Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 8:56 AM
Completely off the topic of poker, but while our site seems to be the most visited place on the net, it seems that second place goes to jibjab.  You have to see this, you will pee in your pants...plenty of jabs at the right and the left

(0) comments

Tuesday, July 27, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 4:40 PM
I will be in Htwon working the full week leading up to Labor Day weekend, and I intend to stick around for the 3 day weekend.  While I doubt that work will allow much poker during the week, please send me an invite if you get something together.

More importantly, if you get a game together on Sunday or Monday (ahem, Junell), please let me know.  I would love to donate

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 4:37 PM
To: DrFro & Johnnymac
Subject: Tourney
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 13:35:51 -0500

On Sunday August 8th we are hosting another NL Holdem tourney.  Gary's house again. $100 buy-in $50 rebuys/addon. Same as before except higher blinds tostart in an effort to get a few more than 2 rebuys.
Please help spread the word.  The more the merrier, etc.
if interested, I can email you Jeff's address....I don't want to post it out on the Net.   Note that Juan Miranda won the last one, so it can't be too hard to win ;-)

(0) comments

Monday, July 26, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 3:37 PM
I found 7 typos and/or grammatical errors in this article.  As a sport which has only been in the mainstream for a short time and is still dominated by people with less education than a Nebraska football team, poker really suffers from some poor writing.

Some of the poor writers have excellent points, but just can't write.  How many mistakes can you spot in Mason Malmuth's Poker Essays?  He is a brilliant &  mathmatically minded man, but the assault he takes on the English language is sickening.  The only things worse are the editor's errors, which include duplicate pages.  Similiar problems can be found with Sklansky and others.

In addition, there are writers who simply can't make a point.  The author of the above article mentions The Art of War, goes on a tangent about poker, and then finishes by admitting that he just flipped the first three chapters of the TAoW.

So this brings me to my point, which has been made here before.  If you want to read about poker from people that can write, read Positively Fifth Street first.  Although a big jump down from there, Poker Nation and The Man with $100,000 Breast were written by writers that happen to know poker, not by poker players that happen to have a keyboard.

(Cruising our site for errors is a waste of time.   There is a completely different standard for a stream of consciousness weblog versus a published work.)

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 11:27 AM
More Celebrity Poker.  Although I rag on it, I have to admit that I do watch it.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 10:32 AM
Underraising (home games)

I promised you a post on underraising, and here it is:

To underraise is to raise a previous bet by an amount less than the previous bet, with the exception of a raise that puts a player all-in*.  It is impossible to underraise in a standard limit poker, as there is no discretion on bet sizes.  In the Gulf Coast casinos that introduced big-bet-on-the-end games like 3-6-12, the concept of underraising lies in the rule that if a guy bets $12 on the river, you can’t come back for $18.  In Mississippi, where you can open pre-flop for $2 or $4, the same logic applies.  In spread limit, it is technically illegal to underraise, and they will stop you if you try in a cardroom.  However, most spread limit these days are on Thursday nights and your neighbor’s house over a case of beer, and nobody ever complains about a 25c raise on a $1.00 bet.

So, the concept of underraising is really only important to Pot-Limit and No-Limit poker.  There are several reasons for the rule, including:
-         An underraise wastes time
-         If there is a limit of 3 raises (not always the case), then this raise limits the total possible amount that could be raised in a round.  As a matter of fact, this is a common strategy in home games in 7-27, where the guy getting middled puts in a raise for the minimum of the spread, while the other 2 put in the max.  So, if it is 25c-$3.00 spread, the total for the round is $6.25, whereas it would be $9.00 if he did not underraise.  This is unfair to the guys with the nut hands
-         It is a Golden Fleece (no pun intended) to colluders.  If A and B are colluding, with C the victim, they would ordinarily need C to be seated between them in order to middle him.  However, if C acts last, A can bet $50, B bet $51, C call, and then A come in for a bigger bet.  With the rule in place, either B makes is $100 and scares off C or simply calls, which gives C the opportunity to call and play for only $50
-         Etc

So, if you find yourself in a game that is allowing underraising (as I did a week ago), you can either point it out and get it fixed, or adjust your game.  I would suggest the latter for two reasons.  First, by pointing it out, you are immediately clueing the table into the fact that you are more knowledgable about poker than they are, which is rarely a profitable table image.  Secondly, they may think you are an ass, and not invite you back.  Thus, let them play w/o the rule and adjust your play to take advantage.

