Hi, I’m nic01ae. An interesting tournament. Started with 200,000 players. The world’s largest poker site has been setting new standards and smashing records since 2001. One of the biggest achievements of all however came in 2009 when a staggering 149,196 players took part in the same tournament, setting a new World Record. 200,000 players, for a buy-in of just $1!
But my play was one without history and a single game, the final one:
SB
BB
P4
P5
ME
P7
P8
P9
P10
D
A♣ Q♠
99
$500
$1000
FOLD
RAISE $2000
CALL
FOLD
FOLD
FOLD
FOLD
ALL IN ($17170)
FOLD
FOLD
FOLD
ALL IN ($15506)
Flop: 7♥ K♥ Q♣ – for the moment, I’m the winner!
But this is “JokerStars”, to not forget!:
Turn: 9♥
River: 2♣
And so I finished my play at this tournament, on the 25263rd place
The game of poker (or at least most of the variants) is considered to be computationally unsolvable. However, methods are being developed to at least approximate perfect strategy from the game theory perspective in the heads-up (two player) game, and increasingly good systems are being created for the multi-player or ring game.
Perfect strategy has multiple meanings in this context. From a game-theoretic optimal point of view, a perfect strategy is one that cannot lose to any other player’s strategy; however, optimal strategy can vary in the presence of sub-optimal players who have weaknesses that can be exploited. In this case, perfect strategy would be one that correctly or closely models those weaknesses and takes advantage of them to make a profit.
Some of these systems are based on Bayes theorem, Nash equilibrium, Monte Carlo simulation and Neural networks.
A large amount of the research is being done at the University of Alberta by the GAMES group led by Jonathan Schaeffer who developed Poki and PsOpt.
On April 15, 2011, the Federal Bureau of Investigation shut down three major poker sites, Full Tilt Poker, Poker Stars, and Absolute Poker. A grand jury has charged 11 defendants, including the founders of the poker sites, with bank fraud, money laundering, and violating gambling laws. The prosecutors are claiming that the sites tricked and bribed U.S. banks to receive profits from online gambling, an act that violated UIGEA. The same day, former Senator D’Almato released a comment on behalf of the PPA. He asserts that, “Online poker is not a crime and should not be treated as such.” D’Almato made no comment on the specific charges raised but promised a response once the “full facts become available.” (Wikipedia)
3 online poker houses face fraud charges in NYC Forbes Authorities in New York City have unsealed an indictment charging 11 people with bank fraud and illegal gambling in a prosecution of the three largest Internet poker companies. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan …
Lawyer: Utah bank exec arrested in online poker case had no authority to make … Greenfield Daily Reporter A Utah bank executive arrested in a federal prosecution of the three biggest Internet poker companies had no authority to make deals for the bank, its attorney said. Lawyer Loren Weiss, who represents SunFirst Bank in St. George, …
Three largest online poker sites shut down by FBI Lottery Post Its illegal to play online poker in the US. If Joe doesn’t drive even to the nearest casino the bustards fooling with oil futures will be in a deep trouble. Its illegal to play online poker in the US. If Joe doesn’t drive even to the nearest casino the …
Possible Australian Connection In US Online Poker Debacle Online-Casinos.com It has been speculated in a few reports that the Online Poker shut down in the USA has been brought about by the young Australian entrepreneur Daniel Tzvetkoff. A short while ago in August of last year Daniel Tzvetkoff was arrested in Las Vegas under …
The Morning After: Players Speak on the Online Poker Shutdown Bluff Magazine It’s only been 24 hours since the news broke that online poker as we know it in the United States is over, but the impact the news has made on the poker community is already far-reaching. Players instantly took to Twitter to joke about being unemployed …
Casino mogul ends PokerStars association following ‘Black Friday’ Manx Radio A statement released by Wynn’s firm says, ““Wynn Resorts Limited announced today that it terminated its alliance with PokerStars, the online poker company. “The decision was reached as a result of the indictment unsealed by the US Attorney for the …
Poker company indictments further cloud legislative debate Las Vegas Sun It also doesn’t look so hot for Wynn Resorts, coincidentally represented by Perkins, too, which signed a deal March 25 with the online poker behemoth. Or for Station Casinos, which partnered with Full Tilt less than a week later. …
US clampdown a massive blow to online poker Winnipeg Free Press I wanted to discuss the Manitoba Poker Championship in this column, but due to the magnitude of Friday’s events, that will have to wait at least one more week.
