Posted by Rolf Carlsson on February 21, 2008 at 10:00am
If you haven't been to the PPA forum lately, you must stop by to discuss all that the PPA is doing, poker legislation, the presidential candidates' poker positions, the upcoming Congressional races, state issues, and other issues important to poker players.The forum has become very active over the past several months, but I have not been soo active as I ought to. I hope I'll find it to be a valuable resource in my and ours fight to advocate for our rights as poker players.Proud to play poker,Rolf Carlssonwww.pokerplayersalliance.org/forumRead more…
Posted by Merlin333 on February 21, 2008 at 4:36am
This is my first post here. It is not new but one most find funny if not ironic enjoy........"Websters"Definition:DonkeyDonkey:[donk]:noun, to donk v. slang. poor poker player, a player who thinks they are good but no evidence of this assertion can be found. 2. Often found shortstacked, whining or whining in the losers lounge while good players are still in the game - usually blurting unprompted questions or statements like: "play me for cash","play me for real", "freerolls suck/ are waste of time" ,"play me hu" , "I won this or that tournament last week","I play at (enter any famous casino name)","my bankroll is bigger than yours!" , etc., etc. etc.3. Usually in this situation being unable to beat players deemed, by player most often using this term, of lower skill. 4. Not to be confused with making a wrong read, bluffing, late positioned / big/short stack, big blinds, calling a 72 bluff or any other read that may give basis to call with something other than AA - they never like all other human poker players make mistakes. B. Frequently heard to exclaim "you called me with that"! note: this can usually be rebuffed with the reply "You went all in with that!" (see below: the video where Patrik Antonius' Ah 2c all in is called by Doyle Brunson's 3d 3c note: having just made the same play they earlier called out as a "donk play" when made by someone else - they never return the announcement. note: watch their hands carefully as they deftly,skillfully demonstrate how to win playing only 4 pocket pairs AA, KK, AK,QQ on the button! 5. Frequently chats, blogs, writes complaints about "that donk this", "that donk that", "why all the donks" complaints which can be traced back to being taken out time after time after time again by someone they consider a donk - never stopping to ask the question - "If it is they and not I who am a donk why can't I win against them? Is it possible I am the donkey?"5. Sometimes a mindless warning to someone who may be playing badly to stop and play better so they can win - instead of the person who cannot restrain themselves exploiting these weaknesses to win - this person would much rather play at a table with Stu Ungar, Alan Cunningham, Phil Ivey, Chip Jett, Barry Greenstein and Johnny Chan or where all players play perfectly and are therefore better than they, thereby insuring they lose (can't beat bad players / can't beat good players). (note: they frequently are "better" than these people too - no really just ask then check their ranking scores - zero does not mean they are bad)6. Often issued as an alert to the other players of "Hey a player with "lesser skills" is taking all my chips" and a reminder of "I can beat Raymer on any given day and I am making "expert" commentary on how others should play, ignore the fact I am not winning here and now because I am unable to take advantage of my own excellent advice".Appendix inspired by jsc88310 : Frequently the player who "checks you" to the nuts (e.g doesn't know the correct bet to give you incorrect odds to call and/or doesn't have the guts to make the bet and/or thinks it's a limit game), goes all in on the river (with 2nd or 3rd best hand) then screams "donk" ,"chaser" ,"riverrat" on the way to or from the losers lounge for twenty minutes!7. trite,overused, "TVPokerese" for someone who is "English challenged" trying very hard to sound like they "know poker" having not mastered the actual game. Verbal device used to distract from the fact their own play is poor. see also Yakkity, Yakkity, Yak, Blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda .....(did Webster play a lot of online poker or what!)(c)2007 JonHolt / Merlin333
Read more…
Come spend your weekend with REDsRAIDERS gang!!!!!Where: G2G poker Name: Redsraiders DestroyersWhen: Saturday afternoon 3pm est March 8th first gameWhat: a 2.20 cent NL-Holdem tourney1 dollar of each buy in will go to the prize pool at the end of 3 months for big final prize pool payout…. The more players a week the more the prize pool grows… example: if we get 10 players for 12 weeks the prize pool would be 120.00 plus 25.00 added from reds raiders staff to be played In the final game on May 31h….. The fun begins on March 8th !G2G does offer many deposit options. .EPASSPORTE If you don’t have it downloaded here is the link and new downloads get Free $3. Details in forum.http://record.g2gpoker.com/_8ad620f6729875fa265c2d73956ce0fe/Only those players who have played at least 1 buy in game for the 3 months will be eligible for the final big game… passwords will be giving out in private IM’s for the big game…Lets GO RAIDERS AND REPRESENT !! GO RAIDERS
