." as he takes all their money.

AEJ opens from EP, something he's doing a ton. I call 77 from MP, all else fold. Flop is KJ7r. He bets, I call. Turn is a 7 bringing a flush draw. He hammers again, and I tank a bit. Finally I make a sloppy one-chip-at-a-time call. River is an off-suit 9 and he bets 2/3 pot, $850. I tank for a while before making it $2350. He thinks for a short while before shoving for my last ~$2000 and I insta-call with the nuts. He shows KJo for what at first seems like a mesmerizingly terrible play. But the more I thought about his play, the more I really liked it if I had been atleast $2000 deeper. And I'm willing to bet that being mostly an online player, he wasn't fully aware of how deep my stack was. His river shove is turning his hand into a bluff, as from his perspective I can never have a full house. I would re-raise KK/JJ preflop, not to mention that he has 2 of those blockers making it even more doubtful. K7s/J7s/99 are all not very reasonable. So from his perspective my most probable hands are trip 7's, QT for the straight, some sort of bluff, or quads. He should also be aware at this point that I'm most probably a thinking online player that is definitely capable of folding out everything but quads to his shove. His play at the time made me super-confused but in retrospect, I really like it if I'm deeper.

This next hand is fun. DJ Sensei is at the table, a really good online player who has significant live experience and can be tricky at live deepstacked tables. The button straddles to $50 and DJ calls from the blinds along with a few others, as I call Q9dd from the CO for a 6-way flop of KJThhh. DJ leads out for pot, an older nit who'd limped from EP calls after some hesitation, and I think/call with my straight. Turn is a brick, 5s. DJ and the nit both hesitate/check, and I bet 2/3 pot. DJ think/calls, nit think/calls. At this point I'm fairly confused because I'm almost 100% certain DJ leads the turn again with a flush. I'm also fairly confident (yet not as certain) that the nit would bet the turn with a flush after DJ checks. I'm decently confident that DJ never has AQ, and that the nit probably doesn't either. So I'm a bit confused to get 2 calls on the turn. The river is another brick, the 4c. Both players think/check, and I need to think about whether I should value bet. I decide that I just simply don't think either player has a flush very often and that I might get paid off by a weirdly played set or a stubborn two pair that thinks I just had the Ah for the nut flush draw. I bet half-pot, and DJ tanks with a hugely winceful look on his face. He painfully calls. The nit then begins tanking. It's at this point that I realize that my $1500 river bet effectively put him almost all-in. I also start to realize that its entirely possible that I might get DJ to call with a worse hand here, while the nit folds out a better one if he did manage to get to the river with a slightly oddly played flush or AQ. But the nit finally calls. First DJ rolls over KK for a slowplayed top set, as he expected the straddle to get re-popped preflop. I roll over my straight, and the nit then triumphantly rolls over AQ for the nut straight. It would have been so sick if he managed to lay it down and I effectively made a two-way river bet, one for value against DJ, and one to bluff out the nit. But nonetheless, it was an interesting pot. In retrospect, I should not have bet the river. Mostly just because in live poker, player's ranges are far less defined as they are in the typical online games that I'm used to playing. Players take more unorthodox fancy-pants plays in live games and thus you can never entirely discount hands from their ranges. After talking to Cole (cts), I should probably have just folded the flop with such terrible reverse implied odds. I agree, and the thought had definitely crossed my mind during the hand. The other option would have been to raise the flop and fold to a re-raise, or try to get to showdown cheaply if called.

The next hand isn't so much interesting as it is fun. Dude raises in MP, I call with Q9hh from LP, and an older "live poker professional" calls from the BB. He's clearly terrible but from his convorsations I gathered that he spends a lot of time playing in live games without much understanding of the fundamentals of poker. Flop comes A94hh. Check, check, I bet 2/3pot, and the BB quickly check-raises fairly big. MP folds, I think/call. Turn is the 4c. This is actually a good card for me as 44 is one of the hands I'm most scared of and now its much less likely. Especially when he insta-bets the turn with a big bet, as he would most certainly have Hollywooded a bit with quads or a full house, and he most probably would have needed some thought before betting again with an Ace if he happened to check-raise an ATs type hand on the flop. So at this point I'm almost certain he's on a draw of some sort, or even just a pure bluff as these people are incredibly bad. River is the Ac, and he thinks and checks. At this point I'm 99% sure I have the best hand with just my pair of 9's but its not really worth value-betting. In retrospect I should have bet something retardedly small like 1/12th pot to either humiliate him when he has to fold, or snap him off if he decides to bluff-raise. But instead, I opted to toss the dealer a $5 chip as tip before rolling over my cards. This is one of my favourite things to do in live games as it shows that you had a total grasp on the hand for you to be cocky enough to tip the dealer before showing down your hand when you don't have anywhere close to the nuts and your opponent showed only aggression up until the river. I'm pretty sure the hand tilted him a a bit as he mucked his cards and muttered a few things.

The last hand is fairly interesting, especially if the circumstances change a bit on the river. The same guy from the last hand opens from EP to $150. He has clearly been sizing his preflop raises according to the strength of his hands, so his range is definitely skewed towards the top of his range when he opens for such a big amount. One caller in MP and I call in the blinds with 99. I flop the world with J94hh. I check, EP bets, MP folds, and I raise large knowing that there's a good chance he has a big hand. He calls, and now I'm certain he's got a big one and I just pray for the board to brick out. The turn is the Qd and I hammer for pot. He calls. River is the Ah completing the flush draw. I'm forced to check as now I'm really only beating KK and a few other hands. Luckily for me, he checks behind his KK and I rake in the pot. It would have been a really really tough spot if he had of jammed the river. AA and a flush draw were both significant parts of his range, and I just don't think he's all that capable of turning KK into a bluff.

