Sometimes sh!t don't taste so good...

I guess one of the bad things about a blog is that you tend to write something once and rarely (if ever) look back. A comment or response to something you write however forces you to look back, particularly when the commenter lets you know that you were wrong and in this case...offended. "Jack" responded to one of my posts from a few days ago, and cause me to do just that. Frank and I had been exchanging posts, recapping how he had played a particular hand while we were at the Eagles the weekend before last. Without going in-depth on it, again, suffice it to say Frank and Matt J (a.k.a. "Jack") were involved in a hand, and Frank lost. His post was framed by this, and he mentioned needing a break from playing cards, because he couldn't take the suckouts, bad beats, or whatever you want to call it. It was more a straw that broke the camels back than anything else. I tried to give my impression of what happened that night, in a follow up post, trying to pick Frank up a bit. What I appear to have done instead was put my foot in my mouth in the process. This is the point at which I actually went back and read what I'd written. Everything I had to say up to a point I can agree with, it's when I headed down an alley of thought that I got outa line. When I stated: "It lacks finesse. It lacks subtlety. It lacks class in a way. It's a legitimate playing style, but I tend NOT to like it." I went overboard, and honestly that would have pissed me off too! So Matt, I'm sorry about that. It wasn't an intentional thing! Keep in mind while writing this post, I was working on the remainder of the whiskey from the weekend, and guess I got a little lippy. But that's not a good excuse. In fact here, there isn't one, and all I can really say is, I'm sorry.

When I said the style lacked class, what I meant to do was echo a sentiment I heard on the AnteUp Podcast recently, but OBVIOUSLY I didn't do a very good job of it, and I ended up looking like a dick! What the two hosts expressed was that at a live table they tended to "like" or "gravitate" toward and emulate a tight/aggressive class of play. Whereas more and more what they are seeing at the tables is a very loose/aggressive class of player emerging as a controller of the table. While they applauded their ability, they still tended to "like" the guys who are playing tight/aggressive. For example they tended to gravitate toward Daniel Negraneau and Phil Ivey instead of Mike Matasow or even Phil Laak. The styles or classes of play are different here, and on the program the hosts made the comment that they couldn't fault the play of Mike and Phil Laak, but that it was more foreign to them than that of Daniel and Phil Ivey. They tended to like those players who played like them. What they went on to say...and what I failed to continue to elaborate on... was that there was a flaw in preferring one player over the other. The guys that they actually had more to learn from were the ones who did not share their own style of play. They would actually be doing themselves a favor if they paid more attention to the play style of those dissimilar to themselves. At first glance loose/aggressive class players look like "wild animals" to those of us who unfortunately learned to play the game as the TV players and books were telling us to, tight/aggressive. It sticks us hard when we see an inferior starting hand beat strong starting hands. We tend to blame poor play on others, but fail to turn our judgement back on ourselves, and realize we should let 'em go when they fail to improve. That's where we get outplayed. These aren't suckouts or bad beats, there our own damn fault. Unfortunately no one likes to admit their own flaws.

Matt, you're a friend, and I'd like it to stay that way. You're welcome to play at the house anytime. In fact, I had you and the wife signed up already for December 15th. I'd like to have you there...I mean how else am I ever going to get any better?

I've long said that you were a MUCH better player than me. You have a greater fundamental understanding of the game than I do, and it comes from experience, and particularly experience with playing at stakes much higher than I've been able to get comfortable with. Even the game at Bob's made me sweat a little. The size of the bankrolls (not the buy-in) was the thing. My disposable poker income (as dictated by my wife) was nowhere near as high as the majority of the guys at the table. This gave them (and you) a decided edge over me, which I realized. I haven't played in many games in which I really "felt" like the sucker. I did there...and recognized it in less than the "first half hour at the table." I played scared and made stupid mistakes. The only way that my game will EVER progress though is to play with people who are better than I am. It'll force me to get better (or go broke.) BUT, I need a bigger roll to feel confident in doing it. Playing scared, I might as well just hand it over right now. I also need to gravitate away from the super tight/passive style that I've come to use at the table. My hand selection is absolutely killing me. And my willingness to take calculated chances has a VERY long way to go. As for your comment that you want to give the impression that you'll play any two cards, well that obviously works! I find you damn near impossible to put on a hand! When I think I'm being pushed around, you show me the aces, when I make you for aces you show the 7-3os.

What has caused me the greatest trouble is the fact that the online money I have has always been small, and so I learned to play at micro-limits. That's done me a great disservice! It taught me to think in terms of bets as being units, instead of their actual value. $2.00 is still just $2.00, but playing at a .05/.10 NLHE table, that's a huge friggin' bet. Losing it online, when all I used to have was $50 was a big deal to me. I need to remember to change gears a bit when I move up in limits though, and remember that sometimes, any hand is worth a few dollars.

At any rate, I hope you actually see this post, and recognize that it's intended as a sincere apology. I don't like to make anyone mad, or step on toes, but I guess I did both. If you don't return to see it, I'll probably call and ask you to take a look. If it's any consolation, since I read your reply, I've been kicking myself in the ass for coming across the way I did. And if that's not enough, I'll mention that I just got back from the dentist, where I took a good drillin', so c'mon haven't I been punished sufficiently?

This is one of those cases where yesterday's word of the day is applicable to the blog owner... DONKTARD!

Regards,

cheer_dad

P.S. After writing this, I happened across the following post over at the Full Tilt Poker Blog by Michael Craig, and he puts a very fine point on what I was trying to say... http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/poker-blog/2007/12/293_part_ii_shut_yer_yap.php