The end of January seems like a good time to update the poker exploits.
There's nothing massive to report since my last post, and that's a good thing, I think. After an atrocious two-month run, I've won back all I've lost. Factoring in the live score I had on New Year's Eve, I'm up $1,000 over the past month-plus-a-day. I'd lost $900 in November/December.
Additionally, as I mentioned in my last post, the only reason I was even taking my broken-down game to the online tables was, I was intent on earning enough frequent player points for a $250 electronics gift card. Mission accomplished. Bonus.
I was up a few more bucks, before enduring a little $200 downswing. But I've won more than half of that back, and my game is stable and sound.
Bankroll: $6,000. It's good to be back.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
It's gotta be the shoes
My previous post about Fairfax High School’s sweet exclusive Nike basketball shoes got me thinking about my favourite kicks of all time. Without further ado, here’s how I see the top five when it comes to all-time basketball sneakers.
1. Air Jordan XI
I’ll be honest – I’m not an unequivocal fan of Jordan’s signature shoes. Too often, Nike has tried to be overly creative/crazy with the design. Case in point would be XV, which was modeled after an X-15 aircraft and was simply a disaster.
The XI, though, is a marvel. It’s the most beautiful basketball shoe ever built. It’s sleek and functional, and its patent leather is so classy-looking that it can easily be worn with dress pants. I had a friend who rocked the classic black-and-white XIs at his wedding, with a tuxedo.
Personal experience: I wore an all-white pair of XIs during my second year of college basketball. Best shoes I ever wore, in terms of form and function.
2. Adidas Superstar
An oldie, but a goodie. The iconic Adidas shoe has been around since 1969, and its classic design is somehow still relevant. The most striking feature is the rubberized shell toe, which looks soooo slick peeking out from under a pair of jeans.
More than four decades after its debut, the Superstar has transitioned to be more of a casual shoe than a performace shoe. You can find it in a mind-boggling number of colour combinations, and if you don’t have a pair in your closet, you pretty much don’t like shoes.
Personal experience: Currently, I have two pairs of Superstars – white-and-red, and a black-and-gold. And yet, I want more. Honestly, if I had the money, I’d probably have a dozen pairs. These shoes have their own Run DMC song – how cool is that?
3. Reebok Question
The Question was the first signature shoe Reebok made for Allen Iverson when he came out of Georgetown in 1996. Iverson’s nickname was “The Answer”; hence, when his inaugural shoe was released, it was “The Question.” Mildly clever.
In my humble opinion, The Question was the only decent shoe Reebok made for Iverson. But they did completely knock this one out of the park. With clean lines and the exposed Hexalite cells on the sides, the shoe had a very cool, distinctive look. The Question’s status as a classic is confirmed by frequent re-releases.
Personal experience: Two years ago, I bought a white-with-grey-toes version of The Question for use in my Monday church basketball league. The shoes far outclass the level of play, I’ll say that much. They’re as functional as they are beautiful.
4. Nike Air Force 1
The first Air Force shoe, to folks in my generation, is perhaps best known as the shoe that former Detroit Pistons star Rasheed Wallace insisted on wearing long after it was out of regular production.
Design-wise, the AF1 epitomizes the look and feel of all of Nike's best kicks. Doing a bit of background research, I discovered it was the first shoe that used Nike Air technology. Cool.
These shoes have a lot in common with the Adidas Superstar, in that they're available in a ridiculous number of colourways, they're more of a casual shoe than a performance shoe at this point, and they have their own song . . . by Nelly. Advantage, Adidas Superstar.
Personal experience: The fact I’ve never owned a pair of Air Force 1’s is a glaring hole in my sneaker resume. I feel shame.
5. Nike Zoom Kobe IV
Lest you come to believe I’m strictly into old-school shoes, I give you Kobe Bryant’s fourth signature shoe with Nike. Kobe was an Adidas guy when he originally arrived in the NBA, but those early shoes were a bit out there in terms of design.
