Blogged.com ranks Ante Up!'s blog No. 2

The site administrators over at Blogged.com have just let us know that they recently reviewed the Ante Up! blog and rated us a 9.1 (excellent) out of 10! That makes us the No. 2 blog in the Games category. Blogged.com has ratings for 141 poker blogs.

Funny note: The site describes us as "professional poker players" (clearly they've missed both pot odds shows, but we appreciate the thought) and Michael Craig, whose blog is rated No. 3 (though also a 9.1), is just plain old "Michael Craig."

Chris and I will quickly get to work on learning all about the Philippine pool scene, as well as the oil and gas, financial services and information technology industries so we can capture that No. 1 spot.

- SCOTT

PPSN update

The Poker Players Social Network has updated its URL. The address we gave you on the show was a beta address. The new URL is here so be sure to bookmark it. At least 40 Ante Up! Nationals already have joined, giving this site a real boost. Nice job! And a special thanks to ChicagoJason for starting an Ante Up! Nation group, which again, is at least 40 members strong.

-- Chris

AnteUp Chicago MeetUp: Good times, great beer ... goofy hats

Clockwise from left: Laura Long, Scott (he doesn't shave on vacation), Chicago Jason, Chicago Mike, Chi-Guy Brian and Chicago Joe. Truly an mazing coincidence that all these guys' parents named them "Chicago" and then they grew up to live there.

Our whirlwind weekend trip to Chicago is in the books, and the dedicated employee that I am, I'm in the office blogging (and doing real work, too, Boss) just hours after touching down in Tampa.

Laura and I had a blast last night with four great Ante Uppers who turned out at the legendary Billy Goat Tavern. We chatted about poker, the show and life for more than three hours. Our great Billy Goat waiter snapped this photo of us wearing the official Billy Goat hats (Well, everyone except the guy who's idea it was to wear the hats. Well played, Chicago Joe. Well played).

Lots of other photos (and audio!) were captured during the night, so hopefully we'll have a few more things to add to the gallery soon, and some funny clips for this week's show.

- SCOTT

The need to share

Here's another problem with online play: It's such a lonely experience. It's not that when I go to one of the local card rooms I'm chatting it up with the players or being friendly for that matter. I usually keep to myself and try like hell to take every last chip from them. But if you're doing well or if you have a nice rally, there's usually someone saying "Nice hand" or "Nice comeback" and you can sort of celebrate your success. But when you're playing online and you make a nice call you turn to no one in particular and blurt out "I knew he was bluffing!" Then you realize what an idiot you are because you're playing alone in your bedroom while the wife's out shopping.

That's the beauty of home games. If you kick some serious butt you have all of your friends there to witness it and you can have fun rubbing it in or just reveling in the fact that your stack is twice as big as the next guy. But when you're playing online it almost has this mercenary feel. You're there to win money and then sign off. The chat box is a cold place filled with bitter players and it usually serves as a distraction. That's not to say players in live games aren't distracting (just as Scott and his whining companion the other day at the O8B table). But for the most part, live play is so much more rewarding. And, of course, there's the converse of this discussion: When you lose live it's more humiliating or dejecting, but you take the good with the bad. I believe winning live far outweighs winning online, and losing live isn't much worse than losing online. The only saving grace for losing online is, if you aren't playing in an AIPS event, no one really knows who you are and you can just turn off the computer and slide into bed. No one sees you cry like a little girl into your pillow.

But all of this is a long way of saying I had a session yesterday that I was particularly proud of and yet it still felt a little hollow because it was online.

I had a rough early part of the session (as I often do) and had lost a decent portion of my bankroll. I actually had my first losing session in Deuce-to-7 on Stars (though it wasn't a bad session, just a losing one). I kept drawing at the nuts and kept bricking (just like last week's home game). So I played a little 5-card draw and won back half my losses (including making quad-sevens for a nice pot).

Then I had an itch for NLHE, but early on it was very frustrating. I'll give you an example: I'd see a cheap flop with 9♥10♣, flop two pair, but the board would come 9♠ 10♥ J♠. I'd bet out and get a call, then the turn would be an 8♠, which not only put four to a straight on board but three to a straight flush as well. They'd bet into me and I'd be forced to fold. Or I'd have JJ and raise and get two callers. The flop would come with an A and K and someone would bet out. There'd be a caller and when it got to me I'd have to fold. This happened quite a few times and then one runner-runner suckout later I was busted at the micro-limit table.

