|
. |
|
|
ales of Team Carborundum
|
|
|
|
Were halfway through
the 2004 World Series of Poker, and its time for a state of the game
address. This World Series has gone strange, and the results mean something. I
play very little poker these days, I wasnt a very good player at the best
of times, and now many technicalities of the game are beyond my reach. But
Im an observer, and over the past few years and especially the past few
weeks, Im seeing things that dont fit the mold. I think poker has
changed, and there are many who are unwilling to accept it. Consider this.
|
|
7th May 2004 |
|
Jesse May |
|
|
|
Jesse May,
multiple author in the gambling field and sometimes dubded the "voice of
poker", writes a regular column. |
|
Most people know Jesse as "the voice of poker"
from his colourful commentary in CH4's late Night Poker. Jesse is also the
author of the widely respected novel, Shut Up And Deal, which looks deep into
the poker playing life. Its the hard faced 21st Century
Cincinnati Kid.
Jesse
is also the creator of The Gambler's Guide to
the World, an insiders look at the action and games around the
world. |
|
|
|
|
|
The game of poker today
is large field tournament poker. This game is less than three years old, and it
bears little or no relation to the poker that has come before. It has long been
said that cash game play and tournament play are two different animals, but the
extremes have become so pronounced as to make each of them closer to Parcheesi
than each other.
There is a curious concept regarding scientific theory
postulated in Robert Pirsigs book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance. You can read it for yourself, and as he spends a good one hundred
pages in its discussion, my two sentence summation should be taken with a grain
of salt. The matter is whether or not scientific discoveries and advancements
get us closer to ultimate scientific truth. When Einstein discovered
relativity, did it mean that Newton was wrong? Pirsigs answer is that
they were both right during their time. Scientific truth is not absolute, he
claims, it changes.
Im thinking about this concept in relation to
poker, because we have reached a watershed in the evolution of the theory of
the game. We have reached a point where many of the truths that have long been
held about how to win at this game have ceased to exist. The poker theorists
and players of the last twenty years were not necessarily wrong, but the truth
has changed, and now there are a good many people who all of the sudden
dont know what the hell is going on. They seek to explain the present
away with talk of luck and coincidence and closed up minds, but I cant do
it. I dont know exactly what the new truth is, but there are too many
anomalies in poker today that need new answers. I say take the old books, and
burn them. Just consider. Dont try to explain, just
consider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Negreanu makes
twenty-seven rebuys in a No Limit Holdem event and comes third. When
making his twenty-fifth rebuy, he had no chips. According to everything that I
know about poker, this is a man on blown out tilt. To call this smart
tournament poker makes a mockery of previous poker theory. But its not
the first time hes done it. And there are others, guys like Layne Flack,
who play this way and succeed. And if you watched Negreanu that day, he
wasnt behaving as a man out of control. He believes this is a profitable
method for winning rebuy tournaments. Hes done it before, he
keeps records, and when I asked him about the tournament, his only response
was, I was very happy about the way I played. Is he smart, or an
idiot? There was an interesting last longer bet offered by a
sportsbook for the WPT championship, Mel Judah vs. Huck Seed. There was general
agreement in the poker world on two things. While Huck Seed was a big favorite
over Mel Judah in terms of odds to win the tournament, Mel was a big a favorite
in terms of a last longer bet. Many have said that poker is similar to golf,
but in golf you would never have a situation where a player is a favorite in a
match-up but shorter in terms of win odds. And the important question regarding
Mel and Huck is, who is the favorite to make more money in the long run, over
the course of a thousand tournaments?
David Sklansky has long been
considered a leader in a field entitled game theory, theories based mostly on
numbers and his cards, yet his tournament results over the past few years
indicate that he has absolutely no chance whatsoever to win a large field
event. Chris Ferguson, on the other hand, is also an expert in game theory, but
of a far different sort. When Ferguson won a No Limit event in California a few
months ago, he made a comment in a post match interview that was simply,
I made a decision that I needed to loosen up at the final table.
Why?