How do you adjust your play?

1.  Use an underraise to build a pot.  Most of the time in poker, you should not try to “build a pot” but in rare instances such as having the nuts on the river, you can underraise to squeeze a little more out of a pot where players would fold to a real bet.
2.  Pay attention to other underraisers.  They are probably trying to build a pot.  If they are sufficiently unsophisticated that they don’t even know about the underraise rule, then it is safe to assume that they will not know to protect their hand with a big bet (pre-river).  Thus, an underraise is a good sign that he holds something very good.  You should probably still call, as you are getting pot odds, but now you know you probably need a straight or better to beat him.
3.  If there is a 3-bet max, and the stacks are big compared to the bets, an underraise by you can help to limit how much a round will cost you.  This is an excellent passive-aggressive move to help to draw out cheaply.


*  note that in Aberdeen Scotland, you can’t underraise, even to go all-in! Thus, the savvy player in early position that is nervous about his hand, should come out and bet 51% of the amount in his opponent’s stack, making it impossible for the opponent to come back at him.

(1) comments

Saturday, July 24, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 1:05 AM
From: Mark
To: Fro
Subject: Mailbag
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 15:05:17 -0500


Here's a mailbag post...

As you might imagine, there are a lot of criminal cases regarding Poker.  I recently did a Westlaw seach of all Texas cases (dating back to 1852) thatmention "poker".  The results are interesting, quite humorous, andillustrate that playing poker may be hazardous to your health...(these numbers are approximates)

Cases discussing the legality of poker:  4
Cases mentioning strip poker:  3
Cases discussing illegal video poker machines (8-liners):  42
Cases where a poker argument led to murder, assault, or some other crime:70
Cases where Defendant tried to use the alibi, "I was playing poker with theboys":  24
Cases where an armed robbery/hijacking occurred at a poker game:  118
Cases where someone was beaten with a "fireplace" poker:  45

watchout for them-there fireplace pokers -cf


(0) comments

Thursday, July 22, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 11:58 AM
Yet another bust

Aside of the obvious difference that this is Minnesota and our tournament is in Texas (which is neither governed by Minnesota law nor by a former "wrestler"), it seems that the snag here was that the place made money off of it.  Not directly, it seems.  Rather, it is implied that the tournament generates customers that in turn pay for bowling or beer or otherwise add to the profits of the place.

What I find interesting in the article is that there is no debate over the "game of skill" versus game of luck.  If and when courts decide that it is a game of skill, I think almost all state laws, including alcohol codes, will no longer apply.  After all, winning money at golf is legal. 

One snag that would however remain in some states is the language in the laws refering specifically to games involving  cards and dice.

(0) comments

Tuesday, July 20, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 8:32 AM
Reminds me of some of the legal troubles at Drink Houston.  One big hurdle in TX is that you can't do a tournament at a place that sells alcohol under a TABC license.  The TABC will be all over you. 
After the TABC code hurdle is cleared, there are still some other hurdles, the biggest one being that the house can't take a cut.  Interestingly, this has the unintended effect of making my tournament perfectly legal but chartiy tournaments potentially illegal.  Now there's an example of Mr Greene's favorite law - the Law of Unintended Consequences.

