[-] .
An announcement - I have decided the time has come to let Plan3t Gong gracefully retire.

Over the last few years it has been a pleasure, no - an honour, to have provided 100's of posts with the theme of 'making you think' about poker in all its wonderful forms. However, life moves on, and rather than allow my passion for this blog to dwindle into nothingness or simply abandoning posting altogether I would prefer to draw a definite line, say a 'big thanks' to the readers who made the whole thing possible and then move on...

Good news - I'll continue to blog, Melted Felt is my poker news satire blog and that will be updated regularly. Also considering a more personal non-business blog too (we will see). I'll also continue to write tons of poker strategy articles... these now go on my 'Planet' network (see adverts on the right --> )

Finally, it seemed a shame to waste so many strategy / thought provoking pieces... so I have make a 'super sticky' with links to as many as possible (sticky also linked on right). Updates will continue below when I have a new business venture to announce.

Thanks very much to everyone, as I say it has been a genuine honour to have been read (and hopefully enjoyed!) by so many of you...

GL at the tables, Mark

Time For A Graceful Retirement! - http://plan3tgongpoker.blogspot.com/feeds/438678113966335151/comments/default

[-] Conversation with a friend of mine earlier. To set the scene i used to go out with a girlg called Georgina (George) who was actually mental i think.. anyway.. conversation from earlier

It is a bit wrong...:

U remember George?xx

do i have to remember george?

ok yeah...

She had sex with her brother before you fucked her.xx

right before? or like an hour?x

Few weeks I think. Seriously I know this as fact mate, she was not right in the head but THAT is beyond fucked up! He blood brother they share a mother and she shagged him, and more than once!xx

really? how do you know? x


Quite lond winded how I know, but she told me after she'd gone to see him that she'd had a dream she'd shagged him and she was worried bout it. I'd actually just read a piece in a mag about blood relatives who meet up after a long absence and are sexually attracted to each other, it's a well accepted thing that sometimes happens but it does wear off with time. She seemed relieved though I was like fucking hel if I'd had a dream like that I wouldn't tell ANYONE man. Then anyway after she split from Chris ******* he said to me that she'd told him she'd fucked her brother and she was sick. I was like mate no she might have had a dream or something but it didn't happen, and he was adamant she'd told him she'd done it, I thought she was just trying to shock him (coz the stuff she told me him and her did in the bedroom was fucking weird man) and thought again why the fucks she saying shit like that to people coz Chrsi totally believed she had. Anyway, I saw a mate of mine ***** on ***** profile and his ex Charlotte was really good mates with George for ages, and her name came up and he said that she was evil and kept trying to fuck ******* and she'd fucked her own brother, I was like I thought i was the only person who knew anything bout that and thought Chris ***** must ahve been saying shit to people so I aksed him how he knew and he said he was in bed with ****** and he made her put the phone on speaker when George rang coz he didn't trust her and George was crying saying she'd done soemthing really bad and said all bout it and he heard evertything, then she told me she'd just dreamt it obviously. So Jesus man it was TRUE! Yak! I never thought for a second it could be man it's so wrong!xx

what did they do in the bedroom that was weird to you?!

Thye ahd sex in front of a live webcam with people watching and she fisted his arse (at his request) and there was shit everywhere apparently, he like to do it in front of people and be analized, but I don't knw if it's true she said it after they broke up so she might have been trying to cause shit for him. Again, not sure why she wanted to tell me that but she's not shy when it comes to shit you really shouldn't reveal!xx

this is by far the strangest conversation i've ever had...

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

jesus...

The strangest most worrying facebook conversation i've ever had....... - http://united113-pokerblog.blogspot.com/feeds/8607622020668381059/comments/default

[-] There are some visuals that just can't be captured with a still camera. The Grand Canyon comes to mind, the Taj Mahal, any ocean at any time and the view from the windows in my new apartment. The shot above was the closest I could find but it is only a fractional glimpse of what I get to see every day.

A Room With a View - http://pokershrink.blogspot.com/feeds/3745854969103429145/comments/default

[-]

A poker hand that I played the other night at Planet Hollywood got me thinking about a great episode of the great sitcom "Taxi." It took me a while, but with the wonders of the web, I was able to track down the episode from some key words in the plot, and actually found it online. It's season 4, episode 22 (the 88th episode of the series), first aired on April 8, 1982.