That's it for now. Tomorrow's event is the $2500 NL 6-max event, one that I should have a huge edge in along with all the other online 6-max cash players. Hopefully I can run up a stack and make my first dinner break!

Read Full Poker Blog Post

WSOP/Vegas, here I come...

Date: Sat, Jun 7, 2008 Professional Internet

So I'm leaving Monday for my 3rd trip to Las Vegas in the past 18 months. I plan on staying anywhere from 1-2 weeks depending on how well I run. The first event I plan on playing is the $5000 NLH Event #21 on Wednesday. I'll do my best to update the blog with interesting happenings and my results as days go by. Hopefully I can come back with a bracelet and/or all the Sklansky bucks that are owed to me.

In my last blurb I talked about "poker as a profession" and made a loose comparison to a civil engineer. I posted the blurb on 2+2, which was probably a mistake in retrospect. I was quite biased in my points in an effort to emphasize some of the issues that non-poker playing friends might not be aware of. The people reading 2+2 are mostly "poker professionals" and thus many of them did not take kindly to someone making points as to why such a career path may not be as lucrative as one might be led to believe. I fully expected to receive the occasional aggressive retort from some readers as they chose to defend their life choices aggressively. But the main goal of posting the article was to incite some constructive discussion, and I mostly succeeded. So here are some of the responses that I thought had some great points:

"Lefort,

I love what you have to say mostly, but your post I think suffers from that age old human flaw: your vision is limited to what you know. You are a poker player, and you suffer the problems of being a poker player. You see a civil engineer, building bridges, and you imagine him having a much simpler life because, hey, the grass is always greener.

But the civil engineer, when he goes to sleep at night, is worrying about whether his firm is going to get that next contract. He wonders if everything he did that day was done correctly, because if it wasn't a bridge somewhere will collapse one day. Tens of lives and millions of dollars could be lost. He's afraid that everyone these days has at least a masters, if not a PhD. Maybe he has to go back to school, to stay ahead of the field. And so on, and so forth.

The fact is that in any attempt at "great success" is going to involve problems of variance and staying on the cutting edge and so forth. We are not so special, we are merely fortunate. Enjoy the ride while it lasts, and prepare yourself for the day after."

----------------------------------------------

"Being able to transcend short-term variance and focus on the long-term picture is one of the most fundamental skills of a successful poker professional. It is difficult, but it is certainly not impossible. While bridge builders may not lose progress if they're doing it right, there are many problems which will arise if not prepared for in advance, and the difference between a good engineer and a great one is how well they prepare for these difficulties and how they deal with them when they arise.
...
Learning to adapt to changing game conditions is a crucial part of being a poker pro, but I don't see that as a negative thing. In fact, that ability will serve one very well in future life endeavors. The fundamentals of engineering will probably not change any time soon, but when the bridge-builder decides to quit building bridges (or is laid off because there are no more bridges to build) he may have a much more difficult time adapting to a new career than the poker professional. On the other hand, if the poker pro is accustomed to making much more money and sleeping until noon, it could be difficult for him to take on more traditional employment.
...
Professional poker players learn many useful skills that are applicable to other fields, such as financial/risk management (and tolerance), self-awareness, and many investing concepts. Just because the next job a poker player has doesn't involve cards and chips doesn't mean that he's a fish out of water.
...
For me, poker is not a long-term career. Its simply a springboard between college and the rest of my life which fortunately lets me bypass much of the nonsense that most people my age have to deal with, like low-paying entry-level jobs, tight budgets, and very little free time. When I stop playing poker for a living, I'll have plenty of savings from it, and probably will be ready to jump right into something new and exciting, most likely something that I've built up from the ground myself."

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Poker as a profession..

Date: Sat, May 24, 2008 Professional Internet

I mentioned in my last update that I was going to talk about poker as a profession and why I don’t plan on ever being considered a professional poker player. To give a better idea of why, here’s the life of a poker player in comparison to the life of a civil engineer. For the sake of simplicity, let’s say that the engineer is privy in bridge building and makes his living managing the construction of bridges. The poker player’s metaphorical bridge is essentially his bankroll. Now let’s look at some of the perks of being a civil engineer:

1. He never has to worry about having built less than nothing, or “negative bridge”. He always starts with two foundations with which to connect. If the poker player considers his current bankroll to be his foundation and experiences a losing day, he now has negative bridge. He goes to the job site the next day with less bridge completed than he had started with. Not only is the project further away from completion, but he’s also lost man-hours. Theoretically the poker player can avoid this by not considering each day to be new and thus not create a “watermark” at the end of each day for comparison. In a more realistic sense, this is very difficult to do.

2. Bridges are always bridges. The laws of physics do not change. The elements of the bridge might change but the fundamentals remain the same and the basic bridge-building skills will always be more than enough to complete the construction of a new bridge. Meanwhile, the poker world is quite dynamic. Strategies become dated and no longer useful for the development of the poker player’s bridge. In fact, not only do outdated strategies stint the building process, but they can also cause destruction.