(0) comments

Posted by Johnnymac 8:20 AM
In response to Fro's post below, I would speculate that a passive game is a great opportunity to make money for the following reasons. This is how I have made money the past few months playing no limit, although recently a lot of people have gotten a lot more aggressive back at me lately and my sugar tree has run dry. Passive games are a great opportunity to make money, although one's aggressiveness needs to be balanced with the risk of being disinvited from the game and one's desire to continue playing in the game. Uncomfortable people don't like to play poker with the people who make them uncomfortable, unless they are forced. Fro touched on this yesterday, btw, but it's an important consideration. Remember Wild Bill Hickock's admonition that playing in a bad game (with cheaters in his case) is still better than not playing at all, so don't take this too far too soon.
How my theory about approaching passive games. These ideas probably require multiple occasions playing with the same people, but likely could apply to a single occurrence, too, or even during the first (cheaper) part of a tournament:
1.) At first, play along with the passive style for the most part and don't draw attention to yourself, unless you have a winning hand.
2.) When you do have a winning hand, bet the hell out of it. Overbet the pot, even. Make the other guys uncomfortable enough to where they don't want to call. Even if no one calls and you win by surrender, be sure you show your cards whenever you do this because you are trying to convince the passive players that you are betting this way because you have a winner. This means that at first you can't bluff or even semi-bluff - you want to show your winning hands every time the other guy folds so as create the image that you are betting this way only because you have a winning hand.
3.) Eventually people will start to fold whenever you bet this way. Whenever you hear comments regularly about how lucky you must be or how often you have winning hands, then it's OK to begin semi-bluffing the flop, but back off as soon as you miss a draw and encounter resistance and certainly don't try and take your bluff all the way to the end. Most players will never remember your big bet on the flop, but they usually will remember that you bet big on the turn and then checked and folded the river card and they will certainly remember if they ever snap you off in a big bluff on the end. If they do this enough you have short-circuited the process and can skip to item 6.
4.) Once you hit a few big drawing hands, be sure to show your cards whenever you win and point out that you were drawing. Even recreate the hands for the other players and try and get them to follow the logic of why you bet when you did. Pretty soon they will be doing the logic for themselves and will automatically assume that you hit your draw whenever you bet big on the flop or turn. At this point they are now sufficiently trained to be susceptible to being bluffed and will be scared whenever you bet big, even if you don't show a winning hand for many hands in a row. This can be reinforced by showing strong hands every now and then when you actually do have one.
5.) It's wise not to bluff too often because you will only hasten the inevitable education of the other players, but you can now bluff a little bit now and thus play more hands than you would if you were just waiting for nice cards. Be sure to show the nice cards when they come, though, so you can try and prolong the powerhouse image as long as possible.
6.) Eventually the other players will catch on and start playing back at you. At this point the game is probably no long passive and has thus become a lot tougher to beat. You might even be well served to start looking around for a new game. Junell's game is like this: at first it was rather passive and easy to grind out wins but many of the previously passive players have learned to play aggressively. It's a different game than it was 6 months ago.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:19 AM
I once used a demo version of similiar software and was blown away by it.  This stuff can really help your game.  I think it is more helpful for limit, which is more scientific, but can be helpful for NL as well

