Online Poker

This is ridiculous. I have become poker obsessed.

I have a few days off and went to try and play on-line. Pokerstars.com have some free tournaments, with 1,000 entrants. Before I could figure out how to enter, it was full!

I'm willing to put some cash into this, but my credit card company will not approve payments for Internet gambling (they being smarter than I). There's a method where you tie your checking account... need I go further? That's not happening.

What I will do is bring some money to Stop & Shop and wire it to Costa Rica via Western Union.

Even as I say this, I realize this is probably a dumb thing to do. However, I will limit my loss to less than what I won this past weekend and see what happens.

It's nearly 2:00 AM as I write this. I have played on and off since 9'ish.

My first mistake was entering a $30+3 Pot Limit Hold'em tournament. I had never played pot limit before and it immediately adds something new to the game. If you show weakness, other players in better position will take advantage and raise like crazy.

Now a pretty good hand becomes suspect. It might have been worth a bet... but your whole stack? As it is, I finished in the middle of the pack. I went "all in" with a two reasonably good picture cards only to lose.

Next it was a one table No Limit Hold'em tournament for $10+1. I don't know what I was thinking, because I had just done so poorly with pot limit. I came in third, again going all in with a reasonably good hand only to lose to someone with a reasonably better hand.

Third place pays $18, so that's $7 net, minus the $33, leaving me down $26.

Helaine played a $10+1 Hold'em tournament. Nada. Now down $37.

I decided, before bed, to try some low stakes non-tournament poker. After all, this is what I play in casinos. The advantage of tournaments is you limit your risk. But, I decided to play $1/$2, so how wrong could I go? How much can you possibly lose playing $1/$2?

It should be noted that I'm playing at pokerstars.com. Earlier, I had played at partypoker.com. There's really not much difference. Competition makes them all match each other. I met some folks from pokerstars at The Orleans in Las Vegas at a tournament and they seemed nice.

Maybe the biggest difference here (and I haven't been to Partypoker in a while) is the very, very low stakes games you can find. You can literally play $.01/$.02 pot Limit Hold'em, and $.02/$.04 with fixed limits.

Of course, there are also free games, but the play is so different when there's no real money on the line that it's just no fun.

I played around a half hour at $1/$2 and got very hot, very quickly. By the time I was done, I had gone from $37 in the hole, to $12 up. Moving $49 to the positive at these stakes is pretty unusual... so luck and the other player's lack of skill certainly had to enter into it.

I couldn't help it. One more time. A very small, one table tournament. Stakes were $5+1. I came in third, losing with three of a kind to a guy who caught a straight on the river (shit happens).

PokerStars Tournament #237041, No Limit Hold'em
Buy-In: $5.00/$0.50
9 players
Total Prize Pool: $45.00
Tournament started - 2003/08/13 - 02:31:08 (EST)

Dear ctwxman,
You finished the tournament in 3rd place.
A $9.00 award has been credited to your Real Money account.

Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.

$9, or $3.50 more net.

Found a Hold'em tournament for $11 this afternoon. Top payoff was well over $700.

I bombed out with AQ off suit to an A-10 who paired up.

48th of 276. Unfortunately, they only pay the first 27.

I guess I haven't been keeping good track, but as of this morning, we're down an incredible $16 since we started.

Tonight I played two tiny $5+$.50 tournaments and came in 2nd once. So, that's $3.50 on the upside. I think Helaine did the same earlier.

I find, because the action is there, that I'm playing a lot of No Limit Hold'em, which is a totally different game than what I had been playing. I'm not totally sure how much I like it, because there are major bluffs going on. So, it's possible for another player, in essence, to ask you to put up your entire stake (and any chance to place in the tournament) and that player has nothing.

If you have a larger stack, it's much easier to be bold, because you can force someone to make a life or death (so to speak) decision, yet you have much less on the line relatively speaking.

Even if I hadn't placed, this game offered good entertainment for the investment. For my $5.50, I played for 1:15.

Both Helaine and I have been playing on Pokerstars.com. Obviously, our inability to win consistently means it must be fixed. It couldn't have anything to do with skill... could it?

Mostly, we stay in low stakes tournaments. Pokerstars runs a bunch of tournaments. Maybe too many!

With all the tournaments, you often have to wait for a table to fill up. So, you'll see 3 of 9 seats filled here and 2 of 9 there or 4 of 18 somewhere else. If there were less choices, there would be more filled tables at any given time.

Tonight, Helaine made 3rd place in a single table, fixed limit Hold'em tournament. Entry fee, $5.50. Payoff for 3rd, $9.00.

We can retire!

After walking Ivy the dog, I tried my luck at a 2 table, no limit Hold'em tournament. Entry fee, $11.00

We're still down $42 since we started around a week and a half ago. Quite honestly, it's exciting, cheap entertainment. But, it would be more fun if we were currently winning.

Nearly two weeks of online poker is now behind us, with Helaine and me playing a few times a day (I originally had I but I think it should be me).

Tonight, I played 3 - $11- 2 table tournaments. Two losses, including one incredibly quick flameout, and one third place. That's $36 minus $33 for a $3 net tonight!

All right... Amarillo Slim.

All together, we're down a bit over $50.

It continues to be fascinating. However, tonight I was chatting with my friend Bob, who was watching me play from Florida, and I realized how easily you could cheat. Except for the really huge tournaments (and we've never placed in the money in any of those) you pretty much select your own table.

But, these $11 tournaments take so long for someone to take home $72... would anyone find that worthwhile?

Helaine and I continue to play, and we continue to be down $43. However, over the past three days I have done two things which have proved very successful.

First, I'm playing in very low stakes games. These are normally $5 No Limit Texas Hold'em tournaments (plus $.50 for the house) with 9 or 18 players. The low stakes tends to attract people just getting their feet wet. You can win up to $36 if you place first in an 18 player tourney

So, is it a bit of an unfair fight? Sure.

Any card player can get lucky or hot, which is what keeps poor players coming back. But, you can't depend on luck. Over time, the cards do even out.

Second, I've become very, very aggressive. I hardly play any hands early on, waiting for the top few draws to see the flop. As soon as I know I have something very good, I go all in. Most players fold immediately.

Will I bet KK and end up facing someone with AA... or someone who makes a ridiculous runner? Yes. But, by and large, this strategy (which cuts down on pot size by eliminating the last few bets) produces many more winning hands. More importantly, players fishing for a hand get scared off.

As I said, it's been very good, as I've won money in 4 of the last 6 tournaments I've been in.

I do know my limitations. This strategy might not work at all in $10 tournaments. Certainly, in higher stakes games there will be a more educated class of player, and I might be seen for the 'poker bully' I'm being.

It's also possible I'm on a hot streak and don't see it. In that case, this strategy will fail rapidly.

It has now been 1½ months since Helaine and I started playing poker online. We continue to enjoy it and be frustrated by it.