3. As a result of (2), the civil engineer doesn’t have to worry about consistently scrutinizing and updating his bridge-building methods. He knows what procedures are being used for bridge-building in recent years, and any necessary adjustments will most certainly be brought to his attention by his superiors. Meanwhile, the poker player must be aware of whether his bridge-building capabilities are even adequate to build current bridges. Interestingly so, it becomes the player’s responsibility to use his own knowledge to reflect on the adequacy of the very knowledge he is using for reflection. If this is confusing for you, imagine how confusing it can be for the poker player. The point is that without foreign input, it is quite difficult for the poker player to know if he has the state-of-the-art bridge building techniques when the only pieces he has for comparison are that of his own.

4. The engineer does not have to experience the foggy distorting element that is statistical variance. If he puts in the time and effort to build a sound bridge, and his knowledge is sufficient, he will complete the task. The poker player does not have such assurance. Further complicating the issues put forth in points (1), (2), and (3), the poker player experiences a distorted viewpoint on how effective his bridge building skills may be. The element of luck involved in poker on a short-term basis presents difficulty in assessing the state of one’s skills and capability for building bridges. It is quite easy for a player without the tools necessary to fully complete a bridge to experience rapid bridge development in a short period of time, leading to conclusions that they must be fully capable of completing a full bridge if given the opportunity. Conversely, it is also quite possible for an adept poker player to experience the negative effects of variance and be forced to embrace a situation in which it appears as though they will never be able to build another bridge again. This only emphasizes the difficulties involved with point (2) and especially point (3).

5. The world will always need bridges. Well, maybe not. But it is a reasonable assumption that upon society losing the need for bridges, builders will still possess a skill-set that can be applied to other civil engineering needs of society. The poker player has no comparable future stability. The future of online poker from a legal standpoint is not clear. The poker player is not assured of the need for future bridges. Nor is he assured that future bridges will even be worth building. His bridge-building world is constantly becoming increasingly more difficult to survive in, and there is no way of knowing whether his current bridge-building skills will be enough to provide him with a career in the future.

6. Time spent building bridges is worth more than just income to the engineer. Society recognizes the sound work of an engineer and rewards him with a level of respect and gratitude. If for some reason the engineer decides to take a different career path, their resume is solid and they should not be in danger of remaining unemployed. The poker player, on the other hand, has a large void in his contribution to society. His resume is most probably lacking in areas and almost certainly littered with time gaps.

7. Everyone can profit in the bridge-building industry. Many builders can survive in the economy. This is not the case with poker. In fact, poker is an overall less than breakeven game for the player once factoring in the rake. You have to be significantly better than your peers to be assured of making money as a poker player. In the civil engineering world, this is often not the case.

8. From time to time, the civil engineer is blessed with a feeling of satisfaction as they complete another bridge. The engineer’s goals are concrete and achievable. The poker player’s bridge is never quite finished. This aspect of the game is often overlooked and rarely given much thought. It can become increasingly difficult for a poker player to find joy in his profession after his bridge has undergone much construction. The potential for a bigger bridge becomes less lucrative compared to the already existent bridge. Subsequently, there is no sign of the end of the bridge. It is very difficult to have concrete results-based goals as a poker player due to the effects of variance and the trouble determining long-term winrates. This can cause issues of never feeling satisfied in a game that never has an ending.

9. The engineer works with a team. They converse and strategize with their colleagues as they progress towards their mutual project goals. They have shared feelings invested towards the building of the bridge. Once the bridge is completed, they can rejoice together. The situation is quite different for a poker player. Poker is clearly not a team game. Yes, the poker player can make many friends within his profession, but they rarely find themselves in situations involving teamwork. Poker can be quite a lonely profession without putting forth the effort to develop friendships within the community.

10. Civil engineers provide bridges to aid society’s need for transportation. Poker players take money from people less intelligent than themselves. Quite simply, most poker players do not provide society any benefits with their work. It can be argued that they provide a source of entertainment, but such an argument does not hold much water when comparing poker with other forms of entertainment. I won’t bother getting deeper into this point, as it could potentially deserve a whole blurb itself.

There are clearly many perks involved in being a professional poker player and I have failed to mention them here. For some, these perks may be so lucrative that pursuing poker as a career may very well be the right path for them to take. For others, including myself, the reasons stated above dictate that they will always treat the game as a hobby, rather than making the full dedication towards becoming a professional poker player.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

I still play poker!

Date: Mon, Mar 17, 2008 Professional Internet

Apologizing for lack of updates is getting old so I won't bother. It's difficult to have material to write about when I've realized that it's in my best interests to both not post results, nor post any detailed hand analysis. In fact, I'd considered forgetting about posting at all until I'd come across some SSNLers on 2p2 who seemed to really appreciate and connect with the blurb I wrote on tilting. (http://lefort.livejournal.com/13827.html) I do enjoy writing about the non-strategy facets of the game and what I've learned about them, so I will continue with that. The topic I'll write about in my next blurb will be poker as a satisfying profession, why it will never be mine, and why I think a lot of players struggle with ever being "content" as a poker player.

As for the coaching sessions late last month and early this month, they were fantastic. This coach really opened up my eyes and re-structured my entire game. I now see faults in most players' games and feel like I've got edges on almost all of the regulars, instead of just sharing profits from the fish. As a result of feeling better about my game and enjoying it more, I set a lofty goal of playing 50,000 hands this month. I'm on pace for over 40,000, which I'd be ecstatic with when all said and done. As for results, they've been encouraging in that I've run really really really bad (broken record, huh?) but have still faired alright.