The reason I love the latest Kobes is, they hearken back to the days of classic Nikes like the aforementioned AF1, in terms of clean design. They’re also ridiculously well-built. I’ve used the adjective “sleek” several times already in this post, but the Kobe IVs practically redefine the term as far as basketball kicks are concerned.
Personal experience: I’ve never owned a pair of these shoes, and I suspect I never will. Reason being, I’m one of the planet’s foremost Kobe-haters, and the notion of buying (and wearing!) a product with his name on it bothers me. Kobe’s an amazing player, don’t get me wrong – one of the 10 best of all time, quite possibly. I respect his skill and competitiveness a great deal, but his ego-centric personality and style of play rubs me the wrong way. He doesn’t seem like he’d be fun to play with whatsoever. And that runs counter to everything I aspire to.
But dang, does he ever have some sweet shoes!
1. Air Jordan XI
I’ll be honest – I’m not an unequivocal fan of Jordan’s signature shoes. Too often, Nike has tried to be overly creative/crazy with the design. Case in point would be XV, which was modeled after an X-15 aircraft and was simply a disaster.
The XI, though, is a marvel. It’s the most beautiful basketball shoe ever built. It’s sleek and functional, and its patent leather is so classy-looking that it can easily be worn with dress pants. I had a friend who rocked the classic black-and-white XIs at his wedding, with a tuxedo.
Personal experience: I wore an all-white pair of XIs during my second year of college basketball. Best shoes I ever wore, in terms of form and function.
2. Adidas Superstar
An oldie, but a goodie. The iconic Adidas shoe has been around since 1969, and its classic design is somehow still relevant. The most striking feature is the rubberized shell toe, which looks soooo slick peeking out from under a pair of jeans.
More than four decades after its debut, the Superstar has transitioned to be more of a casual shoe than a performace shoe. You can find it in a mind-boggling number of colour combinations, and if you don’t have a pair in your closet, you pretty much don’t like shoes.
Personal experience: Currently, I have two pairs of Superstars – white-and-red, and a black-and-gold. And yet, I want more. Honestly, if I had the money, I’d probably have a dozen pairs. These shoes have their own Run DMC song – how cool is that?
3. Reebok Question
The Question was the first signature shoe Reebok made for Allen Iverson when he came out of Georgetown in 1996. Iverson’s nickname was “The Answer”; hence, when his inaugural shoe was released, it was “The Question.” Mildly clever.
In my humble opinion, The Question was the only decent shoe Reebok made for Iverson. But they did completely knock this one out of the park. With clean lines and the exposed Hexalite cells on the sides, the shoe had a very cool, distinctive look. The Question’s status as a classic is confirmed by frequent re-releases.
Personal experience: Two years ago, I bought a white-with-grey-toes version of The Question for use in my Monday church basketball league. The shoes far outclass the level of play, I’ll say that much. They’re as functional as they are beautiful.
4. Nike Air Force 1
The first Air Force shoe, to folks in my generation, is perhaps best known as the shoe that former Detroit Pistons star Rasheed Wallace insisted on wearing long after it was out of regular production.
Design-wise, the AF1 epitomizes the look and feel of all of Nike's best kicks. Doing a bit of background research, I discovered it was the first shoe that used Nike Air technology. Cool.
These shoes have a lot in common with the Adidas Superstar, in that they're available in a ridiculous number of colourways, they're more of a casual shoe than a performance shoe at this point, and they have their own song . . . by Nelly. Advantage, Adidas Superstar.
Personal experience: The fact I’ve never owned a pair of Air Force 1’s is a glaring hole in my sneaker resume. I feel shame.
5. Nike Zoom Kobe IV
Lest you come to believe I’m strictly into old-school shoes, I give you Kobe Bryant’s fourth signature shoe with Nike. Kobe was an Adidas guy when he originally arrived in the NBA, but those early shoes were a bit out there in terms of design.
The reason I love the latest Kobes is, they hearken back to the days of classic Nikes like the aforementioned AF1, in terms of clean design. They’re also ridiculously well-built. I’ve used the adjective “sleek” several times already in this post, but the Kobe IVs practically redefine the term as far as basketball kicks are concerned.
