Sunday Happenings!

Two tournaments were played on Sunday. First, Event #1 of the 2008 season was played at 1:00. 44 people showed up and at the end, Tomi H and newcomer Rick S battled for 1st. First Rick doubled through, Tomi, then Tomi doubled through Rick before Tomi and Rick got them all in again with Tomi's A3 needing to catch up with Rick's A7. On the turn, it did in a big way when she made a straight. No 3 on the river meant Tomi won Event #1 and begins the year with 25 pts, going a long ways towards the 1st quarter Invitational and even a good start to the Yearly standings.

Event #2 will be a 1.5 pt tournament on the 2nd, Saturday, of February at 1:00

The 2nd tournament was the 18-person Qualifier for the final 4 spots into the Championship. 15 players showed and the big hands drove the play. Tomi's 45 flopped the wheel when Bjorn flopped 2 pair with A2. Cowboy caught quads. Matt B and Scott K got them all in on a Q high board with 11 players left. Both had KQ, Matt B was freerolling with KQc with one club on the board. The improbably became reality as the board went runner-runner club to make our final table. Tomi, Bjorn, and Cory B busted fairly early at the final table to leave Cornhusker, Tim F, Slinger, Tallywacker, Big Slick, Matt B, and Cowboy.

Tallywacker would knock out Slinger with KQ against 99, the Q coming after the board ran out T763. Tallywacker would then bust after seeing a 4 handed flop of 653 with AJ and Big Slick holding 52. Matt B would be our Championship bubble as his A9 hit on an AK7 flop, but Tim F was holding pocket 7's to win the hand.

Good luck to everyone on the 10th of February as you battle for the 5 prizes, including the WSOP seat!

Healthcare - Part II

Cost: When you get sick, or you feel a twinge in a muscle, or wake with a sore neck, what is one of your first thoughts? Besides the basic "I could really do without feeling like crap" I think "How much are they going to charge me if I go to the Dr.?" This thought includes knowing the amount of your copay, to not knowing other things such as cost of lab tests, cost of prescriptions, unknown costs. It's no wonder that we don't like to go to the Dr.! I realize it's not a simple proposal to figure out what is wrong physically with a patient, but isn't there some way to give us an idea how much something will cost before we have to commit?

One of the biggest negatives of a Nationalized/Universal Health Care system is the idea that the free market provides the absolute best cost savings for products. While I am a wholehearted believer in this idea, this is only true when one knows exactly what they are getting and they know the value of it before they are forced to buy it. As we've seen recently with energy sales, the price of a product is not necessarily driven by the actual cost of the product. Far from it, it's driven much more by the demand and need of that product by the consumer. Profits in the energy sector have ballooned because at every level of distribution and sale, they are able to take a huge markup in price because no one is able to question it because of the need of the product and the inability to compete with the person selling the product.

Imagine yourself in the desert, stranded, completely unable to get to any place that offers you relief from the thirst and heat. Now imagine someone comes along and offers you a glass of water. The value of the water is low, but because you need it so badly, they are able to offer you an exorbitant rate on that water. Note: I use need here and not demand. Demand, in my mind, conveys a completely different idea. An idea that a good or service you are offering is a completely discretionary expense by your customer, and therefore you have to actually compete for their business. Need conveys that the customer cannot go without a certain product and the only competition becomes who sells them a good or service.

Probably foremost in my mind of the current cost of health care, is insurance. Not what I pay, but what the hospital or clinics pay. What they have to pay for malpractice protection. What is that cost to me when I receive treatment of any kind? Is the cost of the insurance passed on to the treatment for which it's specifically intended or is spread over the entirety of the business as an overhead? Prescription drugs, hospital equipemnt, and basic material also have to have some sort of insurance or hospital grade attached to them. Are all these things the largest cost of my bill? If they are, what can be done to reduce them without reducing quality of care? Would it be viable to be able to sign waivers to reduce your cost of care? Obviously these are questions I have no answer for, but may be the single largest contribution to the ballooning of costs in the medical field today.