Read more…
We are proud to be a long standing sponsor ofd the APCW . We endorse its outstanding values and hold in high regard the team that brought this to life and we look forward to a long association with the guys on this great new platform . Well done J Todd and teamRegardsGreg Gomez and te WJ Gambling Affiliates Team
Read more…
Just for those that might have missed it on the old blog or would just like to read it again .For those that don't know of the APCW , or just would like to read some of J.Todd's thoughts I had interviewed him and just posted it on my new site . Just read Chatting with the APCWRead more…
Posted by The Pokerkeep on February 19, 2008 at 11:30am
For those who live under a rock or slept through the last 4 days, this is an excerpt from the latest FT affiliate newsletter...__________________________________________________________Real Money Players - Changes Effective on April 1As an affiliate, we want to make sure you get the credit you deserve for directing real-money players to Full Tilt Poker.Our Affiliate Agreement defines a real money player as someone who makes their first real money deposit within 60 days of signing up on our site.Beginning April 1st, any player who waits longer than 60 days to make their first deposit will not be credited to any affiliate account. Make sure you don't lose any of the credit - or players - you deserve. Use our promotions and advice to help turn your play money accounts into real money in your pockets.____________________________________________________________There's a heated discussion going on at PAP over this newly enforced ruling.I suggest every FT affiliate should email their AM and complain loudly about this.It will cost you between 10% and 20% of your affiliate income once this goes into effect.Be vocal but be professional - get their attention!Read more…
Most people who play poker seriously started by playing in home games. The structure of these games is simple. Generally, everyone would ante a certain amount (say, $0.25) and then the betting was structured as to have a minimum and maximum bet. For example, the bets and raises would range between $0.25 and $2 each round.The play at home games was generally: bet, call (or perhaps bet, raise, call.) Most hands would go to a showdown, and typically the person who had the hottest cards would win at the end of the day. Games were mostly luck and a little bit of skill.Internet poker and casino poker are very different from this typical home game in 3 ways: the ante structure, the betting structure, and the competition.Ante StructureFirst, unless you are playing 7-card stud, there is no ante; instead, there are blinds. The person to the left of the dealer must pay the small blind and the person after him must pay the big blind. These are forced bets. All the other players are not forced to pay anything to receive cards (they do not need to ante), but they must match the big blind or any raise to the big blind to see the flop. Thus, a typical game, involving 6 people, with a small blind (SB) of 50 cents and a big blind (BB) of $1 would go as follows preflop:Seat one: SB ($.50)Seat two: BB ($1)Seat three: FoldSeat four: Calls BB ($1)Seat five: Raises BB ($2)Dealer (Seat six): FoldSeat one: FoldSeat two: Calls raise ($1)Seat four: Calls raise ($1)Then the betting would begin with the big blind (since the small blind folded) after the flop. For more information about blinds and betting structures, check out our Poker Rules section.Betting StructureIn addition to the ante structure being different, the type of betting differs. The most similar to the spread limit (i.e. the minimum and maximum bet) would be no-limit. There is still a minimum bet, however, the maximum bet is the amount of chips in front of you.There is a common no-limit myth that if someone bets more chips than you have, you must fold. That is not true. If Tom bets $30 and I only have $15, I only must put in $15 to call. If I'm the only person in the pot, Tom is essentially betting only $15. However, let's say that the pot is between me, Tom, and Jane. Suppose both Tom and Jane have $50, while I have $15. Tom put in $30, I go all-in for $15, and Jane must call $30 to stay in. $15 from each player ($45 total) would be in the main pot. $15 from Jane and $15 from Tom would be in a sidepot. So, at the showdown, I would be in contention for $45 and Tom and Jane would be in contention for the $45 main pot plus the $30 sidepot. If I have the best hand, and Jane has the second best hand, I would win $45 and she would win $30. If Jane's hand were better than mine, she would win the entire $75.Closely similar to no-limit is pot-limit, where you can bet any amount from the minimum bet to the size of the pot.Finally, the most popular form of betting is known as limit (also called fixed-limit). This type of game has fixed bets. For example, in a $2-$4 game, the size of the bets are $2 or $4, depending on which round it is. In Texas Hold'em and Omaha, each bet preflop and at the flop (when the three cards come out) is $2. If someone wishes to raise, he