(0) comments

Monday, July 19, 2004

Posted by Johnnymac 10:52 AM
We did indeed end up going to Lake Charles on Friday night and I kinda wish we hadn't. I lost a little and it wasn't that much fun not winning a pot for the last 2 hours I was there.
I took Morris's advice and avoided the Isle because of the tournament. Harrah's was where we decided to go play and I must say that all of the nice things I had heard about the room were true - it was well run and clean and new and worth checking out. When we arrived there was a 1-5 stud game going and four 3-6-12 holdem games going as well, plus an interest list for 10-20 holdem. My boss and I were both immediately seated in two separate 3-6-12 games and I also put my name on the list for the 10-20.
I think there were open seats in each game but we were specifically directed by the brush into out respective tables. No big deal... usually. But today was different because not 10 minutes after we had been seated there was a commotion at one of the other holdem tables - someone had hit the $37,000 bad beat jackpot. Four queens had beaten Aces full and the table share was $1300 for the non-involved players at the table who had done nothing more than just sit at the table and watch. The bad-beatee (aces full) received $18,500 and the winner received around $9000.
I smiled as I looked down at my meager $220 in chips.
Anyway - after that the trip was less than memorable. I played 3-6-12 for about an hour and was up $40 when the $10-20 game finally started. Morris and Junell happened to walk in the cardroom right about that time and sat down in the game, too. It felt just like home.
The big game started out quite promising - lots of juicy pots with less than stellar play from your usual bad Louisiana poker players capped off by a self-professed ex-professional bullrider in a black cowboy hat who was honest enough to admit that he had "more nuts than brains and almost as much money". We took turns at my end of the table trying to goad the cowboy into tilting and things were looking good when I flopped a broadway straight and won a big pot against the cowboy's less than stellar bottom two pair. When the cowboy said, "Nice hand" I replied with a smarmy, "I know" and although I didn't know it then, my night was over. I had ruined my karma and the poker gods were going to punish me for the rest of the night. Not long after that I started losing and my stake for the night quickly evaporated.
I may not have done well, but my boss actually won money in his first ever casino poker experience and thus the night was not a complete bust. He plays a lot with his friends and was anxious to try things out so I think he was rather surprised that the game was not nearly as intimidating as he was expecting it to be.  I have a feeling that he'll be back soon.
Although there was a lot of bad play and jaw-dropping card selection in the $10-20 game, I won't share of that for now for fear of violating the "no bad beat" policy here at the blog. That said, I am interested in hearing what Chris and Mark thought about the game and might share some hands later once I hear from them.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:18 AM
Another thought about last night:
Have you ever been in that situation where you are the new guy that is joining an established poker group, and you want to be on your best manners so you can get invited back?  You bring a little more beer than you need for yourself.  You don't butt into every discussion over rules.  You certainly don't complain about the house rules.
The awkward situation is when there is an obvious breaking of rules that seems lost on the rest of them.  I am not talking about 'house' rules, I am talking about poker rules that they probably don't even know exist.   Let me provide some examples from this weekend:
1.  Underraising
2.  Taking chips off the table vis a vis letting other players buy your chips and then pocketing the cash
3.  Not using the exposed card as the burn
4.  String betting
Re: item 1, I kept my mouth shut.  It is a good rule, but you actually get an advantage by having the underraise out there.  I guess the only way you could get burned by it is if A underaises, you call, and B (who is the intial bettor) makes a big raise.  In this scenario, you now have to face a big bet that would otherwise have been avoided.  I guess.  But there is some real opportunity in the underraise, which should get a post of its own someday.  Maybe soon
Re: item 3, I kept my mouth shut.  What comes out of the deck is still completely random, so the only thing that mattered to me is that whatever the practice is, we stay consistent.  It is analagous to "third base" in BJ.  Sure, he can screw you by "changing what cards you get", but he can also help you.
Re: 4, this is a good rule when playing with sharks, as they could really take advantage of you w a string bet.  However, I don't think that any of these guys knew how to make a string bet to their advantage.  There was no upside to speaking up.  The downside was looking like an asshole.
Re: 2, I spoke up.  Nobody cared strongly and everyone understood the value in the rule.  It was not at all contentious.  I am glad I did, bc the guys with the early big stacks ran cold later.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:09 AM
It took me a week and a 1/2, but I played poker in DFW for the first time last night.  We played 20c-40c blinds, NL dealers choice.  Nothing was called other than HE and Omaha High.  This is very close to the limits we would play at my house of 25c-50c with the same buy in of $20 increments.  However, the two games were worlds apart in terms of stakes.  Nobody bought in for more than $40, and 1/2 the people played with their original $20 all night.  There were very few raises on any street and when there were raises, they would typically be $1 or less.  Not an aggressive lot.  The times that I made even a pot sized raise, everyone would fold.  I won $21 and was either the biggest winner or close to it.  Compare this to games in my garage for nearly identical stakes, where people would win/lose $100-$200.
My point is that when determining how big a game is, the blinds and buyins help in making that determination, but they are not the only factor.  The aggessiveness of the players is key.  Take the other extreme - Junells house.  People are so aggressive that a $1-$2 game gets pots up to $1,000.  So his game is 4x=5x bigger in blinds and buyings, but the pots are 20x bigger (we saw one $50 pot, but the rest were almost all < $10).

