In order to clarify the incident from the Absolute Poker Room , every player received a statement from Joe Norton, the former Grand Chief of the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake .
The statement acknowledges the security breach within Absolute's system that allowed information about opponents' hole cards to be transmitted to several suspect accounts, and confirmed that the hand log released accidentally to Marco 'CrazyMarco' Johnson, the runner-up in the suspect tournament, did in fact highlight the security flaw that allowed the site to be compromised.
October 21, 2007
Dear AP Player:
I am the former Grand Chief of the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake and the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises ENRG, which holds a 100% interest in Absolute Poker.
As many of our players are aware, there has been a security breach in our system that allowed unlawful access to player information that resulted in unfair play. I am writing to you today to let you know what we know so far in order to set the record straight, and to assure you of AP's commitment to player security. I am sure that this letter will not address all of the questions and concerns you may have, nor will it extinguish the heated discussion surrounding this issue. At this point, our intention is to let you know all we can disclose and to assure you of our continued efforts to keep you informed as best we can as the investigations continue.
We deeply regret this situation has occurred. A breach in security in online poker is serious and of great concern to players and the industry worldwide, and this particular situation has been the subject of debate within the poker player community and in the media, giving rise to the creation of several websites and hundreds and hundreds of comments, opinions, and theories of what occurred – some of which are accurate, and some that are not.
Like you, I have not been happy that during the initial stage of our investigation, AP has not been more forthcoming in providing a timely or comprehensive explanation on this matter, giving rise to anger, suspicion, and concern on the part of our valued customers. I hope that our customers can appreciate that this remains an incredibly complex and sensitive issue, and I want to give you my strongest possible assurance that we will be as forthcoming as possible on how this breach occurred and what we are doing to remedy the situation.
What We Know and Actions We Have
AP was notified by a customer that a possible cheating incident occurred during a recent tournament, and in response forwarded players' hand logs. This disclosure of the hand logs prompted our customers to determine that a more serious security breach had occurred. We immediately launched an internal investigation and also requested a formal audit by Gaming Associates, an acknowledged world-wide expert in audits, interactive gaming tests, and information security.
Based upon our preliminary findings, it appears that the integrity of our poker system was compromised by a high-ranking trusted consultant employed by AP whose position gave him extraordinary access to certain security systems. As has been speculated in several online forums, this consultant devised a sophisticated scheme to manipulate internal systems to access third-party computers and accounts to view hole cards of other customers during play without their knowledge. As this consultant was aware of the details of our fraud detection process, the likelihood that the scheme would be uncovered through our normal procedures was minimized. We consider this security breach to be a horrendous and inexcusable offense.
We will pay for all losses suffered by the affected players as soon as our audit is finished and the amounts are determined. Although we are in the process of attempting to recover all the winnings of this consultant, any unrecovered losses of affected players will be paid by Absolute Poker so that all affected persons will be made whole.
Next Steps
We are still investigating whether the consultant was acting alone or in concert with others, and it appears at this time that all account holders are innocent of collusion and were unaware of any wrong-doing by the consultant, who was immediately terminated. We continue to investigate this matter aggressively, and all of these preliminary findings are subject to the audits currently underway. We have recently uncovered additional accounts used by the consultant that have not been publicly reported. So as to not compromise the investigation, we are not releasing the names of these additional accounts at this time, and will contact these affected customers individually.
The specific allegations of unlawful activity are being investigated both by AP and by the authorized authorities, including the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. We will continue to actively cooperate with these authorities in full compliance with the Regulations Concerning Interactive Gaming. In addition to our own investigation and the audit by Gaming Associates, we have also submitted to an audit by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission.
Please be assured that we have corrected the problem that allowed the system to be unfairly manipulated. We are working furiously to increase the safeguards within our systems. While we are satisfied that our systems are secured, we realize that our security systems must be continuously monitored and enhanced.
Without question, this incident has been unfortunate for all concerned, and we will emerge as a stronger company. I realize it will take some time and much more information for AP to re-earn the trust and confidence of our customers who are in doubt of our commitment to the highest levels of security, privacy and integrity. As we move to address and correct this situation, our valued customers have played a vital role in uncovering this scheme through various online forums and have become an active part of the solution.