I won't divulge much into what I learned specifically in the sessions because its not fair to my coach, nor does it really benefit me a whole lot. But I will mention some of the broad conclusions I've come to after experiencing the game from a different angle. I've realized that the best players are the best not only because they are good at making the really tough decisions, but also (and possibly more importantly), they minimize the number of tough decisions they have to make. Their game is structured as a whole to be well balanced to the point where many of the tough decisions become easier decisions as they're filtered through the function that is your strategy. When you play thousands of hands a day, its not about what you or your opponents are holding at any given time. It's about what you or your opponents COULD be holding, and how to optimize your holdings while exploiting the imbalances in your opponent's holdings. Once you base your decisions on this concept, it becomes much easier to make the "right" decision on any street, as you no longer have XXxx, but instead of you have "a hand in this portion of my range".

These lessons have also reiterated the fact that who is "good" at poker is so inconceivably misconceived. It is not possible for someone unaware of what makes a player good to subjectively decide who is good. For MSNLers to gossip about who the best nosebleed players are is pure banter. They don't have the understanding of the game to be able to rate the understandings of players with much greater understandings. A player can combine a rather satisfactory understanding of poker with great table selection and game management to be a profitable player, even at high stakes. But to truly decide who the best poker players are is to go much deeper, not to look at database results.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

So I suck at updates... AND poker!

Date: Sat, Feb 9, 2008 Professional Internet

But I have an excuse!! ...at least for the updates part. So I was in Buffalo for a hockey tournament mid-January and had a fantastic time. Super surprised at how nice the people I met were and how generally nice the areas of the city were that I saw. It was a private school alumni tournament so I'd think we were in some nice parts of Buffalo, but I was expecting way more guns and muggings. Hell, my buddy got in a fight, told off the bouncers, smashed a bar window, destroyed the hotel door, and kept everyone on our floor up all night... and somehow, everyone along the way thought it was amusing and let him get away with it like Dennis the Menace. In Canada, he would have been drunktankamented for sure.

So anyways, on the drive home just past Toronto the highway immediately went from being completely dry to having ice and snow. As I started to slow down (to ~100kmh/60mph) and attempted to change lanes, my tires caught a snow groove and I lost complete control. It was really weird as it all happened in slow motion, and I was astounded at how calm I was as I'd never been in a situation like this before and just assumed I'd panic. But I pretty much just accepted that I was at the mercy of my car and there was potential to be seriously hurt and possibly die. I skidded into the right guard-rail and proceeded to spin across all 4 lanes into the left guard-rail. This was the really scary part because as the car spun, I saw the headlights of other cars coming and knew I would be completely screwed if I got clipped by one. Luckily I "safely" smashed pretty much head first into the left guard-rail and the airbags deployed. I got out of the car, strangely feeling totally elated. It was one of those adrenaline moments and I was just happy to be alive. I realized that I was pretty much unscathed, and swore at the fact that my cellphone battery was dead. A nice young woman pulled over and called the cops for me and let me stay in the car is it was bitter cold outside. We watched as 4 more accidents took place in the area, as everyone hit the sheet of snow and ice.

The tow truck driver was a great guy and dropped off the my mangled car at a body shop and drove me home. Insurance covered the whole ordeal and luckily my rates have not gone up. So in the end, everything is alright and I got to buy a new car. I ended up settling on another Mazda, the 6 Sport. Its a really nice ride and sporty look with electric blue exterior, tinted windows, sunroof and spoiler without being overly flashy or expensive. Vehicles are awful investments and being in the business of investment decisions and equity mongering, it seemed like a poor idea to buy something super expensive. I figure I'll wait to get an expensive sports car for when I really need it during a mid-life crisis.

So the two weeks after the accident were filled with me driving back and forth from school and settling insurance issues and new car shopping. I didn't spend much time playing or thinking about poker and really didn't have a whole lot to contribute to the blog. Since then, I have played a good deal of hands averaging more than 1000/day over the past couple weeks. Results have been varying but I've made some huge strides in my game, mostly due to some "research findings" after spending some time looking at statistics on other players for patterns and tendencies. It truly is amazing how the more I learn about this game, the more I realize how bad I am and how much room I have to improve.

Poker may be played endlessly on ESPN, but it differs greatly from the traditional spectator sports. When you watch a game of hockey, you can truly appreciate the skill level of the players as they skate at full speed, dangle the puck like its on a string, and display their shear level of athleticism. You don't need to have ever laced up a skate to understand that "these guys are good". Poker, is different. The game has so many different layers that when an "amateur" watches the game played on television, he only has access to the outer layer. Its only as he learns more about the game can he start to understand and assess the different plays made and begin to decide how good the players are (or conversely, are not). I got significantly deep into the "layers of onion" that is poker, but neglected to go further once I reached a profitable depth. It took months of playing and learning to get to this point, and I was content with being a "decent and profitable" poker player, better than most of the competition. And to be honest, I really wasn't all that aware that many more levels of poker existed. But I was wrong.

For the past couple years I've essentially just taken advantage of the fact that I knew more about the game than most of my opponents. I didn't necessarily play anywhere close to optimal poker, but I was privy in the business of exploiting the super bad players. Once I reached this status, I was content with my "profitable" skill level and never really put in that much effort to really study the game besides playing lots of hands. As I've stated before, this lends itself to the habit of playing on auto-pilot for weeks and months. This wasn't necessarily a bad thing as I was able to make money in the process. However, in the past year the games have gotten tougher and the number of people who played this type of poker increased to the point where now, its only marginally profitable as the pool of super exploitable players (aka. fish) has dropped off.