Jim (Christopher Lloyd, who is funny every second he is on screen) accidentally burns up Louie's (Danny DeVito) apartment and everything in it. But Jim's millionaire father is willing to make good on the damages, writing Louie a blank check, with the instruction to fill it out for whatever amount he feels is fair compensation. The greedy Louie is tormented by the problem of what dollar amount to write on the check. "If I fill this check out for a million bucks, his dad would never cover it. But there is a figure, an exact figure, one big enough so that he'll go, 'brrrrrrr' [shudders], but not so big that he won't say, 'ehhhhhh' [shrugging dismissively]." (Sorry for the vagueness. It's all conveyed with voice tone and body language.) After much hand-wringing, Louie finally settles on $29,542. Jim calls his father, who OKs the amount. Louie is ecstatic at first, but then nearly has a heart attack when Jim relays the news that his father had been expecting a figure of about $200,000.

(You can watch the "Taxi" episode in three parts on YouTube: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. )

I think of this conundrum every time I'm faced with the situation of a river bet when I have a hand I'm sure is a winner and an opponent who shows willingness to call. The problem is trying to guess the figure, the exact figure, that is the maximum that he will decide to call. Make it too big and he folds, leaving you with no further profit on the hand. Make it too small, and you leave money in his stack that should be in yours.

Thursday night I had been playing at Planet Hollywood for about five hours, without much to show for it. I had started with the maximum buy-in of $300, and had only increased it to about $400. I was thinking that this was going to be kind of a disappointment of a night and maybe I should pack it in. But about that time, I found the two red jacks in the small blind. Now, a lot of people hate jacks, but I have found them to play very profitably, for the most part.

One of the few decent players at the table--very solid, classic tight-aggressive style--raised to $15 from the cutoff seat. I happily called, even though I knew he could easily have a bigger pair. It was just us to the flop, which was a lovely Q-J-x with two spades. I checked. He bet $20. I called. The turn was the 7c. I checked again. He bet $30. This was significant, because he had previously shown a tendency to fire only once if he missed the flop, so his bet told me that his minimum hand here was an top pair (e.g., A-Q), and more likely he had an overpair to the board. Of course, there was a chance that he had me in a horrible set-over-set situation, but you just have to accept that possible fate once in a while and not let it hamper you. I check-raised to $90. He called with almost no hesitation, again suggesting that he genuinely liked his hand.

The river was maybe the best card I could have asked for: the 7s. It gave me a full house. If perchance he had something like the As-Ks, he would have made his nut flush. More realistically, though, if he had an overpair, he would have improved to two pair, and thus think that perhaps I had hit the flop with Q-J and had now been counterfeited by his better two pair. My check-raise on the turn would not be consistent with how he would expect me to play a flush draw, so I didn't think he would put me on that and be scared by a third spade.

So now I had the dilemma of how much to bet. There was about $245 in the pot. I had about $275 left, and he was roughly equally deep. How much would he call with just an overpair, which I had concluded was his most likely holding? I took a little more time than usual on this, both because I was sincerely pondering how much I could charge him, but also because I was hoping that the Hollywooding would make him think that I was falsely representing the flush with just top pair (e.g., A-Q in the hole), or that I had been playing Q-J, realized the dilemma that the paired board gave me, and was trying to decide whether to give up or go for it. I have no idea if my hesitation actually got him thinking that way, but that was the goal. Anyway, I finally landed on $140 as my amount. To give it a finishing touch, I did some little mannerisms that were different from the way I had bet every previous time (like announce the amount verbally before putting it in), because he was one of the few who might have been paying attention; I hadn't been caught bluffing all night, so he might notice changes and think they indicated something was different this time. Again, I can't know whether that bit of trickery really did anything, but it couldn't hurt.

He took nearly two minutes to think. He counted out the amount, separated it from the rest of his chips, looked at what he would have left, appeared to be trying to estimate the pot, rechecked the board and his down cards a couple of times, etc. He finally pushed it forward. I showed my boat. He nodded grimly, knocked the table, and quietly said, "Nice hand" before tossing his cards away unseen. (I'm left with the conviction that he had either A-A or K-K for the overpair, or, less likely, Q-J for top two pair.)

His reaction makes me think that my river bet probably got very close to that elusive "exact figure" that is the most that he would be willing to put out as a crying call without being so excruciatingly painful that he decides to fold. That's rare. Usually in those situations I'm left with the feeling that I blew it one direction or the other.