With my full sincerity, I thank you, and I promise to keep you updated as we bring this situation to a close.
Sincerely,
Joe Norton
Absolute also announced plans to begin working on calculating refunds based on cash-game play involving the supposed cheating accounts, the entire list of which has not been released at this time. Those payments are expected to be calculated within the upcoming Gaming Associates audit.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Pokerstars weekend winners
Congratulations for the following players who Final Tabled the following MTTs this weekend on the best online poker room PokerStars :
PokerStars Sunday Million
$1 Million Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
6,366 entrants
$1,273,000 paid out to 900 places
Pairofnothin - $183,086
ClubbedBoat - $95,362
McNAbb2 - $68,625
twin peaks07 - $53,474
LukeFromB13 - $40,869
Ralfinator - $29,283
Crawfdad - $21,007
canalman - $12,732
Binde - $7,893
PokerStars Sunday Warm-Up
$400k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
2,273 entrants
$454,600 paid out to 360 places
Kennethmedh - $88,828
n1stunnor - $45,005
the wa®den - $29,958
daobvious - $24,093
walrus_poker - $19,093
Slaktaren007 - $14,501
Poker Tuck - $10,410
blai528 - $6,546
power2prut - $3,818
PokerStars Second Chance
$200k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
1,097 entrants
$219,400 paid out to 153 places
Gyuliend - $47,171
HouseeLover - $25,955
Horizon 1 - $17,552
clarkatroid - $14,041
Batera - $11,299
janwillem111 - $8,556
jesse42782 - $6,362
dogsballs - $4,388
Stoweski - $2,523
PokerStars 150k Guaranteed NLH
Buy-In: $215 with Rebuys
286 entrants
$231,600 paid out to 27 places
agriffrod - $63,690
crice25 - $40,530
GRinDer444 - $26,865
The Anvil - $18,528
THE__D__RY - $13,896
LITTTLEMAN - $10,422
scarface_79 - $8,106
BackDoorovic - $6,021
dblgutshot - $3,937
PokerStars Sunday Million
$1 Million Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
6,366 entrants
$1,273,000 paid out to 900 places
Pairofnothin - $183,086
ClubbedBoat - $95,362
McNAbb2 - $68,625
twin peaks07 - $53,474
LukeFromB13 - $40,869
Ralfinator - $29,283
Crawfdad - $21,007
canalman - $12,732
Binde - $7,893
PokerStars Sunday Warm-Up
$400k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
2,273 entrants
$454,600 paid out to 360 places
Kennethmedh - $88,828
n1stunnor - $45,005
the wa®den - $29,958
daobvious - $24,093
walrus_poker - $19,093
Slaktaren007 - $14,501
Poker Tuck - $10,410
blai528 - $6,546
power2prut - $3,818
PokerStars Second Chance
$200k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
1,097 entrants
$219,400 paid out to 153 places
Gyuliend - $47,171
HouseeLover - $25,955
Horizon 1 - $17,552
clarkatroid - $14,041
Batera - $11,299
janwillem111 - $8,556
jesse42782 - $6,362
dogsballs - $4,388
Stoweski - $2,523
PokerStars 150k Guaranteed NLH
Buy-In: $215 with Rebuys
286 entrants
$231,600 paid out to 27 places
agriffrod - $63,690
crice25 - $40,530
GRinDer444 - $26,865
The Anvil - $18,528
THE__D__RY - $13,896
LITTTLEMAN - $10,422
scarface_79 - $8,106
BackDoorovic - $6,021
dblgutshot - $3,937
Monday, October 15, 2007
How random is Online Poker ?
You ever wonder how the deck is shuffled in an online poker game? Who can you hold responsible for that terrible suckout on the river? Randomly shuffled cards can be seen as the core business of online poker rooms and you will be surprised how much effort is required to achieve truly random cards. Read on about online poker rooms, quantum mechanics, radioactive decay and more.
First let's determine the requirements for the source of a true random generator: Firstly it should be high-entropic source. Entropy is the 'measure of the disorder and randomness in a closed system'. You're still reading? Good, the second requirement is that the source should be nondeterministic. This means the there is no way in which the source can be controlled, calculated or predicted (note: our first requirement guarantees those last two properties).
