Archive for February, 2006
Simmons Nails It
the premise of the article is hilarious in and of itself (a fake summit for all of the shitty nba gm’s of the past few years), but simmons completely nails the lines. my personal favorite part of the article:
Simmons: Let’s talk about the draft, guys. What are some strategies there? Worst guy available? Taking someone at a position where you already have someone?
King: See, that’s where you’re wrong. It’s always better to make good picks in the draft — this way, your fans can become attached to them, then you can trade them for inferior guys with bad contracts. Plus, it throws the media off your scent a little bit. I would much rather draft a decent guy, then trade him down the road, or overpay him with a crazy contract that makes no sense or kills my cap space. If you’re openly tanking draft picks, it’s too obvious.
Thomas: I agree, Billy. If you look at what I’ve done over the years, I always drafted well: Stoudamire, T-Mac, Camby, Frye, Ariza … you want to stockpile as many assets as possible, only because it gives you more options to do something dumb.
Babcock: I couldn’t agree more. That’s the single-biggest mistake I made with the Araujo pick. In retrospect, I should have taken Igoudala, kept him for a year, then traded him last summer for Joel Przybilla and immediately given him an $85 million contract extension. Oh, well. You live and you learn.
McHale: I’m kicking myself right now … I wish someone had told me this before I drafted Ndudi Ebi and William Avery!
(Everyone laughs.)
Simmons: So if you don’t want to kill your team with bad drafting, what other recourses are there besides trades?
Thomas: Keep changing the roster — you don’t want any semblance of continuity. Once guys get used to playing with one another, they might start winning. Look at the teams that have done well over the last 25 years — it’s always been the teams that built around a nucleus. I even played for one in Detroit. That’s why I like to keep mixing things up every six to seven weeks. Why chance it?
i’ve been sometimes critical of bill simmons as a sportswriter, but he crushes a home run on this one.
technorati tags: bill simmons, espn, sports, nba
Experience Over Money
i realize it’s easy to say something like that while i sit in a 13th floor windowed office at the world’s largest enterprise software company, consistently cashing reasonably-sized salary checks, but i do indeed believe it. i’m ready for a different opportunity. and if that opportunity pays less money, then so be it. i think i’m starting to get a grasp of what i’m looking for. more on that later.
but i think it’s funny how often i’m starting to hear this refrain from people that i know. i had breakfast with justin smith last week and talked with him about various current pain points in my life (read: career) right now. he’s working on a service called Standpoint (http://www.standpoint.com) that you should all go check out. i distinctly got the feeling that he was enjoying the experience greatly and not at all concerned about the money that he could be making somewhere else right now. i think his attitude and ramit’s article are refreshing; they give me some validation of the ideas and beliefs that are in my head. just time to go execute.
technorati tags: life, standpoint
Music at NBA Games?
i always find myself contrasting the nba situation to that of college basketball games, which are infinitely more energetic (save for nba playoff games). the difference, to me, seems to derive from the relative lack of importance in a single nba game. fans subsequently care less about the outcome of a game than they do in just having a fun time. this phenomenon is even more potent in a mlb atmosphere, where one game is generally meaningless.
even my local nba team, the golden state warriors, has shoved the idea of “Warriors Basketball: It’s a Great Time Out” down our throats, as opposed to “Warriors Basketball: We Could Win This Year!” i’m more inclined to believe that the warriors’ popularity boost is due to their players and style of play rather than the crazy 80’s cover band they have playing during the game.
if playing music during nba game action gets the fans excited and and energetic, then more power to mark and the other owners. it’s certainly better to do that than to not care about the fans. it is certainly a good business decision. i just find it a little strange, as a “purist” of the game. maybe i’m the only one.
Play the player
by then i had a great read on him as he pumped it up to $20 from under-the-gun. not being able to give him credit for much, two players called. i looked down at 33 on the button and called. with his deep stacks (he had me covered), i saw the implied odds of potentially getting ALL of it if i flopped a set (about 1 in 8 shot). those implied odds made the call reasonable.
the flop came 9h6h3h. the maniac immediately pushed in a $200 bet (into the $80 pot). a massive over-bet that just reeked of a steal. i knew it immediately: he had the ace of hearts and probably nothing else. i did the math quickly to myself as the other two players folded reluctantly.