DOJ indicts founders of top US online poker sites MarketWatch Federal authorities unsealed an indictment Friday against the founders of the three largest internet poker companies operating in the US The indictment charges eleven defendants, including the founders of …
Blogosphere
FBI shuts down poker sites in online gambling crackdownTechnology Boing Boing On Friday, the FBI shut down three of the world’s most popular online poker sites, replacing their home pages with the message: “This domain name has been seized by the FBI pursuant to an Arrest Warrant.
FBI Shuts Down Top Online Poker Sites The Big Lead Yesterday the department of Justice charged the owners of PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker with bank fraud, illegal gambling offenses and money laundering.
The Fallout From The Full Tilt / PokerStars Pullout Bill’s Poker Blog I said I was going to cover what this all means on a few topics when I got home and as I start to write this it’s 6:07am and I’ve just spent a sleepless night on the bus from Phetchabun so I’ll probably just do a quick draft and finish up after …
FBI Shuts Down Online Poker Sites Drudge Retort Eleven executives at the online poker sites PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker have been charged with bank fraud and money laundering
Poker Sites Charged with Gambling Offenses [H]ardOCP Eleven defendants from 3 online poker sites were indicted on multiple charges stemming from illegal gambling profits. The Manhattan US Attorney charged the operators of Poker Stars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker with conspiracy.
All of us are capable of making a profit with a pair of Aces or Kings, but it’s what we do with marginal hands, like pairs below 8-8, that can make a big difference in the overall profitability of our game. You may wonder why I specifically chose a pair of eights as my “line of demarcation”. I do so because eights are the median cards in a deck; median meaning half the cards are of lower value (2s through 7s) and half are higher (9s through Aces) – six of each with 8s making up the 13th card. So, it follows that half the time you hold a pair of 8s, any opponent that also holds a pair has you beat. However, the nice thing about pair versus pair matchups is that they are rare. The odds that one of your opponents at a full table has a pair when you have a pair is roughly 30 to 1, but if you have 2-2, you’re almost certainly beaten. However, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t make the bet I’ll be describing here.
In my experience, in the early stages of a tournament, be it single- or multi-table, players will limp into a lot of pots when given the opportunity to do so. Of course, many players will limp with trash hands and a pair Aces alike, so if you’re in late position (Cutoff or Button) and you also limp, you’re never really sure where you stand. One of my favorite sayings is, “Expect anything in an unraised pot.” The way to handle that is to put in a nice healthy raise if, say, at least four players have limped in and you’re in late position with a hand that can win on its own. Obviously, that means any pocket pair, but it can also mean a hand with an Ace or a King, suited or otherwise. Yes, most likely you’ll have to hit something on the flop to win if all you have is A-x or K-x, but a pair of Aces or Kings will often be a winner, so that’s what I mean by “win on its own.” I would not include Q-x or lower in this category.
So let’s say you have one of these qualifying hands and the blinds are 5/10 in the early stages of a sit & go tourney. With four limpers and the blinds, the pot will be 55 when it gets to you and you should raise the bet to at least 70. That means it will cost the Small Blind 65 more to get in on a pot of 125, giving him nearly 2 to 1 pot odds, so don’t be surprised by his call, which will raise the pot to 190. The Big Blind will have to put in 60 more which will be 3 to 1 pot odds, so again, don’t be surprised if he calls. Of course, you don’t really want to see this hand to a showdown, but if the two blinds do call, you’ll have 70 chips invested in a pot that is now valued at 250, which is better than 3.5 to 1 pot odds. Should you hold a pocket pair, your probability of success with a pair of 2s against two random hands like the blinds is 31% (just under 2 to 1), but the pot is offering 3.5 to 1. If you hold 7-7, your probability of winning is 44%, which is just under even-money. Of course, other limpers may also call, but that will only raise your pot odds, although you’re very likely facing a “real” hand if they do. If someone re-raises, you should probably fold if your hand is lower than 8-8. I say “probably” because in an online sit & go tourney, you may not have much of a read on that player and he may have limped with a big pair like As or Ks, in which case you’re about a 4 to 1 underdog or he may have A-x or K-x, in which case you have the best of it. So, if the pots odds warrant a call, you’ll have to use your best judgment, but I lean toward folding. A re-raise is the worst-case scenario, but what you’ll generally find is that everyone will fold to your raise except one other player and that person will just call, which makes any other $$$ in the pot “dead money”, thus the name of this bet.