Now we know this we can throw computers out of the window as far as randomness is concerned. Math is the only language your computer speaks and randomness and math are mutually exclusive. Basically any random function which is created by humans or by machines built by humans can not be nondeterministic. To create true randomness we must turn to something bigger (or actually much, much smaller) then ourselves.
The way to go is physics and the field of quantum mechanics in particular (the relationship between radiation and matter). In quantum mechanics certain physical phenomena, such as the nuclear decay of certain atoms, are fundamentally random and cannot, in principle, be predicted. This right here is our answer. These phenomenon's are used by hardware random number generators to generate a truly (from our perspective, at this time) random number.
The hardware number generators are used by poker sites to shuffle the deck and are thoroughly tested by independent third parties. The implementation of the generator differs per site but you can be sure the deck is shuffled more randomly then a dealer in a live game ever will.
I hope this article provided some insight in how the deck is shuffled in an online poker game. It's pretty sick the state of an atom (about 1 million times as small as the thickness of a hair) is responsible for the cards you get. So next time you suffer a bad beat, think of this article, count to ten, and blame the atoms!
NOTE: I only know for a fact PokerStars , Carbon Poker , and PokerNordica use certified random number generators. If you're not sure about the software you use, drop them an email.
First let's determine the requirements for the source of a true random generator: Firstly it should be high-entropic source. Entropy is the 'measure of the disorder and randomness in a closed system'. You're still reading? Good, the second requirement is that the source should be nondeterministic. This means the there is no way in which the source can be controlled, calculated or predicted (note: our first requirement guarantees those last two properties).
Now we know this we can throw computers out of the window as far as randomness is concerned. Math is the only language your computer speaks and randomness and math are mutually exclusive. Basically any random function which is created by humans or by machines built by humans can not be nondeterministic. To create true randomness we must turn to something bigger (or actually much, much smaller) then ourselves.
The way to go is physics and the field of quantum mechanics in particular (the relationship between radiation and matter). In quantum mechanics certain physical phenomena, such as the nuclear decay of certain atoms, are fundamentally random and cannot, in principle, be predicted. This right here is our answer. These phenomenon's are used by hardware random number generators to generate a truly (from our perspective, at this time) random number.
The hardware number generators are used by poker sites to shuffle the deck and are thoroughly tested by independent third parties. The implementation of the generator differs per site but you can be sure the deck is shuffled more randomly then a dealer in a live game ever will.
I hope this article provided some insight in how the deck is shuffled in an online poker game. It's pretty sick the state of an atom (about 1 million times as small as the thickness of a hair) is responsible for the cards you get. So next time you suffer a bad beat, think of this article, count to ten, and blame the atoms!
NOTE: I only know for a fact PokerStars , Carbon Poker , and PokerNordica use certified random number generators. If you're not sure about the software you use, drop them an email.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Howto play AA ?
How to play Aces post-flop in deep stack situations ?
This hand is from the PokerStars $11 Sunday Hundred Grand - the largest tournament on the net with over 17,000 players. The standard in this tournament is typically quite bad, with most players playing either too wild or too predictably, with the average hand usually following pretty basic and predictable patterns.
The hand
Blinds were 25/50 with no ante.
Player one is under the gun with a stack of 2740.
Player two is in the small blind with 2830.
Player one limped under the gun for 50.
All other players folded round to player two in the small blind who raises to 200 with AsAd.
The big blind folds and player one calls - leaving the pot at 450.
The flop is 7sQc10c.
Player two bets 399 and player one calls - leaving the pot at 1248.
Turn is the Qh.
Player two checks and player one bets 500 - Player two calls after thinking for a while - leaving the pot at 2248.
The river is the 3s.
Player two checks and player one goes all in for 1641 which player two instantly calls.
Player one turns over 8c9c for a missed open ended straight and flush draw and player twos aces and queens wins the pot.
Analysis
The reason I picked this hand is afterwards some players at the table called player two an idiot while others complimented him for making a great play - any hand that divides player opinions like this is always interesting.