- he had 9 outs to the flush of the unseen cards, one of which will hit around 36% of the time (2-4 rule)
- if he hit his flush, he could still lose the hand to me if the board paired
i estimated the odds at around 70-30 for me. cardplayer agrees: poker odds calculator
i made the fateful decision of moving in and giving him pot odds of around 14 to 9 on his money to make the call, which would be a mathematical mistake if he had just the Ah. it was the mathematical play. it was the wrong play. i pushed in for 1100 and he called instantly, standing up and screaming for a heart as he flipped over Ah2c. i think everyone knows what happened next.
i’ve thought about that hand a lot since november, trying to determine if i made a mistake or if i was destined to lose $1100 on the hand. i finally came to the conclusion that i should’ve called the $200 on the flop. when he hit his nut flush on the turn, he probably would not have bet huge, trying try to draw some action. he might’ve even checked hoping to check-raise for all my chips. i could’ve hoped for the board to pair on the river and mucked when it didn’t, maybe even showing him how lucky he got. probably a $200-400 loss.
this weekend i went back and read chip reese’s section on seven-card stud in the original super system. he starts the section off with a story not unlike mine, in which he details a hand in an old texas cardroom back in his younger days. he was playing in a stud game against, among others, a drunk. he found himself in a position where he knew that he was a sligh 11 to 10 favorite. in his zeal to win the man’s money, he and the drunk re-raised each other 56 times, getting all of reese’s money into the pot. you can imagine what happened.
his conclusion years later? he should have waited for a situation in which he had a much larger advantage, perhaps 4-to-1, to get his money in because, against a drunk, those situations will arise. i smiled when i read the short story as it made me feel good. not that i played the hand right mathematically, but that even chip reese had a lesson like mine.
Scott Adams == Funny
Q. Have you ever been asked to sign a hot woman’s breasts or draw Dilbert on them?
A. Not yet. But if I draw Dogbert, I know where his nose will be.
that’s comedy.
ESPN’S Three Blogging Horsemen
PITCHERS AND CATCHERS REPORT
my contention is that sammy sosa has never, even in his homer-bashing prime, been considered a top player. he has always been more of an afterthought and, sort of, a sideshow. that’s really the only explanation i can come up with for why he’s disappeared. if that’s the case, i sure do agree with the lack of interest.
MID-WEEK MUSINGS
There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”
i thought that was funny. i think his book of short stories Oblivion was well worth reading, but i haven’t even attempted to dive into the enormity of Infinite Jest.
============================
– some interesting notes popped up on my rss reader today about google and constraint-based design. it mostly emanated from a guest article on businessweek by a vp at google. she makes some interesting points about designing within the constraints of technology and user behavior, and how those constraints can be inspiring rather than just restrictive. she is then summarily blasted by the folks at 37 Signals and James Governor, who make the point that perhaps google knows little about real constraint, because they throw armies of money and smart people at every problem, even some that are “science projects”.
it’s an interesting rant by the other two parties. my take? google deals in the constraints of technology and user expectations, not of manpower and resources. does that mean that they can’t talk about constraint? no, but they should be sure about what they’re referring to. mayer seems to do a good job of that. does that mean a company like 37 Signals is BETTER to talk about constraint? probably yes. to me, google is just another company making the transition from innovator to large market pusher. it’s an oft-traveled path by many companies, groups, and even popular culture icons. what comes along with that path is criticism, unfounded or founded. they’ll be dealing with that a lot (see: recent china and google desktop controversies).
============================
– in looking back over that short guide i wrote yesterday, a few things pop out at me:
1) that list of starting hands would qualify me as relatively loose, which is weird considering that i used to consider myself as a pretty tight player. kingsley notes that i “stopped being tight last year.”
2) one thing i didn’t mention that i meant to is that, as you watch everyone at the table and pay attention to every hand, you’ll notice how little OTHER people pay attention. this is, of course, another one of those ways to find out who can play; figure out who else is watching. an interesting experience i once had was at a 5-10 NL game at bellagio. as i thought about how to approach the hand when the action was on me, i looked up and saw all 8 other people at the table staring at me intently. tough table.