So now its time to learn from someone whom in my opinion is "one of the best". He is pretty much the most sought out coach in the booming industry of online poker coaching and after a six month wait, I'm finally one of his students. I'm really excited about starting up my sweat sessions after I get back from the Dominican Republic in two weeks time. This coach really takes things to a deep understanding of the game and bases decisions off of the true fundamentals of poker. Essentially, he goes as far into "solving" each hand as anyone else in the world does. Many of his students have transformed into some of the biggest online winners over the past year. I'm not setting such high aspirations, but moreso I'm just exuberant about finally being able to talk poker with this bright mind. (He's very protective of his poker knowledge, which is pretty understandable seeing how he charges for it as a hot commodity.) How much I will learn I'm unsure, but I am positive that I'll be introduced to a different way to approach the game and thats what I'm looking forward to the most.

I mentioned in the last blog entry that I planned on talking about something pertaining to a book I've been reading and how it could be related to poker. But the accident knocked me out of my reading routine and I haven't had a chance to get back into reading the book. I'll have to leave that concept for a later entry.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

$32k Flippaments

Date: Fri, Jan 11, 2008 Professional Internet

Full Tilt Poker Game #4757200912: Table Avon (heads up) - $5/$10 - No Limit Hold'em - 4:24:26 ET - 2008/01/06
Seat 1: Lefort ($17,974)
Seat 2: EskaborReturns ($15,992.50)
Lefort posts the small blind of $5
EskaborReturns posts the big blind of $10
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Lefort raises to $17,974, and is all in
EskaborReturns calls $15,982.50, and is all in
Lefort shows [7c 3d]
EskaborReturns shows [6h Ah]
Uncalled bet of $1,981.50 returned to FELTOR
*** FLOP *** [Ac 7h Ts]
*** TURN *** [Ac 7h Ts] [3h]
*** RIVER *** [Ac 7h Ts 3h] [6d]
Lefort shows two pair, Sevens and Threes
EskaborReturns shows two pair, Aces and Sixes
EskaborReturns wins the pot ($31,984.50) with two pair, Aces and Sixes
EskaborReturns is sitting out
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $31,985 | Rake $0.50
Board: [Ac 7h Ts 3h 6d]
Seat 1: Lefort (small blind) showed [7c 3d] and lost with two pair, Sevens and Threes
Seat 2: EskaborReturns (big blind) showed [6h Ah] and won ($31,984.50) with two pair, Aces and Sixes

Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucy! You've got some splainin' to doooooooo! Okay, so on the surface, it appears that I flipped for $16,000 and lost. Okay, so the surface is technically correct. But before I lose your respect and I become labeled "degenerate", let me explain the circumstances. I was partying with friends as we all got home from the bar in a somewhat inebriated state. They coaxed me into doing some $1000 "flips", where you essentially find someone else who wants to gamble and you both go all-in for the designated amount (in this case, $1000) regardless of the cards. Essentially, you are coin-flipping for money which results in a neutral expected value business venture. Its something I never do sober but sometimes do a bit for entertainment after a few drinks. My stoploss was 3-4 buyins, so the most I was going to lose was $3-4000. So I found someone else, "Eskabor", who was willing to do some flipping. I ran extremely hot for 20 minutes, busting him up in a bunch of exciting hands. Sometimes he would win two or three in a row to get to $4000 or $8000 and we'd flip again and I'd wipe him back to $0. At one point, I was up $31,000 on him. But I figured it wasn't fair for me to stop at any point, and I would let him decide when/if he wanted to stop. Then he doubled to $2000, $4000, $8000, and $16,000 to lead to this massive $16,000 flip at a 5/10nl table, something probably never seen before. It was a pretty exciting 30 minutes of neutral expected value gambling with little risk on my part. He later said that I was very close to busting his bankroll on FullTilt, but instead I ended up +$1000. I was slightly disappointed with the result, having felt like I "lost" $30,000, so I proceeded to play some 25/50nl (higher than I should be playing). Luckily, I played pretty well and their were weak tables, so I'm positive I had a drunken edge. I scooped a couple buyins before going to bed and waking up a sober 5/10nl player with an inflated bankroll after a night of drunken fun. Alright, on to more sophisticated discussion...

I often make fun of the players and their lack of understanding of the game on televised poker while watching with friends and family. I'll sometimes try to explain things about how the faces you see on television portrayed as the "best players in the world" are not even close to such acclaim. I'll even go as far as to say that I'm better fundamentally at poker than almost all of them. But how does that make sense? I'm just a kid playing online, and these players have been on TV for years playing the "highest stakes" in the "biggest games". So I'm pretty sure everyone thinks I'm a liar. It always bothers me a bit that I don't really have the evidence to back up my insinuations, and that these people probably think I'm a little crazy and full of myself. So it pleases me to see some of these "best players in the world" coming out and admitting that the online generation of players have a far better understanding of the game of poker. Here are a couple examples of Daniel Negreanu making such admissions:

http://www.pokertube.com/ShowMovie.aspx?movieID=7d07ac91-56c9-4ab5-859f-1d5ba2180e42&PokRec=1&comeFrom=Films&StartPage=1&pIndex=1&PageView=0&PokRec=1
-Daniel starts talking about the online game vs. the live game at about 8 minutes in. Its understandable that he clearly shows an affinity for the live games, but he does go on to say that online players are much better fundamentally than the live players, ie. players like Scotty Nguyen.

http://www.pokerroad.com/_/pokerroad_radio/12-16-07/
-This is perhaps a better example. At around the 35 minute mark, Daniel talks about his experiences in the 25/50 games on PokerStars. He joined the PokerStars team this summer, so it only makes sense that he has to make appearances at some of the higher stakes cash games. He claims that he's been a marginal winner at these tables after making some adjustments due to the high level of play. To be honest, I'm impressed that he's even a marginal winner in those games. However, he's probably talking about the full ring games and only playing a few tables, meaning his expectations should be reasonable due to this experience with live full ring. However, if you were to add more tables and/or move him to 6max, I'm convinced that Daniel would be doing very well for himself if he were to break even. I'd venture a guess that he'd create some long waiting lists.