Maybe we have the wrong expectation of good play. After all, to quote Kenny Rogers, "every hand's a loser, every hand's a winner." Still, it kills you when someone goes in with a 2-7 off suit (statistically the worst hand you can be dealt) and wins on the river (fifth and final turned card).

As of last night, we were down nearly $150 and then we got warm.

I came in 167th in an 1,100 player $3 tournament (only the top 99 won money), felt lucky, and switched to a $11 - 9 player tournament. I finished first and won $44 (actually net $34). Then, this morning, Helaine played in a $5.50 - 9 person tournament and finished first for $22.50 (net $17).

So, we're back under $100 down and still having good, cheap fun. Considering a $5.50 single table tournament can take 1.5 hours or more, it's a reasonable way to kill time.

I think I said this in one of my blog entries that was lost when the website crashed: We have probably won versus the other players. Our losses are entirely to the house for their share (rake) in hosting the games. It's good to be the house.

Let me begin by saying, little of this is my doing. Helaine has come into her own playing single table, $5.00 (plus 50¢ for the house) no-limit Hold'em tournaments.

We have been playing on-line at pokerstars.com¹ since mid-August. At one time, we were down nearly $150. Right now we're down $38. More importantly, Helaine has begun to consistently win.

I think her skill is in the shorthanded game, when the table has been thinned to just a few players. Playing conservatively, it is very unusual for her to be the leader early in the game. It is also very unusual for her to be tapped out early.

On the other hand, my problem remains a lack of discipline. Often, I go in on hands Helaine wouldn't touch. I'm trying to mend my ways, but it's oh so hard.

And, then there's the machismo thing. After betting up a hand that is bested on the flop, I sometimes hold on or even press my bet hoping to drive others away. It's a strategy that doesn't work, and I'm weaning myself.

As with one's own personality, it is easier to dissect yourself in the abstract than actually take concrete action.

Poker is a microcosm of life... except nowhere near as well dressed or well groomed.

¹I was contacted by pokerstars.com to be an 'affiliate.' Because this website is totally personal and non-commercial in naure, I passed.

As of this morning, with Helaine placing in the money in 3 consecutive 9 player tournaments (and me too busy to lose it back), we are up $1 at online poker since August 16th!

This is no small feat, especially since we were down nearly $150 at one point.

There's no doubt I've gotten better, but Helaine is the story. At this level, and probably a bit beyond beyond, Helaine is clearly a superior no limit Hold'em player.

Tonight, after work, I decided to play a little poker. With Helaine's help we've crawled back to even. Tonight, I added to that.

A quick recap. On August 12, I deposited $250 at pokerstars.com. We'd play until the money ran out. After a few weeks we were down around $150. It wasn't going to last all that long.

My game tonight was a 2 table, 18 player tournament. Entry fee $5.50 ($5 into the pot, 50¢ for pokerstars). Someone was going home with $36. Three others would win lesser amounts.

I played nearly 30 hands before going in the first time. After a few small wins, I drew one player all in to get fairly flush with chips, and then spent the rest of the game being cautious and protective. My finish was second, good for $27.

The winner was nearly out long before the final four. His miraculous save came by winning a lucky hand, filling in a straight with a 5 after he had gone 'all in.'

As he and I played head-to-head for the top spot, a player who had been in the game started typing on the chat screen. He was ranking my opponent because he had won lucky. Truthfully, he was cruel and abusive.

But why? Because he was beaten in a $5.50 game? Where is the perspective in this man's life?

Can the $5.50 really matter that much? And, even if you do lose to someone you consider an inferior player, over the long run, you'll get your money back.

I want lucky players at the table, because their early luck only encourages them to chase for winnings, and hopefully, I'll end up with some of their cash. When I play in these little tournaments, I assume that there are 3 or 4 players who have no idea what they're doing... maybe they've seen poker on ESPN... and are getting educated.

But why was this busted player going after the chip leader?

In a brick and mortar casino, a manager would already be talking to him, letting him know that one more outburst would get him tossed (and they really will do that). Maybe it's the perceived anonymity of the Internet... or he's just an ass.

Actually, that's more likely.

Helaine was playing poker, on the laptop, dragging it around the house. There were five players still in the game when -pfffft- gone. Turning on the TV produced nothing but snow (I predicted that snow, by the way).

On a day with wind gusts beyond 50 mph we had lost cable service, taking out TV and the Internet... and in the middle of a $5.00 tournament.

A few minutes later, at work, I got an email from pokerstars.com. Somehow, without playing a hand, two players had folded before her and Helaine had won $9.00!

Is this a wonderful country, or what?

By the way - we're back to being down around $30.

It's easy to love poker when you've just won a big game... and I just have. OK, not big in the sense that there was a lot of money involved, but big in that I did well - sometimes by luck, sometimes by skill.

This was a pokerstars.com 2-table $5.50 tournament. That makes 18 players with the top-4 getting paid. It's $9/$18/$27/$36 for first through fourth respectively (and the house make $9 gross).

We started at 12:57 AM and finished at 2:38 AM. Helaine has pointed out that, win, lose or draw, that's a lot of entertainment for $5.50.

I was hot (aka lucky) early on, going all in and quickly turning my $1500 tournament stake into $3000+. Then, I went all in and took three players out, all at once.

We went to the final table of 9 with me as the chip leader.

From there it was up and down slightly until the table was whittled to five. Of course, things become critical here because someone's about to get shut out. But, I held my ground, playing very conservatively and went to the final three.

We went to two players when I won against a hand that should have never been played:

The final hand saw me with Jacks. Jacks never win - never. But, I play them anyway. I have actually heard stories, probably apocryphal, about a player who folded Jacks; never played them. They will break your heart.

When the flop came Ace Ace Jack, I guessed the odds were too long for my opponent to have the third Ace.

I cashed out $27, minus my $5.50 for a $21.50 net. I shouldn't have played that last hand so aggressively. But, with two players, you can afford to be a little more suspect of the very unlikely happening.

Were do we stand?

We started in early August with $250. It had gone down to near $100, then slowly back up until we were at $260 (+$10!). And, then, as if some sort of switch had been thrown, we plunged until we had about $120 left.

In the last week, mostly by Helaine's skill, we've come roaring back. With my win tonight, we're currently down $33.40 since early August.†

I am a much better poker player than I ever was before. Granted, these are low stakes games where the competition is less than stellar, and we are down. Still, being this close after hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of games is an accomplishment. Remember, Pokerstars takes 50¢ every time we sit and play.

I have learned to be less macho (the last hand not withstanding). There is no dishonor in throwing in a hand that won't win. Sure, every so often, you throw in a winning hand, but I am convinced this game is won by not losing!

I try and only play quality hands and to be realistic about my chances.

There are analogies to be drawn from digital photography. I've become a better photographer because I take so many pictures and see them almost immediately. I'm a better poker player because I play so many games.

I think Helaine is an even better player than I am - much better.

What amazes me is after reading Usenet posts from time-to-time, it seems that everyone says they're winning. Hello? This can't be. There's a whole lot of BS'ing going on.