Personal experience: I’ve never owned a pair of these shoes, and I suspect I never will. Reason being, I’m one of the planet’s foremost Kobe-haters, and the notion of buying (and wearing!) a product with his name on it bothers me. Kobe’s an amazing player, don’t get me wrong – one of the 10 best of all time, quite possibly. I respect his skill and competitiveness a great deal, but his ego-centric personality and style of play rubs me the wrong way. He doesn’t seem like he’d be fun to play with whatsoever. And that runs counter to everything I aspire to.
But dang, does he ever have some sweet shoes!
Friday, January 14, 2011
Beautiful basketball shoes
This is more or less a poker blog, but my favourite sport is basketball.
(Quick digression – I don’t consider poker to be a sport. It is competitive, it requires skill, but there is absolutely no athletic ability necessary to succeed at it. It is a contest of intellect, math, psychology and strategy. Thus, it is a game, not a sport).
At any rate, as a hoops-head, I have a natural obsession with basketball sneakers. If I won the World Series of Poker main event, one of my first “investments” would be a few pairs of sweet shoes.
The reason I bring up the topic is, I had a rare chance to see some true collector’s item kicks last week at the Abbotsford Collegiate Snowball Classic, a local high school boys basketball tournament.
Tournament organizers imported a team from Los Angeles – the Fairfax High School Lions. Fairfax is one of only a handful of U.S. high schools that are sponsored by Nike. Part of their deal with the Swoosh is, they get special-edition shoes produced each year featuring the school name and colours. This season, they’re rocking the LeBron Nike Zoom Soldier IV. Note the word FAIRFAX printed vertically on the heel, and the LeBron lion logo on the ankle, which matches the team nickname. (Check the sneaker blog nikelebron.net for looks at more special edition Fairfax LeBrons dating back to 2007).
The photo at the top of this post is of Fairfax’s white shoes that go with their home uniform; the one at the bottom is the corresponding black road edition. Sooooo cool.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
In poker, patience is a virtue
Turns out, I didn’t lose my poker game forever. I just misplaced it temporarily.
And what a relief that is.
The live score I bragged about in my previous post was the spark that renewed my confidence online. Since the start of January, I’m up $400. Sweet.
The only reason I’m even playing these days is, I’m just 1,000 PokerStars frequent player points short of earning a $250 Future Shop gift card. (At this point, I have to kind of chuckle. When I started this blog, I was talking about paying off my mortgage. These days, I’m just trying to nurse a few bucks in my PokerStars account long enough to win a freaking electronics gift card. For sure, that whole dream-big routine has given way to more modest goals.)
In order to get to my points goal, I’m being very consistent about my sit-n-go sessions, playing one $22 and one $33 single-table tourney at the same time. Sometimes I just play one of these dual sessions; some evenings I’ll bang out a couple of ’em.
At any rate, I’m nearly two-thirds of my way to the 1,000 points I need, and I’ve profited the aforementioned $400 in the process. Once again, sweet.
The biggest difference between my play this month and my ridiculously unprofitable November-December run is, I’m being much more patient. In retrospect, my mindset at the virtual tables gradually slipped too far to the aggressive end of the spectrum. The edge between winning and losing poker is razor-thin, and while aggression can be a profitable tool when applied correctly, the calibration of my game was just slightly off. I got in far too many marginal situations.
To be philosophical about it, I think sometimes poker players make the mistake of assuming the play at the table revolves around them. It’s a product of the individualistic mentality that our culture breeds in us. In poker, at least for me, that manifests itself in trying to prove I’m the best player at the table by trying overly tricky plays. That’s a high-variance strategy. I’m finding success by keeping it simple in the early going, in accordance with Collin Moshman’s excellent instructional manual, “Sit ‘n Go Strategy.”
The sickest/best thing about this positive uptick in my bankroll is, I haven’t even run particularly well. I’ve had countless SNGs where I’m suppressing a bad word after some donkey sucks out on me. If I were running well, I could be up $700. If I were running real hot, I’d be up $1,000. I’ve put myself in position to win a lot of tournaments, and I haven’t been converting at the rate I’d usually expect. But it’s a far better feeling to bust in unlucky circumstances than to bust while playing badly. My mood is vastly more upbeat when I know I’ve played well.
