Saturday, October 16, 2004

POKER HAND #44

PLAYING AGAINST TWINS: In what can only be described as the authoritative account of playing no limit Texas hold 'em against identical twins, I turn it over to Gideon Friedman, winner of the Phil Hellmuth Jr. Invitational and boyfriend to Rachael Bedard, the winner of the Annie Duke Classic.

A raucous no limit game featuring not one, but two Galens took place at 183 Angell last night. There is little that can match the madness of playing against two Galens at once and their insanity finally drove me out of the game. I'll highlight three hands that best illustrate the two-headed beast I was up against.

1:30am - I limp in with Ac-Kh in the big blind. I limp to avoid going up against only Galens as the other players were fairly tight at this point. The flop comes Qs Jd 5c. I bet $3 hoping someone hit a Q or J but everyone folds to Jeremy Galen who raises $5. I go all in for $27 more and he calls. He has As-10s, cards I am more than happy to see. The turn is a 10 giving me the straight and the river is a blank.

A fairly straightforward play by me and I only mention it because the lesson I learned would come back to ruin me. I felt I had picked up on a situation in which an experienced player can take advantage of an amateur player without a large risk of being burned by a joker. I think many players find it difficult or frustrating to play against less experienced players as they don't play by the "rules" of poker strategy and often benefit from this. Poker is more like tennis where good players end up playing down to their opponents level than basketball where your level of play is mostly independent of your opponent. Of course this can be taken to extremes (Phil Hellmuth and his merry band of Brown students who watch him and believe every hand they lose is due to an inferior players lack of ability). Back to the play, with a Q and a J on the board, I figured he hit one and, though he would be ahead, I could make him commit to the pot without losing too many chips and if I hit my card (especially the 10) he would call anything, being pot committed. As it turned out,
he had even less and as a very loose player with delusions of grandeur, he couldn't walk away from an inside nut straight draw.

2:30 a.m. Now I proceed to follow my lesson down the drain. I am the big stack when I suffer a Galen induced brain-freeze. I pick up K-4 and call a small bet by an indistinguishable Galen. The flop comes K-Q-2 rainbow and with just myself and the Galens and no idea of what I am getting myself into, I raise $3. Jeremy reraises to 10 and Jamie calls. Because they are identical twins and always call each others bets, it is difficult to put them on two different hands, so, using the lesson I learned in the above hand, I put them collectively on A-blank. I call the bet and the turn is a 4. Jamie raises 10, I call, Jeremy raises another 10 and at this point, we all know there will be no folding. I like to believe I momentarily became a Galen for this hand, thus excusing my awful play. The river is a 2, Jamie goes all in for his last $14, we both call. Jeremy flips the K-Q, I quietly slip my cards under the deck and Jamie, oh Jamie, shows a 2 for the set and the huge pot. Jamie had A-2 suited, so my read on one Galen was right, but having a second one at the table threw everything off.

3 a.m. - I announce that this will be my final hand and I promptly pick
up A-K under the gun. With two big-stacked Galens yet to act, I go all-in for $42, hoping to get called by just one of them. I like my chances against one Galen, and even more against one of the two non-Galens at the table, two very good players from Harvard, Dan and Francis, as they may call with AQ, QQ, JJ, etc... I get called by Dan, the next to act and then, as predicted, by Jeremy. Dan flips over the A-J, the hand you dream about going all-in against with AK and Jeremy proudly displays his 4h-2h. I was unhappy to get two callers, especially when the second was a Galen because this is the type of garbage I imagined he would call with and it just increased the chances that I would lose. As if you hadn't guessed, a 4 comes on the turn giving Jeremy the $125+ pot and sending me home empty-handed.

Playing with identical twins is very complicated and is a situation I have found myself in countless times. Unfortunately, there is little work has been dedicated to the subject, one I hope will receive further attention in the future.


Ahahahahahahahahaha.

2 Comments:

Blogger Galen said...

"Non-systematic systematicity" as my adorable clone likes to say. Jeremy's play last night makes me seem like a tight player. After several more lucky jokers, I mused that the 4h-2h call earned him a bachelor's degree in being loose. Subsequent hands earned him the doctorate and the title "Dr. Loose." He has outdone me yet again and I will have to pick up a new style of play.

2:26 PM  
Blogger Galen said...

hey hey hey

gz wasn't exactly flattering, at points, but he was 100% accurate. "delusions of grandeur"; not so nice, but sadly true, i guess. i prefer "manic-depressive lust after the unlikely" or "mania-induced stumble toward fortune's mollifying bosom". by the way, the KQ hand was one of the best examples of momentary systematic poker in my non-system. i put both of you on a high pair or straight draw, i slow played the two pair, and i got it in the ass from a version of my non-systematic self. remind gz that as opposed to "garbage", i have a 100% track record of beating him and his girlfriend on ambitious pre-flop raises. why? a huge number of flops have shit for shit below 10 in them. when nobody's likely to play, that's when the giant leaves his cave and non-systematicity bursts into the stale metaphysics. attacking a system with rulelessness isn't idiocy, it's feigning the ability to at once belong to and oppose the system. this, of course, is an impossibility, that's why it must be feigned. under the guise of indeterminacy I believe it's actually possible to attain the only state that can overcome the hostility of a supossed system: all empowering and obsfucating ambiguity.

oh, and i don't think i believe in probability anymore. does that make me mad?

can i please make the blog?

jer

10:48 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


Criminal Law Lawyer