Of course, every hand is different, but if I raise preflop and the remaining player(s) check to me after the flop, ninety percent of the time I’m going to bet at least 75% of the pot at that point. Remember, your preflop raise basically said, “I have a pair or two big cards” so if an Ace or King comes on the flop, just about the only player who can call my post-flop bet is someone who either has an Ace or a King, a pair that made a set or a drawing hand. If the flop misses me completely, I’m still making that bet and hopefully my opponent will fold. I only start to worry if I’m called. If I’m re-raised, I just drop the hand and that’s that, but a caller is very likely slow-playing me. Now remember, I’ve got “position” in this example and get to act last. With a hand like 2-2, if my opponent who called then bets after the turn card is placed on the board, I’m going to fold unless it’s a third 2, in which case I’ll re-raise. If my opponent checks on the turn, most of the time I’m going to check too and I’ll get to see the river card for free. The river will take care of itself; I’ll either be able to call a bet or I won’t.
But the vast majority of the time when you make this bet, the others will fold and you’ll have made a nice profit at very little risk. The tighter your image, the better this works. Only relatively sophisticated players will see this bet as a “steal”, but even they’ll be surprised a lot of the time because very aggressive players will make a bet like this with any two cards and you’re doing it with a pretty good hand. Remember, even 2-2 has the best of it against two unpaired overcards.
The House of Cards – a painting by Jean-Baptiste Siméon Chardin, 1735.
A card game is any game using playing cards, either traditional or game-specific.
Seating of players
When a card game is played, the players arrange themselves in a circle around a horizontal surface on which the cards will be played. This surface is usually a table, although any flat surface can be used. The players face inwards, and are approximately evenly spaced (so that they cannot see each other’s hand of cards).
The pack or deck
A card game is played with a pack of cards intended for that game. The pack consists of a fixed number of pieces of printed cardboard known as cards. The cards in a pack are identical in size and shape. Each card has two sides, the face and the back. The backs of the cards in a pack are indistinguishable. The faces of the cards in a pack may all be unique, or may include duplicates, depending on the game. In either case, any card is readily identifiable by its face.
The set of cards that make up the pack will be known to all of the players using that pack.
Pack is British English; deck is U.S. English. They mean the same thing.
However, there are some card games that require multiple decks. In this scenario, a “deck” refers to a set of 52 cards or a single deck, while a “pack” refers to the collection of “decks” as a whole.