So I stopped and thought to myself (as it's often professed you should do) "Am I playing poorly or is it just bad luck and bad timing?" I came to the conclusion that I wasn't playing poorly and should buy back in. But this time I went in search of a larger-stakes table that looked easily beatable. I started observing a $1-2 NLHE table that had two maniacs seated next to each other. How did I find this table? The average pot size was $41, so I took that as a sign there was some gambling going on.

There are two types of maniacs in poker: One knows how to play and is just wild and unpredictable, and the other is wild and just plain stupid. He thinks his stack, if he shoves it, is like Kryptonite and we're all Supermen. I had two of these types of maniacs at this table and I couldn't resist. So I sat in and waited. You've all been there: You know these guys will pay you off if you pick up a monster and they have a piece of the flop. And you know they'll shove if you show any weakness.

Here's an idea of how they played: I had queens and raised preflop to $8 from UTG. Both maniacs called. The flop came A♦ 9♦ 6♦. I had no diamond and made a continuation bet of $10. They both called. On the turn came a 2♦. I checked, thinking one of them HAD to have an ace and/or diamond. One guy bet pot and the other guy shoved. I folded and the first maniac instacalled. They both had 9-10o, and neither held a diamond. So I realized right there they overvalued their hands and didn't really read the board very well.

I built my stack up nicely with smallish pots but never got into another hand with these guys for at least 40 minutes. Then the first of two big hands with them came up. I had Q♥ Q♦ (again) and was in early position. These two were in the blinds. I made it $8 to go, again, and they both called. It was three-handed to the flop, which came K♥ K♦ 5♦. I had the Q♦ but that didn't come into my mind. I felt it was a very good flop for me in that the odds of them having a K were slim, given the range of their hands and the fact there were two on board. So I bet $10 and this time I got one caller. The turn was another K, so if he had quads or AA I was behind, otherwise I had a lock on this hand. I decided to check knowing he might bluff at it. He bet $44 and I requested TIME. I thought about smooth-calling, but what if he had an A in his hand and I let him get to the river on his terms? So I minraised after about 25 seconds and he folded.

A few hands later I got involved in a hand with the other maniac when I was dealt K♦ K♣ on the button. The UTG player had raised to $6 and I reraised to $20. The maniac called and the UTG folded. The flop came A♣ 2♣ 9♣ and I had the K♣. I bet $30 and he shoved for $80 more. Even though there was an ace on the board I wasn't afraid because I had the nut-flush draw twice and given that he's a maniac I figured him for just a club in his hand, maybe Q♣ Q♦. So I called pretty quickly. The flush didn't get there and when the hand was over he showed 8♣ 8♥. I felted him, but even though he had bought back in like twice while I was there, he didn't rebuy this time. Oh well. I had one last maniac to dispose of, and it didn't take long after that.

I had been so patient, waiting for the right opportunity to felt this guy. My stack was so large (I bought in for $100 and was up to $300) that I took a chance with 4♥4♦. A person with a stack as large as mine minraised to $4 and I just called. The maniac, now with just $90 left, called and the flop came J♥ 4♣ 7♦. And BINGO was his name-o. The raiser checked and so did I. The maniac bet $12 and the raiser got out of the way. I just called. That board had no real draws other than a couple of gutshots or if he held 5-6 he'd be open-ended. So I took a chance he had just a jack. The turn was a 2♠ and I bet $15. He just called, so now I was wondering if he actually was on a draw or not. The river was an A♠. At this point I thought "This guy either now has a decent hand or he missed his draw. If I check he's going to bet either way because he can't win unless he bets a busted draw and if he has something like two pair he'll want to get paid off." So I checked, and he instantly shoved his last $60. I instacalled and he turned over J♦4♠.

Two maniacs, two busts. And with the both of them gone and my stack a very healthy $400 I signed off. But again, no one was there to high-five. I later celebrated with my wife, but the excitement had worn off.

-- Chris    

Episode #137: Pot Odds Redux

MAIN TOPIC

You asked for it, we cried, but we gave it to you. We tried our best to improve upon our previous infamous "pot odds" show. How'd we do? Click here to listen to the show.

To calculate pot odds, first figure the ratio of the money you need to bet to the money that's in the pot. if there's $30 in the pot, and the bet is $3, that's 10-1. Next, figure out how many "outs" - cards that will help your hand - exist, and divide the number of unseen cards by that number. Let's say you've flopped four to the nut flush. Nine remaining cards complete your flush. There are 47 cards, divided by nine is 4.22-1.

Generally speaking, if the first number (10-1, in this case) is larger than the second number (4.22-1, here), then you call. If it's lower, you fold.

We also briefly touch on "implied odds," which is when you can factor in future bets you expect to win if your hand improves.