There is not a poker book in the world that would tell you to play
more hands than you fold at a full table. Yet if you watch a certain group of
successful players, Im thinking Phil Ivey and Gus Hansen and Huck Seed
and Layne Flack for example, not only do they play nearly every hand, but they
often bring it in with a call, no less. Which part of current poker theory
explains this? And how can it be further explained that theres an entire
other group of successful players, like Dan Harrington and Hasan Habib and
Howard Lederer and TJ Cloutier, who play tighter but more aggressive? Will one
strategy eventually prove more successful?
Everyone says that televised
poker is making the game easier to learn, but as long as televised tournaments
are aired on an edited basis, viewers are getting only one half of a
champions story. You see the hands that they play, but rarely the hands
that they fold. What kind of bizarre folds are going on behind the scenes? I
bring this up after being told by a very successful player that he folded
pocket kings on Day 1 of last years WSOP while absolutely positive that the
player who had raised all-in in front of him had ace-king. And he was
absolutely convinced that this was the correct play. And there are some who
would agree, and many who would call him crazy.
Finally, If you
dont believe me then consider Howard Lederer. Howard is smart if
he opens his mouth, just shut up and listen. Lederer wrote a spellbinding
account of his experiences at the 2003 WSOP main event. Read again his comments
concerning Men the Masters play on Day 4. Men made a fold, he said, that
went against math, physics, and the laws of gravity. Later on, Howard writes,
hes really not sure. There may be a method to Mens madness, there
may be something there. Those plays appear in no book, but Men has trained
loads of players and between David Pham, Minh Nguyen, Young Phan, and Men
Nguyen himself, you are talking results.
Three bracelets at the 2004
WSOP have been won by players twenty-three years of age. Young guns, they are
called, the new breed. But these young guns, in some sense, may be the most
experienced players out there. What experienced old timer has played 8000 large
field tournaments on the Internet? The Internet is ruled by 20-year old
Scandinavians, 22-year old freaks, and 23-year old players who have been locked
up playing ten tournaments daily for the last five years and have none of
pokers past to cloud their minds. Who really is better? Who really knows
about truth?
If youve been playing poker successfully for the last
fifteen years, the hardest thing to do is to accept you know nothing. Many
successful cash game players enter tournaments with the idea that they should
sit down and just play cards. All evidence points to the fact that nothing
could be farther from the truth. In cash game poker, your first consideration
is the cards that you hold. In large field tournament poker today, the cards
that you hold should be your last consideration. How many times do you hear
someone coming out of a tournament with a bad beat story, and the story always
begins with the cards he was dealt? Too many times. In todays game, a
tournament story should always begin with, I had X chips, the blinds were
Y, and there were Z players left. Or something like that.
I was
having a conversation with two poker players the other night, and it got me
thinking. They had both played a large number of WSOP events this year without
success. One of them had missed the frame seven times running, but had made the
dinner break at every event. Youre fine, I said,
dont worry. The other player had been knocked out early every
day. To him I was thinking, Youve got problems. Now the
second player is no mug, to be sure. Hes a very experienced poker player,
one of the top cash game players in the game today, but what he thinks he knows
about poker may very well be holding him back. He needs to throw everything out
of the window, and start from scratch.
Whats going on today has no
relation to the past. There may be books explaining the game of poker, but
there is nothing out there which deals with what is happening now. The very
basic treatises which divide a tournament into early middle and late stages
dont do justice to what poker tournaments are now, large field affairs
which take some luck and whole different skill sets. Tournament No Limit
Holdem is still the most skilled form of poker. Loosen your
brain.
Im not prepared to call all of the young guns lucky.
Im not prepared to dismiss Thunder Kelly, Scott Fischman, Martin
Deknijff, and all of Sweden as inexperienced. Im watching them and trying
to figure out what theyre doing. Because right now, it may just be
smart.
|
|
Editor's note In slight contradiction,
the editor can say that Golf has become a game of equal contrasts in that there
are now some match bets of, more likely to win/less likely to stay, in
existance. This is due to the youth and the money. When the 23 year olds have
money in the bank they are only interested in winning and so go all out for the
first 2 rounds. If they can't make it to the top 10 by Saturday, they can't be
bothered to play the weekend. E.g. Chad Campbell, John Daly, Ian Poulter,
Justin Rose, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|