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:07 AM
From young Boyd, a MUST HAVE for any serious poker player.

(0) comments

Friday, July 16, 2004

Posted by Johnnymac 9:07 AM
Some coworkers are making noise about a casino trip tonight in conjunction with a planned office happy hour - my boss's wife is out of town and this morning he says he thinks this is the perfect opportunity for him to try a casino poker game.

As always, I am up for it, but I haven't been to Lake Charles since Harrah's poker room opened and I'm not familiar with the routine on Friday nights. I also can't access any gambling sites from here at work so I am kind of in the dark. If anyone has any advice on when to leave (ie how early to get there on Fridays to get a seat), where to go, or any regular tournaments that might be going on tonight, please leave comments or send me an email.

(0) comments

Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 9:36 AM
Research on online poker tells.

Some interesting quotes:
"I was once playing at a table and one of the other players wrote his hand in the chat screen by accident!"

dude, do you not realize that you were being cheated? seriously, has he not figured out that somebody was trying to IM another player and accidently typed it in the chat box?

"The beauty of online play is that you can accumulate all of this information and refer back to it time and again. You simply cannot do this in bricks and mortar poker. Information and form is the secret I think."

i agree. information is our friend and you should take notes while online

"not really a tell, but I win most on Friday & Saturday nights, after closing time - people are more reckless drunk, obviously."

i don't win online anymore, but when i lived in the uk, i would play in the morning, which was drunk time in the u.s. i used to kill everyone. you could tell they were drunk in many ways, including "slurring" in the chat box.

(0) comments

Tuesday, July 13, 2004

Posted by Johnnymac 2:56 PM
I know this is supposed to be about poker but, well, the Sports Guy likes poker and writes about it sometime. And so, I don't feel too bad to post a link to his latest column that actually says nice things about Houston.

He also writes about the Home Run Derby last night. I was there too, and I have to agree with him that it's a ton of fun - no score to care about, no one taking themselves seriously, the crowd going crazy at times - what better environment to suck down some beers and enjoy a nice summer night from the right field bleachers? It was very nice. Lance Berkman also made a run that was fun to watch.

I also happen to agree with him about this. It would be funny:

(One highlight in Round 1: My realization that they need to dump the little kids in the outfield and replace them with terrified models and actresses. Imagine Gisele Bundschen screaming in horror as a David Ortiz moonshot comes dropping down on her like a grenade? Tell me this wouldn't make for riveting TV. And yes, I know we're at the 3,500-word mark. I'm wrapping it up. Trust me.)

Now back to the poker.

(0) comments

Posted by Johnnymac 11:03 AM
Here is the story about the bar tournament that got shut down in Lubbock in February. The local AG seems pretty sure that these things are illegal and I would suspect that most judges in Texas would agree with his interpretation that the tournaments are illegal because bars are not private places and the increased business that comes with the tournaments are unequal profits from the game. It makes sense to me.

With regards to the assertion that it's no different that a pinball or golf tournament the answer is simple: cards (and dice) are specifically defined in Texas law as "gambling devices" and thus contests that make use of them constitute illegal gambling and are therefore not allowed in a public place like a bar. Personally, I don't see how prize pools for pinball and golf tournaments don't count as illegal bookmaking, but I'm not a judge and I don't write the law.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:49 AM
Junior was asking for resources discussion dealmaking at the final table. For starters, there is this tidbit written by "Ramsey" on rgp:

In most tournaments the last few players are allowed to agree a deal sharing the prize fund in different proportions to that originally envisioned. A lot of tournaments will end in this way because regardless of how big a lead the chip leader has the blinds are so high that who wins will be more a matter of luck than skill or weight of chips.

