Linda Luckbox

Glenda already outed herself and I can’t come up with an appropriate fake last name for her as easily – Glenda GetsItInRight is too entendre and lacks flow. Go read Glenda’s latest. The second paragraph saved me the search. She reports that Chris roll at this point in the proceeding was a whopping 7-bucks.

I’ve previously mentioned that bankroll management was a key component of his self-challenge. That got me a “Fickled Finger of Fate Award” from Linda. Ok, if they had a crappy 7-bucks the read wouldn’t be as interesting nor would Max show up “Poor Maxie” in the look and feel.

Now I sweatered Linda the other day and she won a tournament. I only commented negatively on one of her plays. There, I felt like that ghost in Harry Potter — the one that couldn’t join the Headless Hunt because a flap of skin had kept his head partially attached. While she was playing very well in general, Glenda was sitting over on a mid-limit Stud8 table with about $500 in play. I know she wouldn’t have let it all slip away and she sure wouldn’t have wanted to sit with the correct amount one can risk with a $600 roll. But whether it is one of the rebuys or $11 tournaments or higher level ring, they’ve used risk:reward like it was a cheap streetwalker.

That isn’t a problem. It is just being noted. If you run over things, you’ll often do it in a risk prone manner. Gamblers do that. Doyle Brunson has been broke a ton of times. Mike Matesow does it still on an almost weekly basis. Tom Sexton has detailed Archie Karas’ travel from $50 to holding all of Binnion’s 5K chips. I’ve a friend that is a problem gambler. Most weeks he’d borrow gas money from me by Tuesday. One week he showed up asking me to hold $17K he’d won that he was afraid to have around his then roomie. He gave it all back but later bought a little house for himself with another rush in his winnings – still down overall. You can go to the newsgroups and read about this guy or that’s “Rampage” and wonder if you might pull it off.

Now I’ve played above my roll most of the time. But, actual money deposited could have supported my play. I just figured that it looked better in my money market account than in the site’s escrow account. That has changed a bit since Netteller went away. But, it is how most of us operate. We play with funds we’re willing to risk/lose without it affecting our lifestyle. That’s also the case over at the Chris Ferguson Blog. That means I don’t have a case that is a criticism; it is just stating the fact that this is fun and not serious play. That is how most of us approach the game. We’ll never be that Minister’s son and poster boy for the UIGEA.

What am I saying here? Not much. I’m just stating the obvious. But, it is one of those important obvious things that some let get away from them. Luck and skill affect the game. We’d all like to move to the right side of that bell curve that dictates deviation from the expected. Some do. Linda and Glenda are there right now. Maxie is actually closer to Chris and expectations than she understands.

Most of us play for enjoyment anyway. You pick a comfort zone and work toward success there. If you’re running a couple of BB below where your average should be, we share a trait. We’re using that comfort zone to waste a bet or two for those holes we recognize and still have some fun with. I see it at my tables all the time. Some guy will flame over it but he doesn’t understand the situation. Yes, I’m a marginally profitable player but I could do better but not have as much fun doing it.

If you do it for fun like Linda and Glenda, there will be no real angst. But, it is their play world and you forget that at you peril. The only time it is a problem is when we try to make it real.

ADDENDUM:

I ran into Chris a bit farther down his journey to 10K. It was at a $5 buyin RAZZ table. He lost most of a buyin. He was a real gentleman at the table — answering the dumb, attention seeking questions that seem to follow the pros around. It is FullTilt’s version of sports radio. The chat box was relatively courteous compared with pros like Matusow’s following. Those who envied the school bully seem to have found a safe playground to emulate his antics in safety.

If you check out Chris’ chart, you’ll see he had his own rush:

He started sometime in the spring of 2006. There’s another chart around that continues from this. There was talk about 100K or better and doing it for charity. That one did run up to 15K from here with the same exponential move. It then ran into ‘variance’ and came back to the 10K level where things went quiet.

If you’re into working poker for a profit, you need to be as anal as Chris points out. For most of us it make more sense to emulate the girls and have some fun in a situation that can’t hurt us. It is better to have fun chasing a dream with zero to 10K than hero to zero. And Linda has documented the sadness of those over the years.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 21st, 2008 at 8:29 am and is filed under Journal, Poker Thoughts, Site Talk. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.