Types of card games
Trick-taking games
500
Cassino
Bridge
Écarté
Euchre
Hearts
Pinochle
Piquet
ROOK
Spades
Sixty-three
Sueca (game)
Whist
Wizard
Pairs(u/c)
Rummy-style games
500 Rum
Canasta
Concentration
Durak
Five Crowns
Gin rummy
Go Fish
Haihowak
Happy Families
Jolly
Kemps
Robbers’ rummy
Seven Bridge
Shanghai rum
Spoons/donkey
Tonk
Tri
Wyatt Earp
Steal the old man’s pack
Casino or gambling card games
Baccarat
Bingo
Blackjack
Blind Hookey
Bouré
Cribbage
Poker
Primero
Red dog
Texas hold ‘em
Thirty-one
Three card brag
Solitaire (or Patience) games
Ace of the Pile
Baker’s Dozen (solitaire)
Calculation
Concentration
FreeCell
Kings in the Corner (multi-player)
Klondike
Russian Bank
Solitaire Showdown
Shedding games
Bartok / Bartog
Bullshit
California Speed
Chase the Ace/Old Maid
Craits
Crazy Eights
Eleusis
Mao
President
Shichi Narabe
Shithead
Spit / Speed
Spite and Malice
Tien len
UNO
Accumulating games
Beggar-My-Neighbour
Egyptian Ratscrew
Seven Spades
Slapjack
Snap
Top Trumps
War
Multi-genre games
Eleusis
Poke
Skitgubbe
Tichu
Tripoli
Collectible card games (CCG’s)
Duelmasters
Magic: The Gathering
Pokémon
Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game
Other card games
1000 Blank White Cards
Blitz
Bohnanza
Chez Geek
Chrononauts
Flinch
Fluxx
GOLF
Gother Than Thou
Grass
Hanafuda
Illuminati
Karuta
Lucky Seven
Mille Bournes
Munchkin
Mus
Numero
Pens
Pit
Pits
Scopa
Scopone
Set
Sheepshead
LeCardo
Fictional card games
Cripple Mr Onion – from the Discworld book series
Diamondback – from the Cerebus comics
Double Fanucci – from the Zork series
Dragon Poker – from the MythAdventures novels
Fizzbin – from the original Star Trek
Pazzak – from the Knights of the Old Republic video game
Pyramid – from the Battlestar Galactica series
Sabacc – from the Star Wars universe
Tall Card – from the Firefly television series
Triple Triad – from the Final Fantasy VIII video game
Links
Card Games – contains detailed rules for a lot of card games, has an alphabetic and classified index of card games
The House of Cards – comprehensive directory of traditional and commercial card games
Morton’s theorem is a poker principle articulated by Andy Morton. It states that in multiway pots, a player’s expectation may be maximised by an opponent making a correct decision.
The most common application of Morton’s theorem occurs when one player holds the best hand, but there are two or more opponents on draws. In this case, the player with the best hand might make more money in the long run when an opponent folds to a bet, even if that opponent is folding correctly and would be making a personal mistake to call the bet. This type of situation is sometimes referred to as implicit collusion.
Morton’s theorem should be contrasted with the fundamental theorem of poker, which states that you want your opponents to make decisions which minimise their own expectation. The discrepancy between the two “theorems” occurs because of the presence of more than one opponent. Whereas the fundamental theorem always applies heads-up (one opponent), it does not always apply in multiway pots. The scope of Morton’s theorem in multiway situations is a subject of controversy. For example, Morton himself expresses the belief that the fundamental theorem rarely applies to multiway situations.
An example
The following example is credited to Morton, who first posted on rec.gambling.poker. (Some numbers have been changed to allow for complete information, see below.)
Suppose in holdem you hold A♦K♣ and the flop is K♠9♥3♥, giving you top pair with best kicker. When the betting on the flop is complete, you have two opponents remaining, one of whom you know has the nut flush draw (say A♥T♥, giving him 9 outs) and one of whom you believe holds second pair with random kicker (say Q♣9♣, 4 outs), leaving you with all the remaining cards in the deck as your outs. The turn card is an apparent blank (say 6♦) and say the pot size at that point is P, expressed in big bets.
When you bet the turn player A, holding the flush draw, is sure to call and is almost certainly getting the correct pot odds to call your bet. Once player A calls, player B must decide whether to call or fold. To figure out which action player B should choose, calculate his expectation in each case. This depends on the number of cards among the remaining 42 that will give him the best hand, and the size of the pot when he is deciding. (Here, as in arguments involving the fundamental theorem, we assume that each player has complete information of their opponents’ cards.)
E( player B | folding ) = 0
Player B doesn’t win or lose anything by folding. When calling, he wins the pot 4/42 of the time, and loses one big bet the remainder of the time. Setting these two expectations equal to each other and solving for P lets us determine the pot-size at which he is indifferent to calling or folding:
E( player B | folding ) = E( player B | calling )
When the pot is larger than this, player B should chase you; otherwise, it’s in B’s best interest to fold.