† The reason for the 40¢ is that, from time-to-time, I sit in on "live" non-tournament games, where the betting can be in odd amounts.

I tried something a little different tonight. I played two games of poker at once. Helaine told me she had heard about others doing it... usually managing to slow down either or both of those games in the process.

With that in mind, as a goal to avoid, I entered a $5.50 one table tournament and the $1 affair that begins at 11:30 PM.

It is a little unnerving to play two at a time, but doable. At the beginning of a game, when there are 9 at your table, things are slow. Often you can set your action before the bet gets to you. Let's face it, most of the time you'll be folding and you'll know that as soon as you're dealt your first two cards.

The $5.50 game started about 20 minutes before the $1 tournament. So by the time the tournament began, the $5.50 table had lost a few players and was moving at a much swifter pace.

Pokerstars software brings a table's window to the top of your stack if action is called for. That comes in handy. There were only a few times when both tables needed me at once. I don't remember playing a live hand on both tables at the same time. If I did, it wasn't much of an overlap.

I did make the decision that the $5.50 table would take precedence if things got hairy, and I found myself watching that table more than the larger tournament. It was a strange game once we got to six. We were tightly bunched. In fact, we were tight enough to go from worst to first on a single win. That happened to me and probably others as well.

By four, one player was totally dominating the chips. He had over $10,000 with the other three splitting the remaining $3,500. The leader broke the fourth player, so we went to three with two of us nearly tapped out. By that time the antes were $400/$200.

Number three went in a few hands. By that time I didn't even have $400 for the big blind. I won two in a row going all in before the flop. Finally, on the third hand, I went down too.

So, $5.50 invested and $13.50 returned for an $8.00 net. And, I was still live on the $1 tournament... but only barely.

I never really got excited in that game, probably because I never had cards. In a tournament like that, you need to be skillful and lucky. I did make one tactical error early, going in on a hand I should have folded. From there on in it was downhill.

I ended up finishing 444th out of 1068. No one above 99th was getting paid. Even then, if you outgunned 967 others to get paid it would only be $1.60, or 60¢ net!

The 'real' money goes to the top-5, with $267.01 to the grand prize winner.

I haven't mentioned where we stand recently. We had gone up $10 over our original stake and then, the wheels fell off the wagon. No matter what we got, no matter what we played, we lost. Earlier this week we had gone down nearly $150 from our original buy-in. As of tonight, we are down $102.40.

Considering we've been doing this since mid-August and the house takes 10% of each one or two table tournament entry we make, I think we've had some pretty cheap fun.

I'll say this much... I am very much looking forward to our yearly trip to Las Vegas. I have more table time in the last three months than in the rest of my poker playing days. I was always able to hold my own at the low stakes tables in Vegas. I never won over the long run, but I never got hurt. It might be different now. I am much more disciplined and much better able to read the table, though still not the other players.

This has been a pretty good weekend for me at the tables. I placed well in a bunch of $11 one table tournaments. We are down $27.40 since we started in mid-August. We have been up as much as $10 and then down nearly $150.

Though I was hot this weekend, Helaine is the better, more consistent player.

I watched a little poker on ESPN this afternoon after the Eagles game. They were poker pros... guys at the final table of a big tournament... and some were playing foolishly.

The more I play, the more I realize discipline is paramount. As conservative as I've become, I'm still a long way from where I want to be. You collect in tournaments by losing less, not winning more.

About a week ago, in quick succession, I won 2 - $11 Sit and Go poker tournaments at pokerstars.com. I was feeling good. What a sap! Too much confidence is a bad thing.

I haven't played all that much, but I haven't won at all this week! Not once. As of this morning, our stake is below $100 - down $150 from where we started in August. Helaine has played too, but the bleeding is coming from me.

Any time you play a game of skill and luck, luck will win out from time-to-time. You go in with two high cards, catch two pair on the flop and still lose to some schmo who stayed and played 10-2 off suit and hit a flush on the river with the 2!

It happens. Even though I was beaten by a 10-2 off suit, I still want everyone with a 10-2 to play as much as they want. Over time it's a loser.

Not all of my losses can be contributed to luck. I sense I have started to 'slow play' good hands a little too much - hoping to get more in the pot. The downside to slow play is often you give your opponent enough time to make a hand and beat you.

And I have let myself go into hands I shouldn't have. My brain knows when in doubt, fold. My fingers don't always follow. The value of discipline in poker is underrated.

These little, single table, tournaments aren't won by winning as much as they're won by not losing.

The online casino I play poker at is loaded with tournaments. Usually I play one table affairs where the last three standing cash out. But, that's not the only way they're dealt.

Every day, there are open tournaments. Pluck down the entry fee and you're in! Some are free - with a cash prize. Others are satellites, qualifying you to play in more expensive tournaments without paying any more money. When it comes to these massive tournaments, I never look above the $1 or $3 level. It's just a way to kill time.

Tonight, I entered a $1 tournament along with 1167 others. Someone was going to go home with over $250 on a $1 bet. Most would get nothing.

The game was Hold'em, no limit. Each player gets $1,500 in chips and plays from there.

I set my computer up with the tournament table over the 'lobby'. I positioned the screen in such a way that I could watch the countdown as players started getting knocked off.

For the first few minutes it was slow. The first out in these tournaments is usually on the first hand... and usually someone who will later say, "Bad cards don't kill you. It's good cards that will do you in." My guess is, a lot of players retiring early are doing so with a pair of aces that didn't hold.

I watched the numbers ratchet through 1,000 and then 900 and 800. I was playing well but always below the middle of the pack moneywise.

The ante rose every fifteen minutes and there'd be a spurt of players tapped out. "Conservative," I kept saying to myself. Not losing is more important than winning.

By the time we got down to 250 players, I was looking at what the tournament paid. Yes, the winner gets paid well, but it's like falling off a cliff after that. By the time you're at number 10, you're down to $10.52.

I didn't care. I wanted to make money. How much wasn't important.

The numbers continued down. 200, 150, 130, 120. I looked at my stack. I had enough to break 99, where the payouts started, if I just sat and folded. I wasn't getting anything to play anyway.

110, 109, 108, 107... the numbers were moving slower. No one wanted to be the last out before getting something. 106, 105, 104, 103. It struck me that I'd have to do something stupid at this point to get blown out.

102, 101, 100, 99, EUREKA!

A text message flashed on the table. At this point, all the tables would be synchronized. We'd play hand for hand. God forbid someone would play s-l-o-w-l-y and make an extra few cents.

There were prize breaks at 81 and 61. I blew by both and had nearly $30,000 in chips. And then, it happened.

I went in with a good hand and met up with a spectacular one. I lost, all-in, to a pair of Aces.

After playing 3:15, I finished 50th!

