Donkeydom

We’ve faced off over the term in blog and forum here. I somehow don’t care for the term as much as others. I admit to it being a prejudice of mine.

A few days ago sitting at a stud table, I got 7’s full of 4’s in 5. It was a hand that I wouldn’t have played in the majority of cases but got it with the bring in. In this case, I had a great hand from what you’d normally call trash. I also lost the hand when the other player rivered his 8’s full. This would be a great time to yell about a shit hand getting his 2-outer on the river. He did. But, as someone said in the forum, you don’t get people with things like a pair and a flush draw to leave with grace. Donkey? I don’t know. That is the problem. I just can’t get inside the other guys head. He could think he has a solid read on me or he be just a chasing machine. Without a crystal ball I can’t be certain. The board looked like I might be on a steal of sorts. Usually, that means a nice payday and he thwarted that nicely. Donkey? I just can’t say.

Gus Hanson’s early wins were marked with aggressive play and calling with ‘trash’ that all the books say to dump. He gave Scandinavian player a reputation that continues to today. Daniel Negreanu’s favorite hand is a ratty connected one-off and he’s ’sucked out’ a bunch of solid players with that or similar hands. In Gus’ case, he seems quite capable of sharing his thought process including a book just out that give his view on every hand he plays in a tournament. Daniel won back to back Player of the Year awards and is noted for his low ball poker along with some great reading ability that goes way beyond my weak attempts to play 57 of clubs like he can.

 Into this atmosphere, comes Pauly with his lead in for a recent blog:

 Welcome back. I’m Pauly, your jungle guide. Day 2 features the first of many $1,500 donkaments. Donkeys attract mosquitoes so there will be a slew of nasty disease-ridden pests swarming around in the Amazon room. Make sure you take your malaria pills.

 Throw in a few invectives later on and it separates that blog into one of his edgy homages to his hero of letters rather than an advert for his weekend tournament. That works for him but it still doesn’t make me comfortable with the language. That’s another of my failings, I guess.

 I don’t have aspirations to be a published author. My background was programming. There one could create sexy flow charts that defined the world(program) with remarkable clarity. It is a structured environment with the devil in the details. I operated in and enjoyed that world for many years before choosing to let it pass me by and retire. My interest turned to hobbies and poker became one of those.

 The reason I chose poker is because it lives in a gray area and is so different from my structured working environment. That seems to be an attraction for a high minded programmer or a cubicle monkey. Or, when we combine the two into poor Dilbert.

 Glenda over in the Chris Ferguson blog has credentials. She run zip to a 4-figure roll in fairly short order. Yet, she’s aware of the world and what she and others bring to it and to a degree at least calls herself that long eared beast:

 Patience as always is my enemy. In ring games I leave when my patience runs out, in a tournament I am stuck. Linda has waaaayyy more patience than I will ever have. One reason is basically I hate NLH and tournaments, I feel trapped in them, so no, I will never be a good tourney player. Hard to be good at anything you really dislike.

 I know that feeling. I call it my boredom tilt. What we’re saying is we aren’t interested in playing optimal strategy in favor of a bit of action. We say we’re capable of that in any number of environments. I’m probably worse at that than a successful player should be. I can afford that at the levels I play even if I wasn’t still marginally profitable. I feel I can support the contention that I’m not a donkey … usually. In the scheme of things it is a leak that I find gratifying or that I abandon before it goes beyond my acceptable level. That is being a donkey but it is a considered (usually) activity.

 I can’t find the blog by Linda, but if my mind hasn’t passed beyond the point of no return, I recall her discussing a horrid tournament session with very few playable hands. She either cashed or got close by a bit of stealing. That is good play. I might go beyond that and say inspired. The thing is… had she been called the appearance would have been just about 180 from her game plan. You adapt to a situation and the difference between success and failure is knife edged.

 Sexton often explains it best for tournaments in his commentary. It does give people a false sense into player’s minds – regardless off how good and how spot on it is in hindsight. He describes the successful squeeze with exuberance. But, WPT can’t fit all the pieces into the picture. It is a failing at tournament poker that few beyond those ultimate professionals at the game – like Mike – fully understand and that understanding comes from hours of boredom and a mass of failures that manage to work themselves out on a given day.

 I do know when I am a donkey. And, it is a situation that occurs more than I’ll freely admit on these pages. It may be selective amnesia but I hope it is just or usually avoiding the anomalies that are part of the game.

 In some respects, being a donkey is a form of insanity. Better minds than mine share my confusion. A number of these quotes seem to come from poker players. (Plagiarism alert)

 Albert Einstein:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Ambrose Bierce:

Love: a temporary insanity, curable by marriage.

Bruce Feirstein:

The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success.

Henry Ward Beecher:

No man is sane who does not know how to be insane on proper occasions.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.:

Insanity is often the logic of an accurate mind overtasked.

Oscar Levant:

There’s a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Seneca:

There is no great genius without some touch of madness.

ADDENDUM:

 Maybe donkament applies. A massively slightly better player (ozone alert) than me happily refers to the WSOP in those terms.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm and is filed under Journal, Poker Philosophy. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.