3) what should you be watching for as you start out? watch hands and try to guess what people have. as you get better at reading, your accuracy will increase on their showdowns.
GETTING STARTED IN POKER
one thing we should note is that i am not a pro, nor do i think that i am a great poker player. just like anything, the more you learn about poker, the more you realize how little you know. that being said, there are two things that you can do. i list them here in, probably, order of importance:
PLAY. PLAY A LOT.
there’s really no other way to go about becoming a good poker player. you need to play to be a poker player. this doesn’t mean that you should jump into every game that you can get into and just start slinging your money around. the internet has made it easy to find games of all types all the time at all budgets. i think there are a few basic things that you must do while starting out playing:
1. watch and listen to everyone at the table. this is CARDINAL rule number one. the one thing about the game of poker is that there’s a time and a place for just about anything (even playing 27 offsuit). the one completely inflexible rule though is that you need to pay attention. if you can’t do this, you might as well give up now. by paying attention you pick up on what kinds of hands people play, verbal and physical tells, and who’s on tilt. but probably most importantly (particularly for, i think, no limit games) is that watching everyone all the time allows you to pick up on betting patterns. if you sit at a game long enough and watch a player enough, you will usually be able to tell what kinds of bets he likes to make. all of this information dictates what you do. there are situations in which you might fold AQ immediately, but other situations in which you might raise liberally with A2. you’ll never know which to do if you don’t pay attention. when i play a long session, i am mentally exhausted by the end of it, mostly because i just spent eight hours intently watching everything that happened all the time. get used to it; it’s poker.
2. put together a plan and USE it. now back in the “old days,” putting together a plan meant trying out new things, without people telling you. in my first trip to vegas, i once put together a plan before playing 3-6 limit hold’em to play hands only if both of my hole cards were 9 or higher (by the way, i actually don’t think this is too ridiculous for a beginner). in retrospect i chuckle about the plan, but i stuck to it and had a winning session. in fact, i won two or three kicker showdowns in that session, which was a direct result of me picking my cards carefully. but just playing tight doesn’t guarantee anything. i once put together a plan in a 6-12 game to raise every pot that was unentered when it reached me, regardless of my cards. miraculously, because of the table that day, that turned out to be a winning session too. will you win every time you play? phil ivey doesn’t win every time he plays. but if you’re trying out new things and seeing how different styles work, you will be learning.
what’s a good way to start? it’s always dicey giving a list of hands, but when i sit down at a brand-new LIMIT hold’em table for the first time, i tend to play a pretty set way. this is a list of hands i like to play in different positions when i don’t know anyone at the table. note that this list shifts, sometimes dramatically, based on:
– my feel for the players
– the action to me in the hand (raises, etc.)
this is probably a looser set of starting hands than many books would suggest, but most people who are beginning will play WAY more hands than these anyway, so reeling yourself in to these might be a good start. does position matter? in a word: yes. in more words: you won’t believe me until you’ve played enough:
HANDS FROM EARLY POSITION (SB, BB, under-the-gun)
AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ
* if i’m feeling creative i might play other pocket pairs as well.
HANDS FROM MIDDLE POSITION (spots 4-6) add:
88, 77, AT, KJ, QJ, JTsuited
HANDS FROM LATE POSITION (SPOTS 7-9) add:
pocket pairs, A9, A8, other suited Aces, KT suited, QT suited, JT offsuit, T9 suited, 98 suited, 87 suited, 76 suited.
READ BOOKS BY PEOPLE THAT KNOW WHAT THEY’RE DOING
the other thing, besides the internet, that i think has really aided the beginner in poker is the influx of many many good books to read. here’s a list of some:
– The Theory of Poker, by David Sklansky: this one is sitting on my desk at home. apparently i’m the only serious poker player in the world that did not start with this book.
– Super System 2, by Doyle Brunson (and friends): the first book i read was the original Super System. i think the second one is better. this book probably has the best description of the different games of poker as well as, i think, the best treatment of the ATTITUDE that you need as a poker player, particularly for no limit. for strictly hold’em players, jennifer harman writes the limit hold’em section. she’s considered one of the best at that game in the world.