must do so by $2. Thus, in a 4-handed situation, this would be a typical case:Seat one: CheckSeat two: Bet $2Seat three: Raise $2 (to $4)Seat four: Call $4Seat one: FoldSeat two: Call $4The bets on the turn (when four cards are out) and the river (when all five cards are out) would be the higher amount: $4. So, taken the above example, this is how the turn betting may happen:Seat two: Bet $4Seat three: FoldSeat four: Raise $4 (to $8)Seat two: Call $4CompetitionFinally, skill pays off more on the internet and in the casino. People actually try to win because the money exchanged is often more than just nickels and dimes. You should not just call to the river 'just to see what he has' and such. You must use strategy if you expect to win in the long run.Someone whose only poker experience is playing at home games may win at first at internet or casino poker, but will probably lose in the long run (unless his or her home game is particularly tough). The other strategy articles on this website will help you to become a winning poker player.Read more…
How much money should I invest?This is an important question, with two simple answers.If you are a beginner or just looking to have fun, don't invest any more than is 'fun' to lose. Hence, if you're comfortable blowing a hundred bucks, put in $100 and see if you can win with it. This is what I did. My original roll was only $100, but I built it up into my current, much more powerful bankroll.Bankroll considerations are different for a seasoned player who has proven himself a winner. These types of players are looking to consistently make money at a given limit. If you are one of these players, you should be able to bank 200 big bets at the limit you play. Hence, if you play $2-$4, you should have an $800 roll ($4 * 200). For $5-$10, your target roll should be $2,000. These numbers prevent you from blowing your entire bankroll because of one bad run.Some say that 200 big bets is too few for shorthand, but I believe that you need to be reasonable about potential losses. You don't want to invest more than 200 big bets unless you've proven that you're successful at that limit.Also, it is a very good idea to keep a daily diary of your sessions. This will help you determine if you are a winning or a losing player and how often you win. It will also prove helpful come tax time if you live in a country with income tax on gambling winnings (in the UK, there is no tax on gambling winnings). If you plan on playing poker regularly, consider using a service such as Check Your Bets.Read more…
Poker sharks are commonly described as tight and aggressive: "These poker pros do not play many hands, but when they play them, they play them like they have the nuts."That's a nice general description, but it doesn't say much. In my opinion, a solid poker player is one who has mastered the four key skills of poker.Skill #1: Mathematics• A solid poker player knows the general probabilities of the game. For example, they know that you have about 1 in 8.5 chance of hitting a set when holding a pocket pair, and that you have about a 1 in 3 chance of completing a flopped flush draw by the river.• Good players understand the importance of outs. Outs are simply the number of cards that will improve your hand. Count your outs, multiply them by two, and add one, and that's roughly the percentage shot you have at hitting.• Good players can figure out the pot odds. Knowing outs is meaningless unless it's translated into rational, calculated betting. Knowing you have a 20% chance of hitting, what do you do then? If you're not sure, check out our Pot Odds article.• Math skills are the most basic knowledge; it's day-one reading. Anyone who doesn't understand these concepts should not play in a game for real money until they do.Skill #2: Discipline• Good poker players demand an advantage. What separates a winning poker player from a fish is that a fish does not expect to win, while a poker player does. A fish is happy playing craps, roulette, or the slots; he just hopes to get lucky. A poker player does not hope to get lucky. He just hopes others don't get lucky.• Good poker players understand that a different game requires a different discipline. A disciplined no-limit player can be a foolish limit player and vice versa. For example, a disciplined limit hold'em player has solid preflop skills. When there is not much action preflop, he or she only plays the better hands. When a lot of people are limping in, he or she will make a loose call with a suited connector or other speculative hand.• A disciplined player knows when to play and when to quit. He recognizes when he is on tilt and is aware when a game is too juicy to just quit while ahead.• A disciplined player knows that he is not perfect. When a disciplined player makes a mistake, he learns. He does not blame others. He does not cry. He learns from the mistake and moves on.Skill #3: Psychology• A good player is not a self-centered player. He may be the biggest SOB you know. He may not care about anyone but himself, and he may enjoy stealing food from the poor. However, when a poker pro walks into a poker room, he always empathizes with his opponents. He tries to think what they think and understand the decisions they make and why they make them. The poker pro always tries to have an answer to these questions:1. What does my opponent have?2. What does my opponent think I have?3. What does my opponent think I think he has?