Its pained me slightly to come to the realization over the past few years that players like Daniel are not actually the "best in the world" like they appear to be on TV. Its players like him that were the reason why the game blew up in popularity in the first place, and thats why I'll always be forever appreciative. I remember when I first started playing, Daniel was the first of many e-mails I sent out to professionals, looking for tidbits of information to help me develop my game. Its somewhat disappointing to know the truth of the poker world and have the special aura of these players diminished. It just goes to show you that you should never believe everything you see on TV.

All that being said, players like Daniel do indeed have amazing live poker intuitions and methods to gain information from players to make them fantastic live poker players. The question remains, who should we respect? The live players get all the publicity as they play the game the way it was "meant" to be played like in the back corners of saloons and shady underground bars. The online players applied an academic element to the game to converge upon optimal strategies with given game conditions. They brought Game Theory to poker to end discussions with proving or disproving the "correct play" while inciting more discussions about topics formerly undiscussed. It seems reasonable that both players should gain respect from the poker world for what they have done for the game. The live players have received the attention because they provide the entertainment, and they've utilized this publicity to make gains through books, video games, advertising contracts, etc.. etc.. The online players have benefited from the influx of "weekend donaters" created by the poker boom, which can only be attributed to the likes of the television personalities. So essentially, there is no argument that without the Daniel Negreanus of the world, there would be no Brian Townsends and Cole Souths. However, there should also be no argument that the best poker players in the world can be found behind the screen of a monitor, and not behind a stack of chips in a Vegas casino.

I didn't get anywhere close to the topic I really wanted to talk about, but this blurb is long enough already so I'm going to leave it until next time. But I will leave you with an update on my New Year's Resolutions... mostly for my own benefit to keep track and force me to continue with them.

1) *No computer, one day a week* - I've yet to spend a day this year without using a computer. It's been on my mind, but nearly impossible with school starting and trying to settle all my courses and whatnot. But I'm going to make an effort to choose a day this week to not touch this time-disposal box.

2) *Read at least a book a month* - I have spent a good deal of time reading. In fact, one of the topics in one of the two books I'm reading is what I wanted to discuss today but I'll have to leave it until next time. I'm well on my way to finishing at least one book this month.

3) *Spend a great deal of computer time on an exercise ball* - Well, I'm sitting on the ball right now... mostly just because this blurb reminded me to do so. (See!?!?! Told you it was a good idea...) Its been tough because I've had some heavy workouts leading to a recovering lower back, but I'll do my best to maintain some sessions on it.

Thats it for now. Oh yeah, and I have indeed played some poker. It's gone well, but I'll leave details and any hand discussion for the next entry. Cheers.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

A New Year!!!

Date: Fri, Jan 4, 2008 Professional Internet

Hope everyone had a fun and safe New Years Eve, and are well on their way to fulfilling their resolutions. I made three myself, all of them somewhat related:

1) Dedicate one day a week to not using a computer of any kind. I think its sad how much our lives rely on a box of wires and circuit boards. We don't own computers, computers own us. It was a pretty eye-opening experience when in Europe and having to entertain myself without the use of a computer. It let me do other things instead of just "killing time on youtube" or "surfing some poker sites" or "checking the hockey scores". There's no reason why I can't spend one day a week without touching a computer.

2) Read at least one book a month. Whenever I spend time reading a good book, I think to myself "man, I really need to read more often." But with computers and so much visual entertainment available, I never "feel" like reading a book. One book a month is a pretty meager/embarrassing goal, but putting a number on it should hopefully force me to read more.

3) Sit on an exercise ball during sessions. This one is because I've always had awful posture, and I want to make an attempt to fix that. I'm going to sit on the ball at the start of every session instead of my computer chair, and do so until my lower back starts to get sore. Who knows, it could also help me be more focused while I play instead of "too" comfortable and sleepy.

As for poker, things have been going well. I've been running reasonably well at $600nl and $1000nl and have also sat at some soft $2000nl tables where I managed to stack-a-donk a few times. Here's a few hands that sort of exemplify some changes I've made in the past few months as I *hopefully* go from being a marginal regular player to a significantly good regular player. (Sorry to online regulars that might be reading for some of the seemingly verbose and useless description, but I try to keep hand history explanations simple enough for casual poker friends to understand):