– Harrington on Hold’em (Vol. 1 and Vol. 2), by Dan Harrington: if you are into no limit hold’em tournaments (and even if you’re into strictly no limit cash games), these two books are must reads. he breaks the game down dramatically to technical details that will make you say “hmm, that makes so much sense.”
others to consider:
– Tournament Poker for Advanced Players, by David Sklansky.
– Hold’em Poker for Advanced Players, by David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth
– Ace on the River, by Barry Greenstein
– Super System, by Doyle Brunson (and friends)
– Phil Gordon’s Little Green Book, by Phil Gordon
– Caro’s Book of Poker Tells, by Mike Caro
other resources:
– cardplayer.com: probably the best online resource available. great articles. etc.
what should you do with these resources? you should think of these books as textbooks (albeit hopefully more than school ones). there is no way that they will supplant experience, but you should treat them as ways to help you put together your plan of play. they are supplements, not replacements.
and at that i will stop because that’s probably all that i’m qualified to talk about.
ORACLE CUTBACK PAIN, ROUND TWO
of course, regular readers will remember that i seem to have gone through a similar experience last year when the peoplesoft merger occurred. i wrote then that it was my first taste of corporate innocence lost. it was precisely because of that experience that i felt like today would be different. i would be able to emotionally stand the events of the day. not so.
i know it’s all business and, gosh, for the shareholders this will provide some change in equity value, but it is utterly impossible to reconcile those facts in your head with the emotion of people losing jobs when you experience it firsthand. i challenge anyone to walk into their company on the day of lay-offs and not be emotionally affected by the situation. maybe when i’ve experienced it ten times, but certainly not two (and i certainly would rather not find out if ten is enough). i write this not to blame anyone, because there is no blame, but just to provide some color to the commentary of the day. 2000 people means 2000 of these snapshots:
- walking into the building in the morning, i was struck by the somber mood of the whole company. people walked around, shifting their eyes, trying to determine through your gestures where you stood on the chopping block. some things i noticed: 1) the particularly vigilant pose of the badge security guard, making sure ex-employees did not dodge their way up into the building, 2) the downtrodden look on employee faces when they saw ANY (innocuous, on any other day) cardboard box, 3) the wordless shakings of heads between colleagues, indicating that either they hadn’t yet heard or they weren’t coming back.
- i went to target at lunch to run some quick errands and saw a member of our team aimlessly walking through the aisles. i said a quick hello and knew immediately from the look on her face. ashes.
- the insightful note by a manager who no longer is managing anyone: “i’m all out of cigarettes. i’ve never had to supply so many non-smokers as i did today.” i respect him as much as anyone here at oracle and seeing how he felt by the look on his face today, i can understand the loaded nature of his statement.
- the announcement of a mentor, as he came by my desk, just saying “i’m going to go home for the day. this is just depressing.”
- and most heartwrenching of all, walking through the entire process of anxiety, fear, acceptance, humor, sadness, and finality with my cubemate. she had sat next to me for the past 18 months, minus three during her maternity leave. the last week she had gone through the full range of human emotion, knowing that her time here was probably up. this morning, finding out that she had a mysterious meeting on her calendar, the only words that could escape her mouth between sobs were “do you have any tissues?” as i helped her carry boxes down this afternoon, we were met in the lobby by her husband and their baby girl. as tears came down her face, her cute little baby stumbled around happily in her pink sweater and matching pants with the help of dad.
it was the oddest dichotomy and, perhaps, the perfect visual of my post yesterday. the constant emotional stream of crises for the adult. the idyllic and ideal innocence of the child. a startlingly emotional moment for the outsider, making even grown men in the lobby teary-eyed. i audibly heard the words in an english accent, “what a *fucking* day…”
when i was little, i once read the book ender’s game. in it, ender and his friends unknowingly send numerous troops to an epic battle for galactic supremacy. they think that they’re playing a game when it is in fact real life controlled from a distance. the powers-that-be justify the pain of some for the salvation of all. in the end, ender is incredibly torn by the emotion of the event.
i imagine today that somewhere the powers-that-be at oracle justify the reduction in force through revenues and profits and rising stock prices. i just hope they have a little bit of ender inside of them: a little bit of humanity.