To figure out which action on player B’s part you would prefer, calculate your expectation the same way
Your expectation depends in each case on the size of the pot (in other words, the pot odds B is getting when considering his call.) Setting these two equal lets us calculate the pot-size P where you are indifferent whether B calls or folds:
E( you | B calls ) = E( you | B folds )
When the pot is smaller than this, you profit when player B is chasing, but when the pot is larger than this, your expectation is higher when B folds instead of chasing.
In this case, there is a range of pot-sizes where it’s correct for B to fold, and you make more money when he does so than when he incorrectly chases. You can see this graphically below
| B SHOULD FOLD | B SHOULD CALL | v | YOU WANT B TO CALL| YOU WANT B TO FOLD | v+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---> pot-size P in big bets0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 XXXXXXXXXX ^ "PARADOXICAL REGION"
The range of pot sizes marked with the X’s is where you want your opponent to fold correctly, because you lose expectation when he calls incorrectly.
Analysis
In essence, in the above example, when player B calls in the “paradoxical region”, he is paying too high a price for his weak draw, but you are no longer the sole benefactor of that high price — player A is now taking B‘s money those times that A makes his flush draw. Compared to the case where you are heads up with player B, you still stand the risk of losing the whole pot, but are no longer getting 100% of the compensation from B‘s loose calls.
It is the existence of this middle region of pot sizes, where you want at least some of your opponents to fold correctly, that explains the standard poker strategy of thinning the field as much as possible when you think you hold the best hand. Even players with incorrect draws cost you money when they call your bets, because part of their calls end up in the stacks of other players drawing against you.
Because you are losing expectation from B‘s call, it follows that the aggregate of all other players (i.e., A and B) must be gaining from B’s call. In other words, if A and B were to meet in the parking lot after the game and split their profits, they would have been colluding against you. This is sometimes referred to as implicit collusion. It should be contrasted with what is sometimes called schooling. Schooling occurs when many players correctly call against a player with the best hand, whereas implicit collusion occurs when a player incorrectly calls against a player with the best hand.
One conclusion of Morton’s theorem is that, for example, in holdem, the value of suited hands goes up, because they are precisely the types of hands which will benefit from implicit collusion.
A chip race is an event that takes place in poker tournaments, especially those with an escalating blinds (such as Texas hold ‘em), in which chips of denominations that are no longer needed (as the current and upcoming blinds are more easily played with larger chip values) are removed from play. This has the effect of reducing the number of physical chips in front of any player, and makes it easier for the players to count their stacks and their bets.
In a typical chip race:
All players color up their lesser-valued chips into greater denominations. For example, if the blinds have increased to a level where $5 chips are no longer needed to post blinds, each five $5 chips will be exchanged for a $25 chip. Players will temporarily keep any leftover chips that cannot be fully colored up to larger chips (less than 5 $5 chips in the above example).
All leftover chips are counted, and equivalent chips in the larger denomination are presented to the table. Continuing the example, if there are 15 $5 chips remaining among 6 players, 3 $25 chips are prepared. In the event the remaining smaller chips do not add up to a whole larger chip, an extra larger chip should be added as long as the leftover smaller chips total more than half a single larger chip.
Each player with leftover chips in the smaller denomination will receive one card for each chip. The cards are typically dealt face up, starting from the small blind position for the upcoming hand. Each player due to receive cards will receive all of his cards before the next player, rather than a “traditional” card deal; the player on the little blind, for example, who is due to receive three cards for his three chips, will receive all three of his cards before the big blind receives any.
The larger chips are issued to the players with the highest single cards showing (poker hands do not count). No player is issued more than one chip. Ties (cards of the same rank) are broken by suit, using the same bridge (ascending alphabetical) order of the suits: Spades are highest, followed by Hearts, Diamonds, and Clubs. All remaining lesser-value chips are removed from play.
A chip race cannot eliminate a player from the game. In the event a player’s last smaller-denomination chips are removed from play as part of the chip race, he automatically gets one colored up chip if one is available. Any leftover colored up chips go to the winner(s) of the chip race as described above.