There are a gazillion good resources on the Web, but we suggest you find a pot odds chart and study it. Just having a basic idea of whether a call, or fold, is the right move will improve your game immensely.

OTHER TOPICS

Just shut up! No, not you. (Well, yes you if you're as whiny as the guy on Scott's left this week). Seriously folks, no one wants to hear bad beat stories or constant crying at the poker table. Grow up.

Chicago is our kind of town: Thanks again to the Chicago Poker Club for keeping us atop their podcast rankings, and come by the Billy Goat on Sunday to rib Scott for not always talking clearly into the mic.

Show!, no you show! No, you show! A playground confrontation between Phil Hellmuth and Jean-Robert Bellande took place on Poker After Dark this week, and listen in to get the real scoop on who was right from Sam Minutello.

Be Chris' social network friend! Chris has joined the new Poker Players Social Network, kinda like a Facebook or MySpace for poker players. It's pretty new, but is picking up steam quickly, all by word of mouth.

What's on your Poker Bucket List? Let us know.

Poker pitchmen on wheels: Online gambling site 888.com has joined up with cabbies in London to promote its site. When you climb into a cab, a cabbie might try to get you to talk about poker. If you do, then he might try to convince you to play on 888.com. Hey, what else are you going to do on the average 16-minute cab ride in London?!?

Hotline: Ross from Indiana calls, suggesting that we use our "card dead" periods to pay attention to action and try to steal in optimal situations. We agree.

One Minute Mystery: Columbo makes what he says is a reckless call, and it works out as his opponent was making a move with 2-2.

HAND OF THE WEEK

To demonstrate our proficiency in pot odds (pause for laughter), we break down a hand from the Ante Up! Home Game where Chris tiptoed on the border of correct odds to win a no-limit hold'em hand.

It's a six-handed table, with blinds of .50/1 and a 50-unit cap. UTG+1 raises to 3, and Chris calls on the but-ton with Ad-Kd, as does the SB.

The flop: 3s-8d-4d.

The SB checks, the original raiser bets 6. Chris figures he's getting 2.7-1 on his money, and his odds of improving are 3.1-1. He makes the borderline call, and the SB check-raises to 15. The original raiser folds, and now Chris is getting 4.1-1 to call, and his new odds are 5.875-1, since he has to assume some of his previous "outs" are no longer good with a player showing strength. That's not enough to call, but Chris reasons he has enough implied odds to make the call profitable.

The turn: 10c.

SB bets 12, which gives Chris 5.3-1 on his money. When considering the cap, Chris makes the call, hits his flush on the river and extracts a value bet out of the SB, who had 3-3.

NEXT WEEK'S SHOW

Former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, now chairman of the Poker Players Alliance, calls in to field our questions on what the PPA is up to these days and to give us an update on the legislative climate for poker. Have a question for the senator? Post it here.

- SCOTT

Ante Up! influences CardPlayer Brasil

Well, okay, Ante Up! didn't actually influence CardPlayer Brasil, but we did influence one of our listeners, Guilherme Kalil, to write a piece for the magazine on ... RAZZ! Our mantra of "Let's Play Razz!" has affected Gui so deeply that he submitted a column on this fine stud variation and it was published recently in CP Brasil. Of course the article is in Portuguese, so it might be tough to read for most of you. It just goes to show you that Ante Up! really can make a difference in the poker community (sniff, sniff). Also, did anyone besides the people in Brasil even know there was a CardPlayer Brasil edition? Just kidding.

Congrats, Gui!

-- Chris

Hey folks, let's be nice to our dealers

I found myself playing Omaha Hi/Lo at a local card room this week, and as any of you who have played Omaha Hi/Lo know, there's never just one dealer per table - there's always 11.

Once the cards are turned over, the barking begins like market traders haggling over the price of frozen orange juice concentrate. Screams of "Lock low!," "He has hearts!," "Two lows, one high!" bellow from all corners of the table (if you can work in a "live deuce!" shout you make the short list for Backseat Omaha Dealer of the Year). All of this insanity carries on while the poor dealer - the only one who should be making such declarations - struggles to separate fact from fiction, and then swallows a bottle of Tums as he prepares for the eventual "Why don't I have a low?!?!" cries from those who really, really should pick a far simpler game in which to lose the Social Security check.

All of this brings me back to my experience this week, when I found myself feeling really bad for a very nice dealer who obviously struggles to understand the complexities of Omaha Hi/Lo. I certainly don't fault him - there are few games more difficult to deal, especially if you don't play it often. His only knock was that he took his time, followed his training and eventually figured it all out, even if it wasn't on the timetable of the players in the hand.