But still, could I have gotten more? Ed Miller recently wrote a Card Player magazine column on how no-limit players tend to bet too small with their strong hands, missing opportunities to take an opponent's whole stack. (See here.) Similarly, the book he co-wrote with David Sklansky, No Limit Hold'em: Theory and Practice, emphasizes the need to plan bet sizing so as to capture entire stacks. So even though I think I extracted the maximum on the river, I'm left wondering if I could have done better on earlier streets. Would I have gotten more by betting out on the flop and hoping for a raise? Would a check-raise on the flop have set up a bigger pot by the end of the hand? I suppose there is no way to know. I will just have to be satisfied with the roughly $260 I made from him, and continue to wonder if it could have been more, or if a different line would have scared him off before he became married to his hand.

What do you think?

"There is a figure, an exact figure" - http://pokergrump.blogspot.com/feeds/1713632538572582839/comments/default

[-] I recently realized how few poetry-related titles I bought in all of last year; I cutnpaste my 2009 "Bought Poetry List" below: a mere 36 titles. I could say "Great Recession", but it's more that I get most of my poetry books from other sources (gifts, trades, etc.) than through purchasing. That I have huge access to poetry's "gift economy" actually makes me more conscious -- or I try to be -- of buying books, but I don't think 2009 was a good result (particularly when the list is so stacked for my own titles-sheesh). Self-awareness: it's a good thing! I shall try to do better. Meanwhile, Dear Blog File, here are the poetry titles (either poetry collections or other works by poets) I bought last year:

2009 PURCHASED POETRY TITLES:

THE SUBURBAN ECSTASIES by Seth Abramson

FRAGILE REPLACEMENTS by William Allegrezza

CHRISTMAS POEM (book & CD) by Maya Angelou

KALI'S BLADE by Michelle Bautista

1000 VIEWS OF GIRL SINGING, Ed. John Bloomberg-Rissman

AT THE PULSE by Laura Carter

RHAPSODY IN PLAIN YELLOW by Marilyn Chin

FOR GIRLS & OTHERS by Shanna Compton

SELECTED POEMS 1956-1975 by Diane di Prima

KA-CHING! by Denise Duhamel

WORLD BALL NOTEBOOK by Sesshu Foster

DELIVERED by Sarah Gambito

POEM, HOME: AN ANTHOLOGY OF ARS POETICA, Eds. Jennifer Hill and Dan Waber

VANITAS literary/arts journal, Ed. Vincent Katz

MAID OF HEAVEN: THE STORY OF SAINT JOAN OF ARC by Ben D. Kennedy

THE NIGHT SKY: WRITINGS ON THE POETICS OF EXPERIENCE by Ann Lauterbach

THE BEDSIDE GUIDE TO NO TELL MOTEL SECOND FLOOR, Eds. Reb Livingston and Molly Arden

SOULS OF WIND, novel by John Olson

MY ZORBA by Danielle Pafunda

SELECTED POEMS OF OCTAVIO PAZ, bilingual edition with translations by Muriel Rukeyser

GRAVITY & GRACE by Ernesto Priego

THE GODS WE WORSHIP LIVE NEXT DOOR by Bino A. Realuyo

LEAFLETS: POEMS 1965-1968 by Adrienne Rich

LENINGRAD: AMERICAN WRITERS IN THE SOVIET UNION, memoir by Ron Silliman, Bruce Watten, Michael Davidson and Lyn Hejinian

WARSAW BIKINI by Sandra Simonds

THE MYTH OF SIMPLE MACHINES by Laurel Snyder

FACINGS by Jordan Stempleman

WHAT'S THE MATTER by Jordan Stempleman

THE GINKGO LIGHT by Arthur Sze

THE BLIND CHATELAINE'S KEYS by Eileen Tabios

DREDGING FOR ATLANTIS by Eileen Tabios

FOOTNOTES TO ALGEBRA: UNCOLLECTED POEMS 1995-2009 by Eileen Tabios

NOTA BENE EISWEIN by Eileen Tabios

ROMAN HOLIDAY by Eileen Tabios

TRANSCENDENTAL STUDIES: A TRILOGY by Keith Waldrop

COLLECTED POEMS by C.K. Williams

RECESSION PURCHASING - http://www.blogger.com/feeds/30425632/posts/default/5389000021126365441

[-] Got my exam timetable, i finish 1st june, I have £25k ready to play around with when im done....