• Knowing the answer to these questions is the first step, manipulating the answers is the second and more important step. Suppose that you have a pair of kings and your opponent has a pair of aces. If you both know what the other has, and you both know that you know what the other has, then why play a game of poker? A poker pro manipulates the answers to questions #2 and #3 by slowplaying, fastplaying, and bluffing in order to throw his opponent off.• Good poker players know that psychology is much more important in a no-limit game than in a limit game. Limit games often turn into math battles, while no-limit games carry a strong psychology component. Thus, poker tells are much more important in no-limit games.Skill #4: Understanding Risk vs. Reward• Pot odds and demanding an advantage fall into this category. Poker players are willing to take a long-shot risk if the reward is high enough, but only if the expected return is higher than the risk.• More importantly, they understand the risk-vs.-reward nature of the game outside of the actual poker room. They know how much bank they need to play, and how much money they need in reserve to cover other expenses in life.• Good poker players understand they need to be more risk-averse with their overall bankroll than their stack at the table.When you play in an individual game, you must value every chip equally at the table. You should only care about making correct plays. If you buy in for $10, you should be okay with taking a 52% chance of doubling up to $20 if it means a 48% chance of losing your $10.However, you should be risk-averse with your overall bankroll. You need to have enough money so that any day at the tables will not affect your bankroll too much. If you worry too much about losing, then you will make mistakes at the table. You need to leave yourself with the chance to fight another day.lRead more…
Why play poker? It seems like a simple question, but the answer is both complex and personal. There are many different reasons to play or not to play poker. Often, the reasons a person has for playing poker will shed light on what type of player that person is and what limits and games he should play.Reasons to Play PokerSocial rewards. This is a major reason behind the traditional home game. Many friends like to hang out and play cards, and many people become friends over the card table. If this is one of the major reasons you wish to play, stick with low stakes, where the games are more fun and friendly.Entertainment. Poker is a competitive game. To win, one needs the skills and the bit of luck the game necessitates. Many find this enjoyable and compare poker to playing a sport. Make sure you don't get swept up in the 'entertainment' nature of poker, because it is possible to lose a lot of money at the game.Education. The skills necessary to become a good poker player apply well to other aspects of life. Poker will help you to improve your judgment skills (reading people) and sharpen your logical and strategic skills (how to play your hand).To make money. Most people play poker for fun, but some make considerable money at it. Of course, these people are few and far between. Not everyone can make a lot of money from poker. Nevertheless, the desire to win more is definitely a reason to improve your poker skills.Poker is one of the few forms of wagering where you can actually win. Casino-style betting is rigged against you (it is impossible to win in the long run at craps, roulette, etc., no matter what anyone says. The only exception is blackjack if you count cards, which is extremely difficult). Sports betting is also nearly impossible to beat without insider information. Thus, poker is one of the few forms of gambling where one can actually win money in the long run simply by being good at the game.Reasons NOT to Play PokerYou have a gambling problem. When anyone plays poker, he or she risks losing money. One should never play poker with money that he or she cannot afford to lose. Poker winnings should not be viewed as a method to 'strike it rich,' and losses should not be viewed as money that needs to be 'won back.' If you are prone to a gambling problem, do not play poker.Disclaimer: Most jurisdictions view poker as gambling; in some jurisdictions, playing poker for money is illegal. The information contained here should not be construed as legal advice. Many people have become addicted to poker and lost considerable sums of money. Full DisclaimerRead more…