The pre-flop action is pretty standard in a tournament like this: player one wants to see a flop with a suited connector and player two wants to build a pot with aces. Calling a smallish re-raise from a player in the small blind is ok from player one - a suited connector is a good hand to take a flop with in position with decent stacks behind.
The flop is a great flop for both players - over pair for player two and flush draw and open-ended straight draw for player one. Player two makes an interesting bet - 399 into a pot of 450 - which sells the hand nicely (think of shops selling goods at $3.99 instead of $4 - a subtle psychological ploy), while also pricing out draws.
Player one elects to just call this bet with their monster (8c9c is actually a 5% favourite over aces on the flop) probably wanting to hit one of their 15 outs before committing all of their stack.
The turn comes the Qh - a dangerous card for player two as it is quite likely player one called with a hand like KQ/QJ/AQ pre-flop and has now made trips - and elects to check. Player one bets 500 into a pot of 1248.
In my opinion this bet gives away a huge amount of information about their hand. Firstly, it is unlikely that they have a queen or a full house, nearly all low stakes players would check their trips/full house in this spot, hoping that they can let you catch up and trap you for more bets later. Secondly, that they do have a hand of some kind - it is rare at these stakes that players will make advanced plays like calling large bets on the flop and value bet bluffing the turn.
This leaves a variety of hands left - straight draws, flush draws and possibly hands like 88, 99, or JJ (they may think you have AK and are genuinely trying to get value from their hand) - all of which Aces are beating. In the face of these factors I think player two’s flat call is good for one reason - how the river will be played.
If the river comes a club or a card that fills a straight draw (all of which could give player one trips if they hold a medium pocket pair), player one is likely to value bet the river and aces can be folded easily.
If none of these cards come then player one is probably going to either a) check the hand down, or b) put in a big bet bluff on the river. Either of these options is desirable for player two if a blank river comes - either way a big pot is won - the only question is how big.
Player two’s check when the three comes out is not actually a defensive move - it is a trap. I think this is pretty likely considering the instant call player two makes. Surely they would think for at least a second if they were worried about trip Queens or a full house? After all, they put in a long pause on the turn thinking about the 500 bet.
Good luck and don t forget ... Pocket acesr are not invincible ! Don t overvalue them !
This hand is from the PokerStars $11 Sunday Hundred Grand - the largest tournament on the net with over 17,000 players. The standard in this tournament is typically quite bad, with most players playing either too wild or too predictably, with the average hand usually following pretty basic and predictable patterns.
The hand
Blinds were 25/50 with no ante.
Player one is under the gun with a stack of 2740.
Player two is in the small blind with 2830.
Player one limped under the gun for 50.
All other players folded round to player two in the small blind who raises to 200 with AsAd.
The big blind folds and player one calls - leaving the pot at 450.
The flop is 7sQc10c.
Player two bets 399 and player one calls - leaving the pot at 1248.
Turn is the Qh.
Player two checks and player one bets 500 - Player two calls after thinking for a while - leaving the pot at 2248.
The river is the 3s.
Player two checks and player one goes all in for 1641 which player two instantly calls.
Player one turns over 8c9c for a missed open ended straight and flush draw and player twos aces and queens wins the pot.
Analysis
The reason I picked this hand is afterwards some players at the table called player two an idiot while others complimented him for making a great play - any hand that divides player opinions like this is always interesting.
The pre-flop action is pretty standard in a tournament like this: player one wants to see a flop with a suited connector and player two wants to build a pot with aces. Calling a smallish re-raise from a player in the small blind is ok from player one - a suited connector is a good hand to take a flop with in position with decent stacks behind.
The flop is a great flop for both players - over pair for player two and flush draw and open-ended straight draw for player one. Player two makes an interesting bet - 399 into a pot of 450 - which sells the hand nicely (think of shops selling goods at $3.99 instead of $4 - a subtle psychological ploy), while also pricing out draws.
Player one elects to just call this bet with their monster (8c9c is actually a 5% favourite over aces on the flop) probably wanting to hit one of their 15 outs before committing all of their stack.