There are typically three types of deal:

1. A saver is agreed for all those players still in who subsequently get eliminated outside the original prize scale. For example if there are 6 players left and only 4 prizes then the players may agree that the next 2 players eliminated will receive $100 each and the prize for the eventual winner will be reduced by $200. The game then continues.

2. The whole of the prize fund is distributed amongst the remaining players and the game is ended at this point. The amount each player receives will be related to the number of chips they currently have but the exact amount will be subject to negotiation.

3. Part of the prize fund is distributed amongst the remaining players and then the game continues; normally on the basis of the winner takes all of the remaining prize money (and the trophy if any).

If you are going to split the prize money on the basis of chips held then it is probably easiest to let the experienced players do the initial negotiating. They will ask if you would be happy to accept $x and it is then up to you to accept or reject the offer. If you are one
of the chip leaders then you should expect to receive less than your chips are worth whereas if you have less chips than average you should insist on receiving more than their face value. For example with 5 players left if you have 10% of the chips you might expect 15% of the
prize fund; if you have 40% of the chips you might have to settle for 30-35% of the money.

For new tournament players the important point to bear in mind is that any deal requires the explicit agreement of *all* the remaining players. If you do not like the proposed deal you do not have to accept it simply ask the dealer to carry on. If things continue to go your way you will end up with all the chips and the bulk of the prize money. Remember however that in these final stages luck is more important than skill and a sensible deal leaves everybody happy.

He references McEvoy's "Tournament Poker" and Buntjer's "The Secret To Winning Big In Tournament Poker". I personally read about negotiations in a Tournament book by Sylvester Suzuki (penname) and I believe Sklansky discusses the issue in the book he published subsequent to Ramsey's post. Lastly, I know Mason Malmuth's Gambling Theory and Other Topics covers the topic. More reviews can be read here.

The key points to consider in the negotiation are:

1. Stack sizes - the biggest size gets the most, but as Ramsey points out above, to deal proportionately based on chips is too generous to the leader. This is consistent with all tournament theory out there that each incremental chip in a large stack is worth less than an incremental chip in a small stack.

2. Tournament format - In NL and PL tournaments, big stacks can more easily be knocked down, so I believe that the discount should be higher here than in a limit tournament. Others may disagree and say that the fact that a big stack can be used to push others around make it even more valuable in NL and PL. I disagree based on experience that in limit tournaments, the big stack at the final table seems to win more often than in NL tournaments.

3. Skill of players - Clearly the better skilled you are, the more generous of a cut you should demand. However, keep in mind that if any of us were twice as good as we really are, we would still only be 1/2 as good as we think we are.

4. Time - The closer the tournament is to the end, the closer the distribution should approximate the original prize payout.

5. Blind position - if you are short stacked and the blinds are imminent, you are a bit more desparate and may be willing to take a less generous offer. OTOH, if you and another player have similiar small stacks but he/she is about to get the blind, you should point it out in hopes of getting a more favorable cut that he/she will.

Those are my thoughts...I am curious to hear what you think

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 8:29 AM
5 out of 6 ain't bad

Morris & Co. went to Lake Charles this weekend for the monthly tournament. I don't know much about the structure other than it is quite large. Morris has now been there 6 times and has place in the money 5 times. Three of those 5 times he "won first" by having the chip lead when a final table deal was struck.

First place is guaranteed $10k, but Morry took $6.5k in the final negotiation. That'll buy a few packs of smokes.

(0) comments

Monday, July 12, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 1:20 PM is organizing a tournament in Houston. Look here for updates.

An Austin one is also in the works...