I had outlasted 1118 others and had won... this is going to sound so stupid... I won the grand total of.... hold on, here's the email:

I have no clue what 53.02 tournament points gets me. You can be sure, however, it's not as good as that $1.92 net profit! Ah, the sweet smell of filthy lucre.

On December 13th I wrote about how bad our poker luck had gotten. From nearly even on December 1st we were down $150 only two weeks later.

It didn't end there. Over the next week we continued sliding until we were $210+ down since our original buy-in.

At this point, let me put this into perspective. We deposited $250 at pokerstars.com in the middle of August. Between the two of us, we've been playing multiple times every day. Even if we would have tapped out, it still would have been fair value in entertainment for our money.

Poker is a fun, strategic game with both skill and luck on every hand, and it's a challenge to play right.

About a week ago, all of a sudden, out of the blue, our luck changed again.

I think I started winning consistently before Helaine, but it doesn't make much difference, because we both started winning. In the little $5.50 and $11 tournaments we play in, it's difficult to move in either direction at any more than a snail's pace - but we did.

As I type this, having just held on for dear life and placed third in an $11 tournament ($18 - $11 = $7 net profit), we are now down $59.98 over our 4½ months of online play¹.

Somehow, we managed to erase $150 in losses.

So, what are we doing differently? Probably nothing. Maybe some nuances... tough to say. Both of our games are mature, in that we've played hundreds of times and have established our strategies.

If there is one thing I can put my finger on, I now play tighter when I'm down late in the game, which has paid off. Tonight was a perfect example. With 4 players remaining, I had $280 of the $13,500 (these are tournament chips - not real face value) on the table. I held tight and didn't bet mediocre cards just because I was running out of cash. When someone else did, he busted, letting me finish in 3rd place.

I think both Helaine and I would benefit from a better understanding of what to play when the table gets down to 3-5 players. With fewer competitors less becomes more, I suppose.

Meanwhile, we're going to head to Foxwoods this weekend where I will try my luck face-to-face. Helaine prefers online play and will find other ways to fill her time.

¹ - The pennies are from the few times I played in low stakes "live" games.

I played in a $3 limit Hold'em tournament tonight. Me, and 828 of my closest friends this time. By the time it was all over, I came in 71st, turning my $3 into $4.97... and only taking around 3 hours to do so!

Actually, I was doing really well until I was dealt a pair of Kings. I bet them all the way, losing a $19,000+ pot when the player I was up against paired his Ace.

Tonight, someone will turn $3 into $621.76. Not me.

I haven't written about my online poker exploits in a while. I'm not sure why, but it might have to do with how poorly Helaine and I started to do. When I left for Florida, nearly two weeks ago, we were down to $40 from our original stake of $250. We started playing at pokerstars.com about five months ago.

After losing a few games to ridiculous hands (people staying in... calling bets... hoping a 1:100 shot comes through... and it does) Helaine decided she had had enough and 'retired'. I played on.

I took another look at my play and decided to make some small, but hopefully significant changes to my style. I am not dogmatic in my play. There are some variations (though not many) from game to game. But, mostly, I am consistent in when I bet and fold.

My strategy now favors not losing.

Hold on. It's not meant as a joke and that's a sentence with real meaning.

It is possible to set out and bet your cards to win. I found, and it's based more on anecdotal evidence than well designed research, most of my losses came when I was in trying to squeeze out another opponent and he got lucky (or my assessment of my cards was in error). If you go 'all in' five times, and win four (an excellent percentage) you're still knocked out!

Now, I will be less aggressive in those situations. That means I'll win a little less per hand, but I'll avoid some of the significant downside associated with allowing one wrong move to break me.

It's only been two weeks, but so far so good. From $40 in the bank, I'm now approaching $100.

My game of choice is still the $5.50 single table, sit and go tournaments. Last night, for the first time in a long time, I sat at a 10¢ - 25¢ no limit Hold'em table (in other words, real betting with real money, as opposed to a tournament with very fixed limits to your possible losses - or wins). I won $9.50 in under a half hour.

I was surprised to find the table very loose. As a tight player, I think that's a good thing for me, and brings lots of early money to the pot as optimists try and hit their dream hand. Sometimes they will. Most often, they don't.

Maybe I'll start playing more of that, though the concept of 'no limit' in this context is scary.

A few weeks ago, with under $40 in my bank, I figured my online poker days would soon be over. Then I made a small change to my strategy. All of a sudden, I can't lose.

Very possibly this is just luck, or a run of good cards. Call it what you want. All I know is I have $146 to play with when I assumed I'd be tapped out!

I'm still down $104 since August, but considering antes paid in hundreds upon hundreds of games, this is just fine.

Can you tell I can't get over it?

How do you go from being a kid to being an adult? Is there a magic moment? Does it happen gradually and sneak up on you - like putting on weight? For me, there was one moment that marked my transition to adulthood, and it came while playing poker.

In 1978 I was a disk jockey in Philadelphia. On paper, it was a pretty good job: morning man on WPEN radio. In reality, we were a second rate station with a poor signal and bad ratings.

In 1978 I also had some tooth problems.

A cavity had gone south and I was faced with root canal. Through a referral I ended up at Dr. Bob Seltzer's office in South Jersey. And, as it turned out, he was a listener. As he fixed me up, Bob told me of a group of guys, around my age, getting together to play poker. Would I like to join them?

Of course I did... but I didn't know how to play.

Actually, I did know how, in a very rudimentary way. I knew a pair beat a high card and that three of a kind was even better, but I had no clue there might be a strategy involved.

Unfortunately for me, lessons are given at every poker table! I was a consistent loser, week-after-week. It was never a lot of money, and it never changed my life, but I was consistent.

More importantly, as I looked around the table every Thursday, I saw a bunch of guys with similar backgrounds and mindsets and they were all adults. Ipso facto, I must be an adult too.

It changed my life. My attitude toward lots of things became different, more long term and thoughtful. Whatever I lost in that Thursday game was well worth it. As I learned about poker, I learned more about myself and who I was.

I left Philadelphia and over the next few years stopped playing. That Thursday night game, floating from house-to-house (though not at mine until I was embarrassed into it) was special, and mere poker would not scratch the same itch.

By the mid-80's, married to Helaine, we'd visit her parents and drive from Philadelphia to Atlantic City. Knowing poker, I felt it was a game I could play and limit my losses. Other casino games are much more favorable to the house (In fact, poker is the only game at the casino where you are not playing against the house. In poker the casino 'rents' you a seat by taking a percentage or 'rake' and makes its money that way). I still lost, but slowly and had a nice time playing.

With the advent of casinos in Connecticut, we started going 3-4 times a year. Again, as a defensive move, I played poker. I was getting better, playing closer to even.

The same was true in Las Vegas. We'd go on a vacation in July and I'd play poker. I never made a lot. I never lost a lot. It was a way to gamble with little downside risk.

The Las Vegas poker competition is very tough with professionals at the larger tables and locals who play every day at the smaller ones. You can't make a living at the stakes I play, but these local residents, often retirees, could kill a day and come home with something in their pocket. I was getting better, though still not as good as the better players I would sit with. To them, I was a fish.