Bankroll = $5,900. Loving poker, loving life.
And what a relief that is.
The live score I bragged about in my previous post was the spark that renewed my confidence online. Since the start of January, I’m up $400. Sweet.
The only reason I’m even playing these days is, I’m just 1,000 PokerStars frequent player points short of earning a $250 Future Shop gift card. (At this point, I have to kind of chuckle. When I started this blog, I was talking about paying off my mortgage. These days, I’m just trying to nurse a few bucks in my PokerStars account long enough to win a freaking electronics gift card. For sure, that whole dream-big routine has given way to more modest goals.)
In order to get to my points goal, I’m being very consistent about my sit-n-go sessions, playing one $22 and one $33 single-table tourney at the same time. Sometimes I just play one of these dual sessions; some evenings I’ll bang out a couple of ’em.
At any rate, I’m nearly two-thirds of my way to the 1,000 points I need, and I’ve profited the aforementioned $400 in the process. Once again, sweet.
The biggest difference between my play this month and my ridiculously unprofitable November-December run is, I’m being much more patient. In retrospect, my mindset at the virtual tables gradually slipped too far to the aggressive end of the spectrum. The edge between winning and losing poker is razor-thin, and while aggression can be a profitable tool when applied correctly, the calibration of my game was just slightly off. I got in far too many marginal situations.
To be philosophical about it, I think sometimes poker players make the mistake of assuming the play at the table revolves around them. It’s a product of the individualistic mentality that our culture breeds in us. In poker, at least for me, that manifests itself in trying to prove I’m the best player at the table by trying overly tricky plays. That’s a high-variance strategy. I’m finding success by keeping it simple in the early going, in accordance with Collin Moshman’s excellent instructional manual, “Sit ‘n Go Strategy.”
The sickest/best thing about this positive uptick in my bankroll is, I haven’t even run particularly well. I’ve had countless SNGs where I’m suppressing a bad word after some donkey sucks out on me. If I were running well, I could be up $700. If I were running real hot, I’d be up $1,000. I’ve put myself in position to win a lot of tournaments, and I haven’t been converting at the rate I’d usually expect. But it’s a far better feeling to bust in unlucky circumstances than to bust while playing badly. My mood is vastly more upbeat when I know I’ve played well.
Bankroll = $5,900. Loving poker, loving life.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Wrapping up the poker year on a winning note
One of my new year's resolutions is to update this blog more often.
The reasons I went without posting during the month of December are varied. For starters, I was exceedingly busy, both at work and in my private life. After a long day of writing at the office, coming home and doing even more writing didn't seem like a fun use of my time.
Additionally, my heinous poker slump continued, blunting my desire to write on the topic. It felt as though I'd forgotten how to play the game. Confidence = Shot. My bankroll, after peaking at $6,000 at the end of October, shrank to around $5,100 when I wisely decided to take a break from PokerStars a week before Christmas.
On the last day before 2010 expired, I finally managed to put together a positive result. I went to Cascades Casino in Langley for a New Year's Eve rebuy tournament, and had a reasonably smooth trip to a $465 payday. Sweet.
I was basically in for the minimum - the initial $50 buy-in, plus a $20 add-on at the end of the rebuy period. I played a simple, snug game, and was fortunate enough to triple my stack during the first hour of play.
On the key hand, I called a 300-chip raise in late position holding AQ, and saw a flop of A86, two hearts. The small blind led out for 400 and was called by the initial raiser. I started the hand with about 2,500 in chips (starting stack was 3,000), and just decided that if I was beat, I could always rebuy. I stuck all my chips in and was called by both players. The small blind had A-10, and the middle-position player had 4h6h. I managed to dodge all their outs to earn a big stack.
I kept it snug with the big stack, and built up steadily en route to the final table. I ramped up the aggression early at the final table, stealing a series of blinds and antes to build up to 39,000. That left me in second or third place.