The turn comes the Qh - a dangerous card for player two as it is quite likely player one called with a hand like KQ/QJ/AQ pre-flop and has now made trips - and elects to check. Player one bets 500 into a pot of 1248.
In my opinion this bet gives away a huge amount of information about their hand. Firstly, it is unlikely that they have a queen or a full house, nearly all low stakes players would check their trips/full house in this spot, hoping that they can let you catch up and trap you for more bets later. Secondly, that they do have a hand of some kind - it is rare at these stakes that players will make advanced plays like calling large bets on the flop and value bet bluffing the turn.
This leaves a variety of hands left - straight draws, flush draws and possibly hands like 88, 99, or JJ (they may think you have AK and are genuinely trying to get value from their hand) - all of which Aces are beating. In the face of these factors I think player two’s flat call is good for one reason - how the river will be played.
If the river comes a club or a card that fills a straight draw (all of which could give player one trips if they hold a medium pocket pair), player one is likely to value bet the river and aces can be folded easily.
If none of these cards come then player one is probably going to either a) check the hand down, or b) put in a big bet bluff on the river. Either of these options is desirable for player two if a blank river comes - either way a big pot is won - the only question is how big.
Player two’s check when the three comes out is not actually a defensive move - it is a trap. I think this is pretty likely considering the instant call player two makes. Surely they would think for at least a second if they were worried about trip Queens or a full house? After all, they put in a long pause on the turn thinking about the 500 bet.
Good luck and don t forget ... Pocket acesr are not invincible ! Don t overvalue them !
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Online Poker Winners last week
Betonpoker congratulates the following players who Final Tabled the following MTTs this weekend:
PokerStars Sunday Million
$1 Million Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
6,330 entrants
$1,266,000 paid out to 900 places
Haligon - $182,050
TeamWispy - $94,823
hansou - $68,237
dh3684 - $53,172
PkrHolic - $40,638
bb55 - $29,118
fladfisk111 - $20,889
zoomboy - $12,660
Urlings - $7,849
PokerStars Sunday Warm-Up
$400k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
2,104 entrants
$420,800 paid out to 270 places
MasterJNeel - $82,560
nicava - $41,659
Zugwat - $29,624
youscareppl - $23,985
bjerke1972 - $18,809
Yank46 - $14,180
Kenny Rap - $9,972
Mrsgardener - $6,185
postmannen - $3,703
PokerStars Second Chance
$200k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
1,071 entrants
$214,200 paid out to 153 places
downosaur - $46,053
bigpman8 - $25,339
777toome - $17,136
troster16 - $13,708
Livin on Luk - $11,031
PieOhMy - $8,353
bds18 - $6,211
Dude Seeger - $4,284
g8nana - $2,463
PokerStars 150k Guaranteed NLH
Buy-In: $215 with Rebuys
263 entrants
$209,00 paid out to 27 places
AJKHoosier1 - $57,475
UGOTPZD - $36,575
Pwnasaurus - $24,244
ocrowe - $16,720
ch0ppy - $12,540
rockets23 - $9,405
charder30 - $7,315
muchbetter - $5,434
youwannaknow - $3,553
PokerStars High Stakes Showdown
Buy-In: $10,300
4 entrants
$40,000 paid out to 2 places
1 $tinger 88 - $25,000
2 lftarii - $15,000
200k Guranteed
Buy-In: $215
937 entrants
$200,000 paid out to 100 places
mnsprout - $45,000
Tool_Triad - $26,500
Uli Kunkel - $18,000
Trifecta07 - $13,100
Ruprikkt - 10,500
Tha_karas1212 - $8,500
IDoUrDaughter - $6,500
ELMO_MASK - $4,500
woot woot - $3,400
Runarsson - $2,000
PokerStars Sunday Million
$1 Million Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
6,330 entrants
$1,266,000 paid out to 900 places
Haligon - $182,050
TeamWispy - $94,823
hansou - $68,237
dh3684 - $53,172
PkrHolic - $40,638
bb55 - $29,118
fladfisk111 - $20,889
zoomboy - $12,660
Urlings - $7,849
PokerStars Sunday Warm-Up
$400k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
2,104 entrants