With the advent of online poker, and after hearing about Chris Moneymaker's miraculous win in the World Series of Poker - starting at a $35 satellite tournament and parlaying that to the big score - I decided to play on the computer. I had met someone from Pokerstars in Las Vegas and that's where I went to play.

For a variety of reasons, getting money to an online casino is not simple (I have yet to try and get any back). On a Saturday in August 2003, I went to the local Stop & Shop and sent $250 to Costa Rica via Western Union. To make a deposit at Pokerstars, you had to send the money to a man (the name changed from time-to-time) in San Jose. Even in retrospect, it looks like a scam.

During this entire time, my thought was I had just thrown $250 away. I'd never see it again. Even if it did get to Costa Rica and was credited to my account, I expected to play it for a few days or a week, have some fun and be done with it.

I am still playing that money six months later!

I started stupidly, playing in games above my head. By the time I realized my error, I was already down. Helaine was playing too. We both became active in $5 'sit and go' tournaments. For $5, plus 50¢ for the house, 9 players fight it out. The winner gets $22.50 with $13.50 for second and $9 for third.

We were excellent at placing fourth.

Our fortunes fell and rose. At one point we climbed up over our original $250, only to have it fall again. By January, Helaine decided she had enough - too many bad beats - and stopped playing (though she was the superior player in lur family). It's tough to play well, only to lose to someone holding awful cards and then got very, very lucky at the last possible moment.

I was down to my last $40 when I started to crawl out of the hole. For a week I couldn't lose. My bank swelled to $150. I was still down $100, but in an August to January time frame, that wasn't terrible. Every time I played, the house was taking 10%, which adds up quickly.

By last night that $150 had shrunk back to $84.64. With Helaine and Steffie away, I was looking for a way to kill time. I sat down at a huge, low stakes tournament.

It's called a $10 tournament, but that's misleading. You buy in for $10, plus $1 for the casino, getting $1500 in tournament chips. Then, during the first hour you can re-buy another $1,500 for $10 more. At the end of the first hour you can spend another $10 and add-on $2,000 more in chips.

My decision was buy in for the $11, see what happened during the first hour, and if I was OK at that point, spend another $10. That's exactly what I did. My total investment would be $21.

The game started at 10:15 PM. There were 1267 players. By tournament's end, those 1267 had re-bought 1927 times with 825 add-ons. The prize pool was $40,280! It was possible to turn my $21 into the first place prize of $10,700.

I vowed to play conservatively. I would fold everything but the very best hands. Sometimes in Hold'em, the type of poker I play, you get forced in, as I was early on with a Jack and King of Diamonds. The flop (three common cards) came, Ace, 10 and 7 - all Diamonds! Unless a pair came in the next two common cards, my hand was a guaranteed winner. I sat back and let others bet into me.

The two other common cards came, and they were in poker parlance 'rags.' I was sitting with 'the nuts.' - a hand which was unbeatable. Only I knew that. And the other players started betting. Since I had 'slow played' they had no way of knowing what I held. Then, I bet back, pushing my electronic stack to the center of the table.

All my chips were in play. A loss would wipe me out... but I couldn't lose with the nuts.

After the hand ended, I called a friend in Florida, a professor of meteorology at a major university, on Instant Messenger to say:

That one hand was as important as any I've ever played. But, the tournament wouldn't be over for me until 3:39 AM. I would not be the big winner - I would win cash.

As I continued to play, I continued chatting with Bob. We were talking about the weather and some computer programming questions. I realized our conversation would be good documentation of what went on.

Half the original field was gone. Most of the new players, people entranced by what they've seen on TV, were gone. The field was playing tighter. As the players began to bunch moneywise, my position changed often. Often I would move up or down in the pack without having my chip count change at all.

I'm leaving these comments as they were typed. Some language has been sanitized, but the content remains as it was. Often, I was trying to get some words out while hands were in progress, hence some bad spelling, capitalization and punctuation. Bob probably didn't know what I meant when I said, "I can't stop." I meant I couldn't stop winning. I had taken a series of small hands. Some of that was probably by virtue of my large chip stack. People were intimidated. One wrong move against me could get them knocked out. One wrong move for me would only wound me.

The thought that I could win some significant money was starting to sink in. I kept looking at the payout table. First place was over $10,000. By ninth, it was down to $604. Even 99th was good for $60.

In retrospect this seems silly, but I was scared of winning it all and facing the tax liability. And, even though my investment was only $21, would winning $10,000 make me look like too much of a gambler? What was I thinking!

My body felt like it was full of coffee. I was getting a little jittery. I became obsessive looking at the payout table. Where were the breaks? What would I have to do to win some cash? I had been this deep into a tournament before, but never so high in the standings so late in the game.

Bob, who had been typing every once in a while, as he played against some friends on his Playstation, started paying more attention. His responses to me came faster.

The cards weren't coming. I had fallen back. The distance between first and the rest of the pack was opening up. The first few players had large leads, but the distance between the other players was small. Only a few hundred dollars separated players whose stacks were in the tens of thousands.

Each time we approached a milestone, players would get very tight. Since 99th to 84th place all got the same payout, no one wanted to go out at 84. To compensate, Pokerstars synchronizes the games at that point, playing hand-for-hand.

It was obvious, these were better players than those I had seen earlier. Anyone who was a bluffer, playing a macho game, was long gone.

Even at this level, it was possible to have one good hand and lose to a better hand, busting in one fell swoop. Pots were astronomical in size.

It was becoming tougher to keep a perspective on the value of bets. Was $30,000 a large bet or small when there was this much money in my stack and on the table? I am used to playing at much lower levels. I didn't want to lose because I was strategically over my head.

After every hour of play there is a 5 minute break. I didn't want the break to come. I wanted to play. I was full of adrenaline.

We had started at 10:15 Saturday night. It was now 2:40 Sunday morning and I was still in the thick of it.

Those statistics are telling. With 9 at the table, unless forced in, I'm only playing 12% of the hands. Of the 54 times I bet any money at all, and often it was the minimal forced 'blind', I won 36! That's the value of playing only quality cards, and part of why I was in so long. Of course luck entered into this as well, because it's easy to lose with good cards.

Those two Aces would prove to be the second most valuable hand I played because that win allowed me to continue.

Reading through this last little conversation snippet, it's tough to see what actually happened. I held and held and held and finally was forced to go in with an Ace and Queen, only to lose to a player with more money and a worse starting hand... which paired up.

I was out.

After 352 hands, I received this email from Pokerstars:

So, playing since August I am actually up! My $250 is now $426. And, I had one hell of an evening.

I signed off Instant Messenger and got ready for bed, but I couldn't keep away. I turned the computer back on to watch the end of the tournament. With only two players left, and the chips evenly split, they decided to 'chop' the pot. I had never seen a casino host come on the screen, but one did. He made the arrangments and within seconds, they both left with over $7,500. Though the money is in Costa Rico, I have never heard anyone complain about not getting their money... though so few are in a position to do so.