There are substantial differences between online poker gaming and conventional, in-person gaming.
One obvious difference is that players do not sit right across from each other, removing any ability to observe others’ reactions and body language. Instead, online poker players learn to focus more keenly on betting patterns, reaction time and other behavior tells that are not physical in nature. Since poker is a game that requires adaptability, successful online players learn to master the new frontiers of their surroundings.
Another less obvious difference is the rate of play. In brick and mortar casinos the dealer has to collect the cards, then shuffle and deal them after every hand. Due to this and other delays common in offline casinos, the average rate of play is around thirty hands per hour. Online casinos, however, do not have these delays; the dealing and shuffling are instant, there are no delays relating to counting chips (for a split pot), and on average the play is faster due to “auto-action” buttons (where the player selects his action before his turn). It is not uncommon for an online poker table to average sixty to eighty hands per hour.
This large difference in rate of play has created another effect among online poker players. In the brick and mortar casino, the only real way to increase your earnings is to increase your limit. In the online world players have another option, play more tables. Unlike a physical casino where it would be nearly impossible to play multiple tables at once, most online poker rooms allow a player to be on up to 4 tables at once. For example, a player may make around $10 per 100 hands at a lower limit game. In a casino, this would earn them under $4 an hour, which minus dealer tips would probably barely break even. In an online poker room, the same player with the same win rate could play four tables at once, which at 60 hands per hour each would result in an earning of $24/hour, which is a modest salary for somebody playing online poker. Some online players even play eight or more tables at once, in an effort to increase their winnings.
Another important change results from the fact that online poker rooms, in some cases, offer online poker schools that teach the basics and significantly speed up the learning curve for novices. Many online poker rooms also provide free money play so that players may practice these skills in various poker games and limits without the risk of losing real money. People who previously had no way to learn and improve because they had no one to play with now have the ability to learn the game much more quickly and gain invaluable experience from free money play.
Poker freerolls are poker tournaments that do not require a money buy-in. Commonly called “freerolls” and “freerollz”, they when invented in the early 1960′s when Las Vegas Casinos used them to reward VIPs by offering them a free poker tournament with real money prizes. Poker freerolls have surged in popularity recently with several online poker rooms regularly offering them to attract new players to the site, or to reward existing players’ loyalty. Some online poker freerolls have a raked hands requirement to enter, meaning they are not entirely free. While most poker freerolls have real money prizes, some freerolls will offer other prizes such as trips, clothing, and gift certificates instead.
As the number of freerolls offered by various online casinos grows, the potential to profit solely by playing freerolls has become a reality. Some websites provide players with freeroll schedules, and some players are turning a significant profit just by hopping from site to site to play freerolls.
The game of poker as played today requires that players agree before play on allowable amounts for betting (called limits), and the use and amount of forced bets. These are collectively called the betting structure of the game.
The betting structure of a poker game is a more significant factor in its balance of luck and skill than the game variant being played. Higher forced bets and smaller limits increase the influence of chance. Smaller forced bets and larger limits increase the element of skill. Good games are carefully balanced so that skillful players will win in the long run while recreational players can win often enough for the game to be exciting to them.
The reason that higher forced bets with smaller limits increases the luck factor is simple enough. With a lot of money in the pot due to the antes, the small forced bet is getting high odds – it is, therefore, worthwhile calling with any hand.
For example, in Texas Hold ‘em, suppose the antes are $10 per player, and the blinds are at $5 and $10. With nine players the pot is $105 before the first player to act has to decide whether or not to call the $10 big blind. That first player is getting odds of 10.5 to 1 on a call – this makes any hand worth playing.
Consequently, various skills such as hand selection and reading player’s hands are reduced in value and the game becomes a dice-shoot.
The game of poker (or at least most of the variants) is considered to be computationally unsolvable. However, methods are being developed to at least approximate perfect strategy from the game theory perspective in the heads-up (two player) game, and increasingly good systems are being created for the multi-player or ring game.
Morton’s theorem is a poker principle articulated by Andy Morton. It states that in multiway pots, a player’s expectation may be maximised by an opponent making a correct decision.