The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'by Jerome R. CorsiPosted: 05/22/2006The idea to form the North American Union as a super-NAFTA knitting together Canada, the United States and Mexico into a super-regional political and economic entity was a key agreement resulting from the March 2005 meeting held at Baylor University in Waco, Tex., between President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin.A joint statement published by the three presidents following their Baylor University summit announced the formation of an initial entity called, “The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The joint statement termed the SPP a “trilateral partnership” that was aimed at producing a North American security plan as well as providing free market movement of people, capital, and trade across the borders between the three NAFTA partners:We will establish a common approach to security to protect North America from external threats, prevent and respond to threats within North America, and further streamline the secure and efficient movement of legitimate, low-risk traffic across our borders.A working agenda was established:We will establish working parties led by our ministers and secretaries that will consult with stakeholders in our respective countries. These working parties will respond to the priorities of our people and our businesses, and will set specific, measurable, and achievable goals.The U.S. Department of Commerce has produced a SPP website, which documents how the U.S. has implemented the SPP directive into an extensive working agenda.Following the March 2005 meeting in Waco, Tex., the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published in May 2005 a task force report titled “Building a North American Community.” We have already documented that this CFR task force report calls for a plan to create by 2010 a redefinition of boundaries such that the primary immigration control will be around the three countries of the North American Union, not between the three countries. We have argued that a likely reason President Bush has not secured our border with Mexico is that the administration is pushing for the establishment of the North American Union.The North American Union is envisioned to create a super-regional political authority that could override the sovereignty of the United States on immigration policy and trade issues. In his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Pastor, the Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, stated clearly the view that the North American Union would need a super-regional governance board to make sure the United States does not dominate the proposed North American Union once it is formed:NAFTA has failed to create a partnership because North American governments have not changed the way they deal with one another. Dual bilateralism, driven by U.S. power, continue to govern and irritate. Adding a third party to bilateral disputes vastly increases the chance that rules, not power, will resolve problems.This trilateral approach should be institutionalized in a new North American Advisory Council. Unlike the sprawling and intrusive European Commission, the Commission or Council should be lean, independent, and advisory, composed of 15 distinguished individuals, 5 from each nation. Its principal purpose should be to prepare a North American agenda for leaders to consider at biannual summits and to monitor the implementation of the resulting agreements.Pastor was a vice chairman of the CFR task force that produced the report “Building a North American Union.”Pastor also proposed the creation of a Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment with the view that “a permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law.” The intent is for this North American Union Tribunal would have supremacy over the U.S. Supreme Court on issues affecting the North American Union, to prevent U.S. power from “irritating” and retarding the progress of uniting Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. into a new 21st century super-regional governing body.Robert Pastor also advises the creation of a North American Parliamentary Group to make sure the U.S. Congress does not impede progress in the envisioned North American Union. He has also called for the creation of a North American Customs and Immigration Service which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security.Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity. Pastor has also called for the creation of a new currency which he has coined the “Amero,” a currency that is proposed to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar, and the Mexican peso.If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election. Pursuing any plan that would legalize the conservatively estimated 12 million illegal aliens now in the United States could well spell election disaster for the Republican Party in 2006, especially for the House of Representative where every seat is up for grabs._____________________________________________________________________________Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians," and most recently, "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders." He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.Jerome R. Corsi is a staff reporter for WND. He received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972 and has written many books and articles, including his latest best-seller, "The Late Great USA."You can read more of his articles at:http://www.worldnetdaily.comand also athttp://www.humanevents.comRead more…