Blogger's note: As I wrote, I often abbreviated the cards. It should be obvious that 2-10 and J,Q,K,A are cards. What's not so obvious is the use of other letters. JQs means Jack and Queen of Spades. JQo means the Jack and Queen were not the same suit.

Looking back at my $250 stake in online poker, I chuckle. It was supposed to be a small buy-in for a few weeks, maybe a month, of fun playing online. Here we are 7 months later - still playing.

We've been down as low as $40 a few times but we've bounced back. The big strike was a $300+ tournament win, no doubt. That was a nerve wracking tournament and a heck of a payout for $21 invested.

Every time I think I understand poker strategy, I change and do it differently. It's possible that strategy is a fluid thing, and changing is what you have to do. Maybe I'm just placing to much credence in anecdotal evidence and being reactionary.

Recently, I've been successful, late in the single table tournaments I play most often, by playing possum - sitting back and letting others start betting when I have a powerful hand. That's also called 'slow play' and is normally frowned upon as a strategy because you often let those without good hands catch the cards they need.

Helaine just played in a $10+1 tournament and placed 2nd. With that $27 payoff, we have gone over $500 in the bank. Now all I have to do is run down to Costa Rica to pick it up!

I haven't written about our poker playing in a while, and this seems to be a good time. At this moment, we are up $.11 since August!

Not long ago, we were up to $500 in the bank, meaning up $250. Oh well. It comes and goes.

There's no doubt I'm hooked on poker, and obsessive gambling is a problem. On the other hand, is it a problem if all we've spent is time?

Part of the reason I'm only up $.11 is because I've got $6.50 tied up in two games in progress. One is a 9 player $5.50 tournament. There are four left and I'm second.

The other is a $1 tournament with 1334 entrants. There are 811 left, but I'm way back at 682.

More than once, Helaine and I have commented how amazing it is that we put money into the poker 'kitty' in August and we're still playing in April. In fact, we're back to being up around $200 (above our original $250 stake).

Recently, Pokerstars introduced an additional type of no limit Hold'em tournament.

It's $15 to play with $1 for the house. The structure of the game makes it play much faster - maybe half the time of normal tournaments. I also think it's brought in more wild players who are often gone quickly and are always very volatile.

A quick explanation of these tournaments for non-poker players. You enter by paying a set fee. All the money (minus the house's share) is put into a pot and divided by the top players. In these nine player tournaments, it's the top three who cash out. When I talk about betting in a tournament, it's 'tournament dollars' which aren't convertible to cash and only go to decide who will collect the pot of entry fees (which is real money).

Have I made it more confusing?

I like this new structure and maybe it's only because Helaine and I have been very successful in it. Yes, there is lots of luck to poker. But, over the long run skill will win.

I think the lower house percentage will work to our advantage. Now, instead of 9% going to the house, it's 6.25%, which is a huge difference.

We don't know anyone else who plays online, but we're sure these casinos wouldn't exist if everybody won. There's always money flowing to the casino. The fact that we're above water, working against that tide, astounds us. And, we think we're much better players than we were when we began.

Poker fates can change quickly. From $200 up, we have fallen below even. It's taken no more than a week.

It has been a week marked by bad beats. I've lost with Aces. I've lost with Kings (more than once). I've lost to players who had no business going in, but caught a wildly lucky card to make an improbable hand. I've had flushes lose to full houses... or better flushes.

And, I've also lost, at least once, by playing stupid. Helaine watched as I did that one.

It is important in a situation like this to keep from going into tilt... letting your emotions guide your play in too aggressive a manner. It's easy to do that in a situation like this. After all, you just lost to someone who played bad cards!

The first thing I'm going to do is play for lower stakes. There's not much difference in skill.. but there is some. I want every advantage I can find to try and rebuild my stake.

We've been playing on the same money since August. But now, our original $250 is $222.86.

Unfortunately, in poker as in life, being lucky is much more important than being skillful.

Poker is such an exceptionally intricate game. It has elements of skill and elements of chance. On any given hand, chance can turn a losing hand into a winner. Over the long haul, the effect of chance is greatly diminished.

It is fascinating to play. I am surprised that there are people who find it fascinating to watch on TV.

Last week I wrote about a streak of bad luck that had brought our stake from +$200 to -$25 (or so). It was frustrating because I was losing consistently while playing well. I lost with Aces. I lost with Kings. I lost to someone who stayed in with 7-2 off suit (statistically, the worst two cards you can get) and drew a full house!

Since that time we've come back. In fact, we're a little under +$200 again.

Poker philosophers talk about going into 'tilt.' That means you let your emotions get the better of you and play with a vengance... almost as if you had a grudge against the cards. Going into tilt is something losers often do. It is something a good player should watch for and take advantage of.

I often see players on tilt, winning big early in tournaments. I've gotten to where I can often predict their final outcome. They nearly always bust out.

I tried my best not to go into tilt while we were down, and I think I succeeded. Just to make sure, I even stepped down in stakes - going back to $5.50 tournaments.

Luck changes - or at least it disappears over the long term.

I was reading while playing last night and came across some poker philosophy which might help me be a better player. In the tournaments we play in, the top three finishers get paid. That's very different from playing in a 'live' game where each hand means profit and loss.

The article pointed out that busting other players was not an obligation or even objective of playing. Players busting would take care of themselves. My goal is to survive.

This philosophy comes in to play toward the end of tournaments, where a player might be hanging by a thread and so will go 'all in' on hands which he might not have played earlier. Instinct says, if you have a lot of cash, keep him honest by calling. It's everything to them, and much less significant to you. That's a bad move... or so said the article - and I agree.

Often, going in will stake that opponent and allow him to play on. I have done that in the past and had it bite me in the tush. I will attempt to restrain myself in the future.

In the meantime, I'll be playing against real people at Foxwoods this weekend. It is something I seldom do, but look forward to. The games will be much slower than what I'm used to online. I have no idea how the play will stack up, though I anticipate the game having more better and more worse players with fewer in the mid skill level. I will be playing against some people who are earning their living.

It will be interesting to see how I fare. Even if I run into bad luck, I think I understand cards well enough to gage my play.

Meanwhile, as I typed this I was also playing in a $16 turbo tournament. A little run of bad luck at the end held me to third, for $27 or $11 net profit.

Blogger's note: If you're interested, all my poker entries are chronologically strung together by this incredible blogging software (all the way back to sending my money to Costa Rica) and can be read by clicking here.

We spent yesterday, and a significant part of today at Foxwoods. Helaine and Steffie both wanted to see Rick Springfield perform. I wanted to play poker with real people.

Though Foxwoods is only about 1:15 away, we decided to spend the night. The hotels on-premises are beautiful and quite pricey. This isn't Vegas. Still, it was a good idea because we weren't under the restrictions a drive home would require.