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 9:30 AM
Intersting fact of the day:

AK vs 56 is only a 1.60:1 favorite.
AK vs K9 is a 3.12:1 favorite

I have been drafting a long post on proper NL starting hand requirements, but when I came across this in my research, I felt it warranted posting.

(0) comments

Posted by Dr Fro 9:28 AM
While gambling laws are state specific, this article is interesting given the large number of similiar tournaments in TX.

(0) comments

Sunday, July 11, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 4:07 PM
Houston Poker

From: "John Smiley"
To: ""
Subject: Houston Poker - This Weekend Come Play Tonight :^)
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 06:51:39 -0500

Howdy Poker Players :^)

Here are the games I know of over the weekend.
I hope to see you at one or all of them :^)
If you haven't been to these games before,
you will need an invite. Call my cell 936-537-2777

Saturday: 6PM $1/$2 Pot Limit Holdem - Houston

Saturday: 6PM $10/$20 Limit Holdem - Houston

Sunday: 4PM $100 NL Holdem Tournament - Houston
$1,300 Avg, 1st. Place. Pays 3-4 places.

Sunday: 5PM $1/$2 Pot Limit Holdem - Houston

Sunday: 5PM $10/$20 Limit Holdem - Houston

Monday-Thursday 6PM $1/$2 Pot Limit Holdem - Houston

Please let me know if you are coming.

Looking for a Poker Table for your Home Games?
I bought one from a guy in Conroe and I love it!
He makes very nice tables at very affordable prices.
He can make one for you in any size, shape, or color.
Contact: Adam Jolley Cell 936-524-2556

John Smiley: cell 936-537-2777

And don't forget to visit and support:
Houston's Only Poker Forum

John :^)

(1) comments

Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Posted by Johnnymac 12:18 PM
Well, I had to take down the pictures of the house because it looks like we won't be buying it after all. The inspection last week revealed some problems with the foundation that we were hopeful the sellers would correct, but they rejected our request this morning and came back with an allowance for repairs that was not quite enough to satisfy our concerns. As of 12:00 noon today we exercised our buyer's option to rescind and we are back in the market. Again.

How does this relate to poker? It doesn't, really. It just sucks. But an emotional decision risks being a bad decision and financially, the house in its current condition just isn't a sound purchase, no matter how excited my fiancee and I might have been about the landscaping and rennovating projects it afforded to us.

(0) comments

Saturday, July 03, 2004

Posted by Dr Fro 3:43 PM
I have been travelling silly, so I also apologize about my absence. Moving to Dallas next week won't help, so I will be relying heavily on the mailbag. This one is from young Boyd.

(0) comments

Random thoughts from a lawyer, an accountant, a commodities trader, an ex-Marine and a WSOP Main Event money finisher that don't know as much as they wish they did...



Home Page


What's this all about? Poker. Why we like poker. What we have to say about poker. How we play poker.

Why isn't it gambling?


09/01/2003 - 10/01/2003
10/01/2003 - 11/01/2003
11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003
12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007
12/01/2007 - 01/01/2008
01/01/2008 - 02/01/2008
02/01/2008 - 03/01/2008
03/01/2008 - 04/01/2008
04/01/2008 - 05/01/2008
05/01/2008 - 06/01/2008
06/01/2008 - 07/01/2008
07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
08/01/2008 - 09/01/2008
09/01/2008 - 10/01/2008
10/01/2008 - 11/01/2008
11/01/2008 - 12/01/2008
12/01/2008 - 01/01/2009
01/01/2009 - 02/01/2009
02/01/2009 - 03/01/2009
03/01/2009 - 04/01/2009

The Doctor is IN

Dr Fro
aka "slow roller"

Which one is the fish?

aka "Sunday Stroller"

You go now!

Johnny Mac
aka "Chop Suey"

You got to know when to hold em;  Know when to Mo' em ...

aka "Mo roller"

Old School

"Baby's Daddy"

free hit counter


Beautiful handmade receiving blankets. Get yours today in flannel or seersucker.

Get Flash

I play poker at