Rob

Exams - http://pokerwithrobert.blogspot.com/feeds/7151937173763487701/comments/default

[-] i really really really really need to withdraw from boss and play the games i enjoy and do well at. I've dumped about 44euros in the space of an hour and a half playing 3 +0.30 5 seater SNG on virgin. Every table i look at am being dumped out by some daft hand and can't hit anything. I might withdraw and walk away completely and remove myself from poker. Does it really do anything for me?? or is it just a game for degenarate gamblers who lose out on so much of their normal lives just to win fuck all at the poker tables.

It's funny how it works, i hadn't worked for a year, and as soon as i start working i then get worried about money. I really want to go on holiday this year so was looking for my bankroll to pay towards that. I bought a car today anyway an old N reg VW Golf TDI complete with lots of rust and sticky tape holind the bumpers together but it cost me £430 with 12 months MOT and 6 months Tax and £20 worth of diesel in the tank so not bad.

Bankroll Disaster - http://united113-pokerblog.blogspot.com/feeds/899778099942614498/comments/default

[-] Race 1 - 6 Personal Edge (7-2)

• Result - 10-9-5
  
• 6 scratched

Race 2 - 2 Dynaquake (9-2) 3 Sir Classic Chris (5-1)

• Result - 10-5-3-2

Race 3 - No Pick
Race 4 - 7 Scarlet and Gold (9-2)

• Result - 10-11-7

Race 5 - No Pick
Race 6 - 2 Tabby Lane (9-2)

• Result - 2-10-7. Returned 10.40 for 8.40 gain

Race 7 - 4 Secret Kin (8-1) 6 Dr. Zic (6-1)

• Result - 6-8-1. Returned 7.20 for gain of 3.20.

Race 8 - 6 Liberally (12-1)

• Result - 8-4-6

Race 9 - 4 Imaginary Saint (5-1)

• Result - 6-2-7
  
• Imaginary Saint brought up the rear

Race 10 - 4 Sneaking Uponyou (10-1)
Race 11 Tampa Derby - 7 Odysseus (7-2)
Race 12 - 8 Stumbling Block (9-2) 9 Rey Del Sol (10-1)

13 win bets in 10 races for $26.

Tampa Bay Downs 13 March 2010 - http://blog.vitriol.net/feeds/2351633220570567728/comments/default

[-]

 

I noticed, looking over the hit list, yesterday, that the mention of Obama and Company drew attention from the Black Hole sites again. I’m beginning to appreciate them. Really. The hit counter keeps score. Love that.

I’ve also noticed that Obama has moved aside his overseas trip to spend time twisting arms for his unpopular medical program.

I’ve wondered, more than I should I suppose, where this individual sees the line. There is Congress, who is suppose to watch the money and does not, and there is the Chief Administrator of the the Federal Government – supposedly Obama. Each has a function.

Yet we hear Congress say “The administrator wants,” or “The administrator hasn’t told us what to do about.”

I would dearly love to curse, cuss, swear or other wise rant on supposedly mature persons that do not know, in rarified air (meaning the odorous atmosphere within high level politics) how to fly and feed themselves. Congress! for God’s sake! A separate function, asking what the very antithesis of separation of powers wants.

I shouldn’t be surprised. The rabble on the hill has always feared the veto pen, and by extension the wielder.  It would be refreshing to see the rabble vote down a veto or simply say the administrator is full of hockey and we’re not even bothering to consider addressing those desires.

A number of years ago a few colleagues were casting about in their normal throes of indecision and found a picture. I’ve forgotten the original intent of the picture, but I do remember both it and the captions the colleagues had added.

The picture (drawing actually) showed a hawk swooping down upon a mouse, and the mouse giving the hawk a single digit greeting. The picture has been widely distributed, of course, and various captions of other sorts from other interests have expressed their cultural view points.

My group happened to be aviation buffs. They therefore labeled the hawk FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and the mouse as private aviation. There is some justification to their feelings.

I felt, personally, that the captions should have been reversed and a cape added to the mouse’s shoulders, representing, of course, the Super Mouse fingering the masses, in spite of the wishes.

Browsing the web, I came upon an up date of the concept of the hawk and mouse. Un-captioned:

I’d dearly love to see Congress (the mouse) assume the courage to finger the owl (the administrator).

On a like note, eternal longevity is possible if one waits long enough.

_____

From the reaches,

Ten Mile

Saturday, March 13, 2010 - http://tenmile-thane.blogspot.com/feeds/8847441326782105918/comments/default

[-]




To reveal the hidden answer, use your mouse to highlight the space immediately after the word "Answer" below.




Answer: Flamingo

Guess the casino, #445 - http://pokergrump.blogspot.com/feeds/3149584060825524439/comments/default