Check-in was a breeze and we ended up on the 21st floor of the Grand Pequot Tower, overlooking the woods of Eastern Connecticut. The room was spacious by hotel standards and the bathroom immense, with big towels and strong water pressure (the two criteria by which I judge all hotel rooms). There is no high speed Internet access and the dial-up connection wasn't very good, and quickly disconnected.

Though Foxwoods is the largest casino in the world, it is in a part of Connecticut that had languished in obscurity for deades. If you think of Connecticut as the "Gold Coast" of Fairfield County, you are not thinking of Eastern Connecticut. If it weren't for the casinos, Fairfield County residents wouldn't know this area existed.

Near Bozrah and Occum, not far from Uncasville, Foxwoods is surrounded by the town of Ledyard (Foxwoods itself is in the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation) . Without Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun, I'm not sure what the economic state of Eastern Connecticut would be. I do know, with these two casinos, people working in service industries can have jobs with benefits... including insurance. In Eastern Connecticut, a working family can own a home.

I headed to the poker room and got on a list to play, then joined Helaine and Stefanie in the coffee shop. Again, this is a beautiful place, but not Vegas. It was a little more expensive for similar food.

After lunch, while the girls schmoozed with the cult members (Rick's fans), I went and played cards. I sat at a $5/$10 fixed limit Texas Hold'em table and bought in for $100. Unlike the tournaments I favor on the computer, I'd be playing live cash. Every bet was real money - win or lose.

Almost immediately, I faced one difference between online and brick and mortar poker - the dealer wasn't perfect and the players weren't saints. An older man at the opposite end had ripped into the dealer for a minor transgression which put her on tilt. For the next 15 minutes she was awful; once beginning a deal without shuffling!

Almost immediately I found an inner peace I had never experienced at a poker table before. Everything was crystal clear. I was totally confident. I watched as players went in and out, betting, checking, folding. I knew what they had... or was pretty sure.

My game is very tight. I only play 'premium' cards, and only play under specific circumstances. I had no trouble folding hand after hand after hand as the action went on around me. As tight as I was, the players at the table were the opposite. Of the 10 players, often 6 or 7, sometimes more, would see the 'flop.'

Compared to my online games, things went slowly. But, I wasn't bored. I had ample opportunity to take in the game and the players. This is something I had never been able to do in the past. I knew how I'd play my cards almost as soon as they were dealt, so I watched them play my opponents play theirs and started to form opinions about their style and technique.

I have been thumbing through poker books for years. The authors always talk about doing things like this, but I had never been savvy enough. At times, it was as if the other players were moving in slow motion with their cards exposed to me.

OK - Hold on a second. Let me stop patting myself on the back. I am going to tell you I won, but make no mistake about it. Just because I won tonight doesn't mean I will be a consistent winner. But, as I wrote before I went, I thought I'd end up with a pretty good idea of my skill - win or lose. It was fun to realize all the computer games I'd played had sharpened my skills.

I played through the early evening at $5/$10 and won $112. I was beat on a very big hand when my pocket Kings didn't hold to pocket Aces, or I'd haev won more. Poker players always remember their beats more than their wins.

When my cellphone rang around 10:15 I picked up my chips and cashed in. Steffie had called from the concert, asking me to bring more memory for the camera. She didn't think the 200+ pictures available would hold her when we went backstage after the show.

I got the memory and headed to the theater. I was lucky enough to see someone who knew me and was let in for the last 20-30 minutes. Helaine and Steffie were out of their seats in the first row, pressed against the stage. Steffie had my camera against her eye and was snapping away.

I moved down to see them, then said hi to Mark Davis, our chief capitol correspondent, who was there with his wife Betsy. From there I moved to the back of the theater. I have seen Rick Springfield before. His fans really are cult-like in their fervor. It is fun to stand back and watch him perform and them react. And, it's fun to see Steffie and Helaine having such a good time side-by-side.

After the show the three of us and the Davis's went backstage to say hello and take some photos. It's really a spectacular theater, with great acoustics and better lighting. Backstage was the perfect spot for the meet and great (last time it had been in a basement stairwell). As he had been in the past, Rick was gracious and took time with those who had come to see him.

It's obvious he enjoys the adulation his fans give him. How many other rockers will have a career that spans four decades?

We took Steffie upstairs to the room, then joined Mark, Betsy and two friends of theirs in a very nice lounge on the 24th floor. They were driving home, so the night didn't last long, and Helaine and I were soon back in the casino.

The $5/$10 table I favor wasn't available, so I tried a weird no limit game with $1/$2 blinds and a buy in limit of $40-$100. If it sounds confusing now, I can assure you it was extremely confusing then!

It didn't take long to give back $50, and I'm still not quite sure how. I stood up and walked away.

This table is obviously there to cater to folks who've watched poker on TV or played on the Internet. The math involved when one player goes all in against another player with less money makes the action unwieldy. On top of that, it's slow. I could never get into the rhythm of the game, if there even was one.

There were still no seats at the $5/$10 table, so I sat down at $10/$20. This is way over my head. I had never played at stakes like this before. My thought was, even with the $50 I'd just dropped, I was up. I'd take my winnings and another $100. Whatever would happen, would happen.

The $10/$20 games was very similar to the $5/$10 - loose. It didn't take long to win a pot and I recouped the $50 from no limit and a little more to boot.

This table was expensive to sit at. If you folded an entire round, not playing a card, it would still cost $15 for the blinds!

I held my ground and played tight. I gave back what I'd just won and a little more before winning again. The pots were large - often well over $200. My night was not spectacular. But, I felt really good about how I was playing.

Dealt two 4's, and with little action before the flop and then a third four with the flop, I quietly sat back and watched my 3-4's turn into 4-4's! They had been played so silently, on a table where others could be depended on to do the raising, that when the river came, another player bet into my four of a kind. I gladly bet back.

On the hand I decided would be my last, I took an AK all the way to the river without pairing. The others at the table, having seen me fold hand after hand, respected my final bet enough to let me steal the pot.

Not every hand was played correctly. I slow played two Queens, even after I caught a third one. When I checked, it allowed a player to stay in and make his straight, taking me out. Had I bet the three Queens, he surely would have folded to me.

I cashed out $265 ahead, which with my earlier winnings put me up $377.

Was I lucky? Probably. Will I always win? No. Consistently? I'm not sure, but it's certainly more likely than ever before.

Before I went to play, I had written in the blog that win or lose, my goal was to judge my competence at poker. I am confident in the fact that my skills have greatly improved thanks to the thousands of games I've played on the Internet. I think that will translate to profit... at least I hope it does.

I can't wait for Vegas this summer.

I read an article online recently about the type of poker tournaments I play in. I wish I could remember where I read it, or who wrote it, because it has had a lot of influence on me these past few weeks.

These tournaments pay the top three finishers out of nine who start. It's not like a 'normal' game where your fortunes ebb and flow with each hand. And so, the article said, the goal is not to knock other players out - but to survive.