So I pose this question: What dealer would you most like to have at your Omaha Hi/Lo table? The one who quickly dispatches with awarding the pot, and in his haste may overlook the true winner, or the one who painstakingly considers all four cards from all seven or so players and arrives at the correct determination?

I know which one I'm choosing.

- SCOTT

What's on your poker 'Bucket List'?

Warner Bros.

This month's box office blockbuster (well, at least until Cloverfield landed) is The Bucket List, in which Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman play two terminally ill guys who set out to fulfill all those things they had hoped to accomplish before they "kick the bucket."

Despite my lofty respect for both of these fine actors, not on my "Bucket List" is dropping 9 clams at the Woodlands AMC 20 to see whether Red and Code Red have anything poker-related on their lists (I'm guessing not). But it didn't stop me from pondering what would be on my "Poker Bucket List."

Turns out, it's not all that easy of an exercise.

The list can't have squishy, hard-to-define stuff (such as "learn to read opponents" better), nor can it have things that there's no guarantee of success (such as "win the World Series of Poker Main Event." I'll pause here to say winning that event may indeed be a worthy "goal" for all poker players, but a more appropriate "Bucket List" item would be to "play in the World Series of Poker Main Event," since anyone who's 21 years or older with $10,000 and is not a PokerShare.com chimpanzee can enter, even if they're smelly.)

After a couple of days' thought, I ended up with a rather sad list. Maybe it's because I haven't spent enough time contemplating my mortality, or maybe it's because "poker" just doesn't provide enough material for such an endeavor.

But here's my list, and perhaps I'll add more as the days turn into weeks:

1. Play in the World Series of Poker Main Event

2. Play in the $50,000 World Series of Poker HORSE event

3. Play in a World Poker Tour main event (sensing a weak trend here?)

4. Play an entire lineup of events at a tournament. Doesn't have to be a BIG tournament, like the WSOP, but maybe a smaller event, like the Scotty Nguyen Poker Challenge or one of the L.A. casinos' events. I'd like to see how I fare in a relentless day-in and day-out tournament frenzy.

5. Visit and play in as many world casinos as possible. Aviation Club is Paris is at the top of that list, and I think it would be cool to skip from European country to European country, sizing up how the play is different each time I cross a border.

That's it. Sad, I know. But it is what it is.

What's on your "Poker Bucket List"?

- SCOTT

Ante Up! wins Chicago Poker Club's "Best Podcast" award for second year

A good month for Ante Up! just got a lot better - for the second year in a row, Ante Up! has been named "Best Podcast" by the Chicago Poker Club.

Click on the link above to read the entire text, but here's a highlight:

"... Ante Up!’s accessible style and its consistency are the two keys to its success. Other great podcasts have come and gone, waxed and waned, or disbanded and rejoined, but Ante Up! marches on as poker’s podcast beacon."

ChicagoJason even flew down to Tampa last night, as a testament to how strongly the Chicago Poker Club feels about Ante Up! (well, he got to visit his Dad, who lives here, and his wife, who is on business in Orlando, and he got a cheap fare on Southwest, but think how impressed you would have been had I not told you all of that).

And again, on behalf of Chris, we humbly thank our listeners for all of our success. Last night, Jason laughed about how he just walked up to my table, said "Hey!" and I turned around and said "Hey!" like we were old friends, even though we've never met. He said he felt that way because he's grown to know us over 135 weeks of shows. To me, that's the real award in all of this - that Ante Up! has that effect on its listeners. We feel like we're old friends with many of you, too, regardless of whether we've ever met.

But to that end, let's not forget that I'll be in Chicago - home of the Chicago Poker Club - this weekend, and would like to have a beer with as many of our "old friends" as possible. Come out if you can (details here), and if not, we thank you for listening week in and week out - and we hope to meet you sometime and someplace else.

- SCOTT

More NBC Heads Up invitees

The list of invitees to the NBC National Heads Up Championship has reached 60 people. Some of the new invitees include Jason Alexander (Seinfeld), our good friends Tom Schneider, Bill Edler and Jean-Robert (Don't call me Bobby) Bellande. One of the shocking names on the list (and there are quite a few, Mr. George Costanza) is Orel Hershiser. Remember the former Dodger pitching ace? They called him the Bulldog in his playing days. Wonder what they'll call him in poker .. Bull shark? Can't understand this pick. I think NBC would get more viewers if they picked Scott Long or me to be honest. Do you think I'll ever be able to parlay this blog into a shot on any NBC poker show? Of course not! Anyway, here's a link to the latest release for this event.

-- Chris