I hit a speed bump at that point. I was in the big blind (1000-2000) when the chip leader limped under the gun, and the small blind completed. I looked down to see AK, and I decided to raise another 6,000. The chip leader called, the small blind folded. The flop came 568, two spades. I continuation bet 8,000, and the chip leader called in position. The turn was the four of spades - a terrible card for me if there ever was one. I contemplated firing another bullet, but decided discretion was the better part of valour. I check-folded to my opponent's 12,000 bet, which would have crippled me, and he showed 77 for the straight.
I retrospect, it might have made sense to check preflop. Given the size of our stacks, and the likelihood the chip leader would call in position, keeping the pot small and seeing a free flop might have been wise. It's a play I make in certain situations online, and I considered it in this spot. Another way to go might have been to raise all-in, but our stacks were too big in relation to the blinds. Checking would probably have been the way to go.
That hand cost me nearly 40 per cent of my stack, and the blinds quickly carved away even more of my chips. I was down to 16,500 with the blinds at 2,000-4,000 when I finally picked up some hands worth raising with, and took down some crucial blinds and antes.
Only four places paid (the tournament had 30 starters), but the prize pool was around $2,300 due to all the rebuys and add-ons. With six players remaining, we started talking about a chop, and the second-largest stack said he'd consider it in three hands, when the big blind hit him.
The very next hand, I found As10s under the gun, and raised to 9,000. The big blind said, "Well, I'll make your decision easier," and shoved his stack of about 19,000 into the middle. I started the hand with around 30,000, and though losing would have crippled me, I decided I had too much invested, and called. I was stunned when he showed KhQh. What was this dude thinking? We were talking chop, and he decides to put his tournament life on the line in a ridiculously marginal spot.
Fortunately, the board ran out with nothing but rags, and I vaulted into second place. The very next hand, the short-stacked small blind shoved on me for 9,700 total. I looked down to find A8, and even though I knew his range was very small, I decided I probably needed to call, getting 3-to-1 odds. He showed AA, which made perfect sense. Rockets was probably the only hand he was shoving with - clearly he was a wiser player than the dude who was just knocked out. He obviously doubled up.
With no distinct short stack, and with the chip leader in a hurry to make it to another appointment, we decided to chop up the prize pool on the money bubble for $465 apiece. That was better than third-place money, and I was all too happy to do the deal. I wasn't eager to get into a coin flip or another marginal spot on the bubble when I could score a nice little payout.
So at the end of 2010, my bankroll is at $5,500. That's about $5,000 more than it was in September 2009, when I started playing the higher buy-in tournaments. It's about $2,000 more than when I began this blog experiment back in June. Sweet. And it's hard to overstate how nice it is to end the year with a great live result.
That said, my poker confidence is still rather low at this point. I'm not eager to play on PokerStars these days; the only factor that might get me playing in January is, I'm just 1,000 VIP points short of earning a $250 gift card from Future Shop. That's about one month's worth of play, and it might be worth my while.
But I'm really feeling moved to dial back my online poker hours; thus, the poker/bankroll/mortgage premise for this blog might take a back seat in 2011. I'll still be updating this site regularly, but I imagine fewer of my posts will relate to poker exploits. Please continue to visit. I promise to be interesting.
To all five of my regular readers, I wish you a wonderful and blessed 2011.
The reasons I went without posting during the month of December are varied. For starters, I was exceedingly busy, both at work and in my private life. After a long day of writing at the office, coming home and doing even more writing didn't seem like a fun use of my time.
Additionally, my heinous poker slump continued, blunting my desire to write on the topic. It felt as though I'd forgotten how to play the game. Confidence = Shot. My bankroll, after peaking at $6,000 at the end of October, shrank to around $5,100 when I wisely decided to take a break from PokerStars a week before Christmas.
On the last day before 2010 expired, I finally managed to put together a positive result. I went to Cascades Casino in Langley for a New Year's Eve rebuy tournament, and had a reasonably smooth trip to a $465 payday. Sweet.