$420,800 paid out to 270 places
MasterJNeel - $82,560
nicava - $41,659
Zugwat - $29,624
youscareppl - $23,985
bjerke1972 - $18,809
Yank46 - $14,180
Kenny Rap - $9,972
Mrsgardener - $6,185
postmannen - $3,703
PokerStars Second Chance
$200k Guaranteed
Buy-In: $215
1,071 entrants
$214,200 paid out to 153 places
downosaur - $46,053
bigpman8 - $25,339
777toome - $17,136
troster16 - $13,708
Livin on Luk - $11,031
PieOhMy - $8,353
bds18 - $6,211
Dude Seeger - $4,284
g8nana - $2,463
PokerStars 150k Guaranteed NLH
Buy-In: $215 with Rebuys
263 entrants
$209,00 paid out to 27 places
AJKHoosier1 - $57,475
UGOTPZD - $36,575
Pwnasaurus - $24,244
ocrowe - $16,720
ch0ppy - $12,540
rockets23 - $9,405
charder30 - $7,315
muchbetter - $5,434
youwannaknow - $3,553
PokerStars High Stakes Showdown
Buy-In: $10,300
4 entrants
$40,000 paid out to 2 places
1 $tinger 88 - $25,000
2 lftarii - $15,000
Buy-In: $215
937 entrants
$200,000 paid out to 100 places
mnsprout - $45,000
Tool_Triad - $26,500
Uli Kunkel - $18,000
Trifecta07 - $13,100
Ruprikkt - 10,500
Tha_karas1212 - $8,500
IDoUrDaughter - $6,500
ELMO_MASK - $4,500
woot woot - $3,400
Runarsson - $2,000
Sunday, October 07, 2007
World Blogger Championship
PokerStars is home to the world's largest online poker tournaments and qualifies more players for World Series of Poker Satellites, the World Poker Tour, and the European Poker Tour than any other internet poker site.
From now until the end of 2007, if you make your first-ever real money deposit, PokerStars will give you a 100% bonus up to $50. Use the bonus code "First2007" to begin earning your extra cash.
Play at PokerStars , the number one site on the Internet for poker tournaments.
I have registered to play in the PokerStars World Blogger Championship of Online Poker!
This Online Poker Tournament is a No Limit Texas Holdem event exclusive to Bloggers.
Registration code: 5969206
From now until the end of 2007, if you make your first-ever real money deposit, PokerStars will give you a 100% bonus up to $50. Use the bonus code "First2007" to begin earning your extra cash.
Play at PokerStars , the number one site on the Internet for poker tournaments.
Saturday, October 06, 2007
The Pokerbowl
The U.S. Poker League has announced the PokerBowl, a competition in which 25 U.S. cities will compete for a national title. The event is set to kick off on October 20th, 2007 in Las Vegas, and many cities are scrambling to fill their rosters with the best talent that poker has to offer.
Some have already secured local pros willing to represent their hometowns. Lee Watkinson will play for Seattle, T.J. Cloutier for Dallas and Paul Darden jr. for Boston. Other teams have made chemistry a priority, rounding up players that know each other well. Full Tilt pros Clonie Gowen and Chris Ferguson with play for Houston alongside 2006 WSOP 3rd place finisher Michael Binger. Meanwhile, Phil Laak and Jennifer Tilly feel confident representing host city Las Vegas with pals Antonio Esfandiari and Danny Masterson.
Although ‘poker rankings’ have yet to be established, one team likely to top such a list would be the “Denver High Rollers.” With solid players Paul Wasicka, Chad Brown and Vanessa Rousso already on board, the team recently added father and son powerhouse, poker legend Doyle Brunson and his son Todd.
As the event nears, many questions still linger. How will team-poker fare in the primarily player-independent game of poker? What strategies will teams employ and to what degree will team chemistry be a factor? With the PokerBowl set to air on Fox Sports beginning in early 2008, these questions will soon be answered.
Some have already secured local pros willing to represent their hometowns. Lee Watkinson will play for Seattle, T.J. Cloutier for Dallas and Paul Darden jr. for Boston. Other teams have made chemistry a priority, rounding up players that know each other well. Full Tilt pros Clonie Gowen and Chris Ferguson with play for Houston alongside 2006 WSOP 3rd place finisher Michael Binger. Meanwhile, Phil Laak and Jennifer Tilly feel confident representing host city Las Vegas with pals Antonio Esfandiari and Danny Masterson.