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1889567 - This is just a small hand, but it shows how playing less tables and having better reads is helping my game. Preflop is fairly standard, as is the flop. On the turn he bets halfpot again when an overcard hits. An argument could be made to lay 88 down here but I decide that my equity + 8 outs is enough to warrant a call against a player with a high enough turn aggression factor. The river pairs the 7, and now he fires a full pot after a bit of hesitation. I'm now losing to any 7, any 9, any 10, any K, straights, boats, overpairs, etc.. and if I was 8-tabling I probably would have just pitched it without thinking much. But after a little thought its evident that a player with his type of stats is never value-betting anything but trips or better for full pot here, and he almost never gets to the river with his line with those hands. So in summary, his story doesn't make sense and my 88 is good. Again, just a small hand but a positive result due to playing less tables and focusing more.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1886941 - This hand is more profound, and I can thank whitelime and his deucescracked.com video for this one. Aggressive player 1 opens UTG+1, Aggressive player 2 calls from the CO, and I make a standard squeeze from the BB with QQ. To my surprise, both players call. I get a seemingly decent 7-high (but drawy) flop. Normally my standard would be to bet and call a shove from either player, but both players had exceedingly high (too high) aggression factors. So I decided checking let them potentially bluff and was the better play. Turns out, player 1 takes a stab, player 2 tanks and shoves (with his knowledge that player 2 is probably taking a stab, and I probably missed after checking), and I get it in against him as a good favorite after player 1 folds quickly (obviously bluff). Normally I would have bet and probably gotten two folds.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1886938 - This hand just kind of exemplifies why 3betting (re-raising preflop) became such a popular trend over the past year in these short-handed online NL games. I make a standard 3bet with AKdd from the BB against an aggressive opener from MP. He calls, and I flop top pair. I make my standard smallish continuation bet for a 3bet pot (to leave room for betting on later streets), and he tanks and shoves his JJ. His play is pretty awful, and is quite reminiscent of how most players dealt with similar situations when 3betting started getting popular. Essentially, I'm going to play "perfectly" to his shove. I'm going to call with any K, AA or set, and will fold anything less than a pair of jacks. The only hand not in there is QQ, which I probably don't lead the flop with anyway. So he is essentially making a massive raise (committing his entire stack) in a situation where he's way ahead or way behind to all hands in my 3betting range. He should have called and re-evaluated the turn, unless he thought the game was way crazier than it was (which it wasn't) where I might call with a bunch of weaker holdings. Either way, it shows how people have trouble adjusting to constant 3betting and why its become an essential part of any good shorthanded NL player's game.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Happy Holidays!!!

Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2007 Professional Internet

Sorry for the lack of updates. I have played a reasonable amount of poker this month, looking to reach 30,000 hands by the new year. Its been a real learning experience but in the end, my results have been pretty good. I've realized that my game was severely lacking in a lot of areas. For the past year, I built my bankroll on knowing how to find and exploit bad players. When it came to playing good players, I was at best a marginal winner and most probably a significant loser against a lot of the regulars. I've also learned that in the post-UIGEA online poker era, I need to play *at most* 5 tables to be able to give the concentration I need to be able to really logically breakdown hands against the competent players. So to summarize, I've gotten a lot better at seeking and exploiting the statistical weaknesses in good players as opposed to just beating up on the bad ones. There are a ton of different aspects a poker player needs to be aware of, and table selection is a very important one. Your actual poker skills are only one piece of the puzzle, and its quite commonplace for lesser skilled players to make more money than the incredibly good players due to things like table selection, discipline, bankroll management, tilt control, etc.. etc.. the list goes on. And it was because of this that I still succeeded this past year at the tables. But I still had/have a lot of room to improve in many areas of my game.

Again, I've got some great reading material to refer. Actually, "great" doesn't nearly do it justice. I think I'm better calling it quite possibly the best thread to ever be posted on twoplustwo.com. The thread is Jman28's (Phil Galfond) "well", where he answers anyone's questions. Phil is an amazing poker player winning at the nosebleed stakes for a year now. I met him in Vegas this summer, and he's also a great guy which you'll discover in the thread where he goes into great detail about all kinds of poker issues, from strategy to philosophy. It really is a fantastic read and if you are a real poker enthusiast, I recommend spending the time to try to plug through the whole thing as its very worth it. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=88525

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Some great reading material...

Date: Fri, Dec 14, 2007 Professional Internet

I was just doing my usual blog reading and came across CptZeebo's blog. I'd read it before, as he's a looooong-time online player and has always had a blog of some sort. He's a very interesting individual and has done alot for the evolution of online poker, being one of the original "great" players. I think he makes some reallly good points about the pitfalls of being "too much" into poker and achieving a balanced life in this blurb:

"I'm also realizing that tilt-free poker comes from being fulfilled in all areas and only using positive self talk as motivation. Negative self-talk: why am I so stupid, I got knocked out of the FTOPS event #10 in 44th place b/c I shoved with Q6o preflop after a raise, is the kind of talk that just affirms you are stupid. It's completely detrimental to your overall happiness to telling yourself you're stupid. You should treat yourself like you would treat a best friend. Any errors you make on the poker table are OKAY and great. Identify them and be happy that you found a place to grow as a poker player. Review them and identify them for what they are. Review them like you'd review a peer. No reason to be harder on yourself than anyone else. Some of these ideas are probably painfully obvious for happy poker players, but I'd be willing to wager there's a lot of poker players that try to get too much of their identity as a great poker player. I'm a lot more than just a poker player, and I need to work on most of other parts of my identity even more. I don't have meaningful relationships with most of my family. I'm starting to think many people don't have close relationships with their family, and they supplement that missing part of their psyche with many false happinesses.

I'm starting to think identity is one of the biggest problems in the world today. People have a hard time identifying who they truly are. Identity is stopping as individual identity and has become the sum of 1000 pieces of consumerism. Look at how people generally identify themselves. We're a facebook society, and we're identified as the sum of our pop culture interests, with a slight amount of collective beliefs (politics and religion). The problem is each group has been identified and everyone desperately tries to fit into the group. The funny thing is other people tell each group what to think."

That's all for now. Off to an exam...

Read Full Poker Blog Post

And... the bitch of hearts...&#%$!!!!!