The fact that someone didn't follow that advice in a tournament I played earlier tonight was what allowed me to finish in the money. I had very little cash left and was forced 'all in.' Though he had two bad cards, a 2 and 4, he stayed in, hoping to eliminate me. The little I won from him allowed me to stay in through another round of blinds, and that allowed me to outlast the player who went out 4th!

I have been doing well of late. Maybe some of it is this strategic advice. I'm sure a lot is the luck of the deal which does enter into poker over short periods.

I started tonight playing a $15+$1 'turbo tournament.' Whatever the reason, these suit my style of play and I've done very well with them. I came in 2nd.

I had won some money, so I decided to up the stakes and played for $25 +$2. This was the tournament of survival I just wrote about - and I came in 3rd.

Now I was up over $40 for the evening, so I decided to do something daring - a $50 +$5 tournament. I had never played at this level before.

For the first time, I noticed a difference in the quality of players. They were tighter - probably more savvy. I felt my way through the first few times around the table. There were a few deals where I had good cards, but they didn't improve after the 'flop.' I was slowly bleeding money. Of 8 players left, I was 8th.

I was following the sage advice I had been given. I avoided conflicts when I wasn't assured of winning. That meant throwing away a lot of early bets as I folded. As the ante's rose, all this betting then folding was crippling me.

And then, the cards turned. I started getting great hands. This isn't the norm, but luck is luck. I'd much rather be lucky than skillful!

Before long the table was down to five, then four, then three. I was in the money.

I won this little nine person tournament when I went in with an Ace against the other players Ace, but with a higher kicker. He was gone. I hadn't won as much as I'd survived as others fell around me.

We're now up nearly $500. I remember a few months ago we had turned our $250 into less than $20. Now poker fortunes have changed. This is our high water mark.

I won't stick at this $50 + $5 level. Much too scary. Much too expensive. Tomorrow, it's back to the smaller games. But, if I get a few wins, I might be back.

I am watching the 2003 World Series of Poker on ESPN 2. This is... oh, maybe the ten thousandth time this has been on TV. I know who won, and have seen much of the action before, but still enjoy watching. The reason is, TV has added an angle to the game which never existed before.

Let me backtrack a second. I was in Las Vegas, playing at a $3/$6 Texas Hold'em table at the Mirage Hotel. Two players were head-to-head. The first raised and the second paused, thought and then folded. As the cards were being mucked, he asked the winner what cards he had. The reply, "This is a pay-per-view game."

It's true. Unless you pay to see them, the winner's hand is never shown. Was he bluffing? Did he have the nuts? You'll never know unless you pay for the privilege. That is major power for a poker player. Without his hand being exposed, his true strategy remains a secret.

Enter TV. Now every hand is exposed from the deal. There is no secrecy. The play of a master can be dissected and understood. The huge advantage that a very good player might possess is gone.

Of course TV has brought so much new blood (and money) into the game that it isn't quite a pact with the devil. Still, the curtain has been parted.

The players at the WSOP level aren't that much better than those I'm playing with... but they are better. Every time I sit down (online) at a low stakes, one table tournament, there's guaranteed to be someone who really doesn't know what he's doing. Yes, that person can win - Kenny Rogers was right in saying "Every hands a loser. Every hand's a winner." But over the long run, he's going to get drained.

I am fascinated to see the odds displayed on the screen as the games plays out. Calculating pot odds is something I should be better at. I have a sense of where I stand, but if I could really make the calculations of my chances versus the pot, it would make me stronger.

Meanwhile, Helaine and I continue to do fine playing our online games. At last check we are up about $300 since August 2003.

Over the course of this weekend, I will try and play in some of the larger tournaments available (larger in participants, not stakes). Though the payoffs can be large, it's unlikely I'll cash out in any given weekend.

I played poker tonight. This past week hadn't been my best. A little up, a little down. Without Helaine, the week would have been a loss (both in poker and life in general).

I played a few small tournaments Saturday. In one that paid to 45th place, I was out at 47th! With another, I got tired around 2:30 AM and just played stupid (on purpose) to get it over with. It was a very small tournament - either $1 or $3 entry. I can't remember.

Tonight, at 8:00 PM, I decided to play in another. It's a tournament I try to catch every week, if I'm around. It's only $3 to play, and though I seldom get my $3 back, it's cheap entertainment. Since I hadn't been doing well, the $3 seemed like the right investment.

I played fairly consistently - made a bad move in the first hour that hurt me dearly - and went to the bathroom break in the middle of the pack. By hour two, I was in the middle of those left. And then, I started to hit.

My cards tonight weren't particularly good. I did have some nice hands, but wasn't able to maximize them. I would characterize my night as grinding it out. Nothing fancy. No spectacular steals.

If you've never played in a tournament, here's how it works. The house collects an entry fee and a fee for running the tournament. I guess these $3 tourneys are a way to entice new players, so with these the house takes nothing. All the $3's are put in a pot. Tonight, that pot was $3,867.

With 1,289 players, the last 99 standing would win some cash. It wasn't until 7th place that the $100 prize mark was reached. Then the numbers went up a little faster until $204.96, $251.36, $348.04, $541.39 and finally $966.76 for coming in first.

By 11:30 PM I was still rolling along. In fact, I had made it to 2nd place. There were still plenty of players. Going out there would have only won me $17.41. And, my grasp on 2nd was precarious to say the least. With $170k in my kitty, only $7,000 separated 2nd from 5th.

As the tournament progresses, the stakes increase. Those left playing end up with more money, but the price of playing goes up too. Players were dropping with regularity - tapped out. I played on.

At 12:16 AM, over 4 hours into the tournament I went into first place. Oh my God! I was coming to the realization I might bring home some real money (Actually, I was already home - but that's another story).

There were 14 left. Tournaments become very volatile at this point. Pots are huge as players try to intimidate those with good, not great, hands out. I was guaranteed $35 on my $3 investment. I was a happy man.

Twenty minutes later, I had sunk to 4th, but then hit a big hand and was back to 1st. What had begun as 144 tables was now just 1 - and I was playing on it. I saved a screen capture of the game summary at this point.

I fell to 6th, then rebounded to 5th and 4th. Players had become more conservative. There was less bluster and bravado. Everyone was waiting for a quality hand.

By the time we were down to 3, I was back to 2nd. Then, I took down the third player and with his chips moved to first.

At 1:02 AM, five hours into the game, I was heads up, playing against Mo888 from Glenwood Springs, CO. I didn't think about it at the time, but this series of hands was worth over $420 by itself - far more than I had ever played for before.

Even without that pressure, I was beginning to sweat. I wondered whether to wake Helaine, sleeping in the next room. I continued to play - and play conservatively.

I had over $1,200,000 in tournament chips out of the $1,933,500 on the table. Slowly I whittled away until I got dealt an Ace and small card. I called from the small blind position and he raised. It all went so quickly. He went all in, and I followed. When