Although ‘poker rankings’ have yet to be established, one team likely to top such a list would be the “Denver High Rollers.” With solid players Paul Wasicka, Chad Brown and Vanessa Rousso already on board, the team recently added father and son powerhouse, poker legend Doyle Brunson and his son Todd.
As the event nears, many questions still linger. How will team-poker fare in the primarily player-independent game of poker? What strategies will teams employ and to what degree will team chemistry be a factor? With the PokerBowl set to air on Fox Sports beginning in early 2008, these questions will soon be answered.
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Bluffing in live games
When many players bluff in live games they go to great lengths to try and be as serious and still as possible. They will sit motionless, hold their breath, avoid eye contact, anything to try and give off the gravity of the play they have made. They want you to believe they have a big hand (to go with their big bet) and to display the seriousness of the situation and the power of their holding.
This is typical human behaviour when trying to deceive people. The ‘mad genius’ of poker - Mike Caro has frequently talked about how humans try and disguise their actions by behaving in the opposite manner to their true cards.
People seem to associate seriousness with strength for obvious reasons; many of the most powerful institutions in the world maintain an aura of seriousness at all times-the royal family, the police, the government, the tax man - the list goes on and on. If a player seems to be exuding serious behaviours they will often be bluffing - it is an instinctual cultural behave when trying to show your power over somebody.
Compare this with when a player is holding the stone cold nuts - it is very hard to act in a serious manner when you are holding an unbeatable hand. There are two simple reasons for this; firstly, the hand is already won, the player feels no stress about how to win the actual pot; secondly, the player is no longer trying to dominate their opponent; they simply want to influence them into getting more money in the pot.
Influencing people looks like it requires some kind of stimulation (think of basic propaganda techniques) and leads people to think that by moving, talking, laughing, or using an object (a cigarette for example) that they will persuade the player threat they are lying about their hand and that their bet is a bluff. If a weak player is doing any of these things often they will not be bluffing.
Remember that these sort of behaviours are not fool proof. Many of the top pros go into the tank with both big hands and bluffs alike (Phil Hellmuth or Phil Laak are good examples of this), while others will talk and move with both bluffs and hands (Tony G or Mike Caro, for example). Any player doing well in a game will probably not be giving off consistent tells - try and focus on the more predictable behaviour of the losers in a game and punish them accordingly.
* a great article by Philip Tuck
This is typical human behaviour when trying to deceive people. The ‘mad genius’ of poker - Mike Caro has frequently talked about how humans try and disguise their actions by behaving in the opposite manner to their true cards.
People seem to associate seriousness with strength for obvious reasons; many of the most powerful institutions in the world maintain an aura of seriousness at all times-the royal family, the police, the government, the tax man - the list goes on and on. If a player seems to be exuding serious behaviours they will often be bluffing - it is an instinctual cultural behave when trying to show your power over somebody.
Compare this with when a player is holding the stone cold nuts - it is very hard to act in a serious manner when you are holding an unbeatable hand. There are two simple reasons for this; firstly, the hand is already won, the player feels no stress about how to win the actual pot; secondly, the player is no longer trying to dominate their opponent; they simply want to influence them into getting more money in the pot.
Influencing people looks like it requires some kind of stimulation (think of basic propaganda techniques) and leads people to think that by moving, talking, laughing, or using an object (a cigarette for example) that they will persuade the player threat they are lying about their hand and that their bet is a bluff. If a weak player is doing any of these things often they will not be bluffing.
Remember that these sort of behaviours are not fool proof. Many of the top pros go into the tank with both big hands and bluffs alike (Phil Hellmuth or Phil Laak are good examples of this), while others will talk and move with both bluffs and hands (Tony G or Mike Caro, for example). Any player doing well in a game will probably not be giving off consistent tells - try and focus on the more predictable behaviour of the losers in a game and punish them accordingly.
* a great article by Philip Tuck
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