I was basically in for the minimum - the initial $50 buy-in, plus a $20 add-on at the end of the rebuy period. I played a simple, snug game, and was fortunate enough to triple my stack during the first hour of play.
On the key hand, I called a 300-chip raise in late position holding AQ, and saw a flop of A86, two hearts. The small blind led out for 400 and was called by the initial raiser. I started the hand with about 2,500 in chips (starting stack was 3,000), and just decided that if I was beat, I could always rebuy. I stuck all my chips in and was called by both players. The small blind had A-10, and the middle-position player had 4h6h. I managed to dodge all their outs to earn a big stack.
I kept it snug with the big stack, and built up steadily en route to the final table. I ramped up the aggression early at the final table, stealing a series of blinds and antes to build up to 39,000. That left me in second or third place.
I hit a speed bump at that point. I was in the big blind (1000-2000) when the chip leader limped under the gun, and the small blind completed. I looked down to see AK, and I decided to raise another 6,000. The chip leader called, the small blind folded. The flop came 568, two spades. I continuation bet 8,000, and the chip leader called in position. The turn was the four of spades - a terrible card for me if there ever was one. I contemplated firing another bullet, but decided discretion was the better part of valour. I check-folded to my opponent's 12,000 bet, which would have crippled me, and he showed 77 for the straight.
I retrospect, it might have made sense to check preflop. Given the size of our stacks, and the likelihood the chip leader would call in position, keeping the pot small and seeing a free flop might have been wise. It's a play I make in certain situations online, and I considered it in this spot. Another way to go might have been to raise all-in, but our stacks were too big in relation to the blinds. Checking would probably have been the way to go.
That hand cost me nearly 40 per cent of my stack, and the blinds quickly carved away even more of my chips. I was down to 16,500 with the blinds at 2,000-4,000 when I finally picked up some hands worth raising with, and took down some crucial blinds and antes.
Only four places paid (the tournament had 30 starters), but the prize pool was around $2,300 due to all the rebuys and add-ons. With six players remaining, we started talking about a chop, and the second-largest stack said he'd consider it in three hands, when the big blind hit him.
The very next hand, I found As10s under the gun, and raised to 9,000. The big blind said, "Well, I'll make your decision easier," and shoved his stack of about 19,000 into the middle. I started the hand with around 30,000, and though losing would have crippled me, I decided I had too much invested, and called. I was stunned when he showed KhQh. What was this dude thinking? We were talking chop, and he decides to put his tournament life on the line in a ridiculously marginal spot.
Fortunately, the board ran out with nothing but rags, and I vaulted into second place. The very next hand, the short-stacked small blind shoved on me for 9,700 total. I looked down to find A8, and even though I knew his range was very small, I decided I probably needed to call, getting 3-to-1 odds. He showed AA, which made perfect sense. Rockets was probably the only hand he was shoving with - clearly he was a wiser player than the dude who was just knocked out. He obviously doubled up.
With no distinct short stack, and with the chip leader in a hurry to make it to another appointment, we decided to chop up the prize pool on the money bubble for $465 apiece. That was better than third-place money, and I was all too happy to do the deal. I wasn't eager to get into a coin flip or another marginal spot on the bubble when I could score a nice little payout.
So at the end of 2010, my bankroll is at $5,500. That's about $5,000 more than it was in September 2009, when I started playing the higher buy-in tournaments. It's about $2,000 more than when I began this blog experiment back in June. Sweet. And it's hard to overstate how nice it is to end the year with a great live result.
That said, my poker confidence is still rather low at this point. I'm not eager to play on PokerStars these days; the only factor that might get me playing in January is, I'm just 1,000 VIP points short of earning a $250 gift card from Future Shop. That's about one month's worth of play, and it might be worth my while.
But I'm really feeling moved to dial back my online poker hours; thus, the poker/bankroll/mortgage premise for this blog might take a back seat in 2011. I'll still be updating this site regularly, but I imagine fewer of my posts will relate to poker exploits. Please continue to visit. I promise to be interesting.
To all five of my regular readers, I wish you a wonderful and blessed 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