Date: Thu, Dec 13, 2007 Professional Internet

First of all, sorry for the lack of updates. I've been really busy lately with exam season, as might be expected for someone who doesn't attend a whole lot of class. I have however, found some time to play some cards in between studying and studying some more. I decided to play all the big tournaments on Sunday as well as some qualifiers for the Aussie Millions and Pokerstars Caribbean Adventure (PCA) in January, as I figure thats not a bad time for me to get away from school for a week. Well every tournament was a complete disaster, except for the $1000 buyin European Championship of Online Poker on the iPoker network. We started at 3pm est with 992 players. Fast-forward ten hours to 1am est, and I'm the chipleader with 20 players left, and both my housemates watching behind my shoulders as well as a few online friends railbirding me. I proceeded to be card dead until the final table where I sat 4th in chips at T550,000. Then, with 9 players left... this happens:

I'm dealt KQss in late position. Another big stack who has me covered and was an active player, raises from mid-position to T45,000 from T7500/T15,000 blinds. I call.

Flop: Kh 4h 4s (pot = T112,500)
He bets T80,000, I call.

Turn: Th (pot = T272,500)
He bets T200,000, I instantly shove all-in for my remaining T425,000. He thinks for a few seconds before calling with JhJs. I'm a 75% favorite to double up and become the new chipleader... until the Queen of hearts falls on the river, and I'm out in 9th place. Although $14,000 was a nice score, its nothing compared to the $220,000 I was really close to locking up. But hey, such is life, and such is definitely, poker.

As for cash games, I dropped down to the $400nl level and withdrew some of my online bankroll with intentions of "letting my results dictate what stakes I play." Today's games are obviously much tougher than the games a year ago. The problem is that its very difficult to gauge where one's place should be as far as stakes go with such recent memories of "crushing" higher stakes. So instead of guessing, or finding out the hard way, I decided to start at $400nl and see what happens. Over my first 10k hands I've run really well. Combine that with weaker opponents than I'm used to and its felt like I've been printing money, which is a nice change from spinning my wheels. I'm going to stay at the $400nl and $600nl level for another while before moving up to $1000nl, a level where I will stay at until I really think I'm crushing. I've realized that I don't have the type of personality to play the ultra high stakes games, regardless of whether I ever achieve the ability to be profitable in them. I'm the type of person that needs to be really good at what they do, not just a "marginal" winner. And at the highest stakes, almost nobody (and quite possibly, nobody) is anything more than a marginal winner. So for now, I'll stick to being a winner at $400nl/$600nl and see where my bankroll takes me.

As for strategy discussion, here's a high-stakes NL hand played by CTS earlier this month that has some really interesting thought processes involved. Cole is a friend of mine, and possibly the best short-handed NLH player in the world. Thats obviously a huge statement to make... but I've witnessed most of the best play, and Cole is pretty unreal.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1765626 - So Cole is playing heads-up $10,000nl as "hallohallo2" vs. an opponent he credits as being "good". Note that they are 250bb deep. Cole 3bets 54ss, a somewhat standard play with stacks this deep in an aggressive heads up match. Cronvelt calls, and Cole hits a glory flop, nailing trip 4s. He makes his standard continuation bet of almost pot, and Cron calls. On the turn, which brings the flush draw, Cole bets smaller, roughly 2/3 pot. Cron calls once again. The river brings the J, making a larger boat for Cron if he holds a J over Cole's 4's full. Cole now bets about half pot, and Cron min-raises. At this point, the min raise is to $11,000+, more than a full buyin. So its not exactly a snap-call with any good hand... especially when it very much looks to be representing the hand that beats Cole, jacks full. The key here is not what Cole has or what Cron might have, but what Cron thinks Cole has. Cron has to think that Cole doesn't have a 4 often because he 3bet preflop (pretty much only 54s is what *might* be in his range..) Secondly, Cole bet the turn. If Cole had a J, he probably slows down on the turn when he hits, as the flush draw also hits and he could/should very well be scared of a 4. Lastly, Cole's weak river bet looks alot like a blocking bet where he's folding to a raise. These things all lead us to believe that Cron will frequently bluff-raise this river, more than enough for us to call with the under-full. I think this was an interesting hand, and what makes Cole such a sick player is not that he called the raise. What makes him a sick player is that he managed to get an extra $11,252 out of his opponent by taking this line, instead of betting bigger (and him folding), or checking (and him *possibly* bluffing off something like $8000). These stakes are all about getting into your opponents head, and thinking his thoughts before he even thinks them. So yeah... in summary... poker's all luck! 100%!

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Now officially taking students...

Date: Mon, Nov 19, 2007 Professional Internet

"If what you did yesterday seems big, you haven't done anything today." -Lou Holtz, multiple NCAA Coach of the Year honors

After an overwelming amount of requests, I've decided to start coaching poker. I will coach in the standard fashions of either sweating the student, or letting the student sweat me. Currently I'm using TeamViewer3 (something the student will need to download, but its quick and free) and Skype to communicate and view each other's desktops. I'm going to aim for 10 hours a week but if I have the time and the demand is greater, I'll stretch that. I'm looking forward to the idea because I feel that constantly analyzing hands will only help my game as well. My starting rate is $300/hr, but if supply and demand dictate it, price is subject to change.

If interested, feel free to contact me at sean_lefort@hotmail.com. Give me your brief poker background along with what you want to work on, and some good time slots and we'll get started as soon as possible.

Read Full Poker Blog Post

Blackjack success

Pick up some tips for playing online blackjack and video slots at this online casino that has it all.