Next in cost would be the salary and benefits of it's employees. Definitely always a rising cost, is it something that can be looked at as being out of line in some sectors? Not nursing or staffing, but specialists and especially executives. I do believe in being able to set your own worth, and therefore I have an issue with any talk of curtailing salaries, but at what point does something become that exorbitant, especially concerning executive salaries. Can there be more diligence taken in the hiring of these positions so as to not have to pay these large salaries?

Every year, we continue to have advanced technology in every form of medicine. Because we have new technologies, are the old ones obsolete? Or, is it feasible to have levels of care to give the customers choice: Instead of using the brand new technology, use the 2 year old technology. How much choice should we give a consumer that cannot comprehend the complete picture of his or her own problem?

Finally, accountability of costs. If there is no checks and balances for the cost of a product to the consumer, does the hospital/clinic necessarily care what the item costs them, or can they simply mark the item up a comfortable amount. How many times from the manufacturer to the end user does each item receive a markup? Tougher standards in showing the actual cost of a product all along the line could be a good first step in keeping costs from rising too dramatically.

To be honest, I'm not sure where to go to solve the problem. But the first step must be to have people agree that the current situation is a problem. Whatever we do, we must start now. A basic form of Universal care that covers the basics but implements regulations and cost controls on other aspects of the system could possibly work. I do believe we're past the point of saying that controlling costs of the healthcare system through free market forces is the best way to go. Those who use this argument are either reciting a standard line without additional knowledge or are currently benefitting from the current system.

How can so many other industrialized/Western nations provide basic healthcare for their citizenry and we are stuck with THIS???

Healthcare - Part I

Preface: As I began writing this I realized I was and wanted to write about these subjects without putting in or quoting any research from news or other public sources in forming any opinion or question because I believe that's how the majority of Americans would contemplate the questions posed and the issues faced by themselves and their peers.

Well, why not start big? Personally, I view Healthcare as the biggest of all the major issues. The cost of insurance plans have continued to have double digit increase for many of the past 7 years, thus doubling the cost while wages have not typically doubled for the same job over that span - especially in the Red River Valley. I have a family of 5, and the cost of my insurance plan including employer contribution, has ballooned to over $10,000. So BCBSND receives 1 stack of high society every year in an effort to protect me from calamitous ruin due to an unforeseen hospital bill. On the surface, that gives me a very sick feeling seeing that number. But that, in my opinion is far from the worst of it. Each time we visit the Dr. we see a $20 bill. Then we have prescription drug costs, lab tests, and this year, maternity ward costs. So in addition to our upfront costs - which at least are pre-tax dollars, we have out-of-pocket expenses that, although aren't enormous, are sometimes difficult to deal with - and this is as a family that is by all means very, very healthy. I look at my situation and feel we probably have a best case scenario - supposedly. I see many, many other families that would have a much harder time - be it financially or physically - than us when it comes to paying and receiving quality healthcare. I'm sure this is only 1 of many different anecdotes that our leaders have to consider. So what are the issues? How can we solve them.

#1 issue: Cost. From the first visit, to each test, to each and every drug you take, why and how is the cost to the consumer determined? This is absolutely the first big hurdle that has to be tackled. Is it due to their own liability insurance at each and every level of business? Is it due to rising salary costs? Is it due to rising material costs? How about executive salaries? Better technology but at what cost?

#2 issue: Availability. How do we get everyone who needs treatment for an ailment what they need? Why do so many in America not have insurance?

#3 issue: Preventive issues. Are there programs that can be implemented to reduce the need?

#4 issue: Effectiveness of care. From pills prescribed to treatment in a facility, are we getting the best care?

Obviously most of the latter issues deal with a monetary issue as well, but are a little more in depth to their respective topics than just plain 'how much'?

To delve into each issue quickly at first, I'll look at the bottom first and work up.

Effectiveness of Care: If I would decide to go without health insurance, would I receive the same level of treatment? Even with health insurance are the poor treated differently in the current system because they may be seen as risk to not being able to pay for certain treatments? There are many who believe this is most assuredly the case with the current system, and if so, then the system needs to change. At least to the point they are told why they are not receiving the same quality of care. Risk and reward is part of our lives as poker players and I think most of us understand a gamble, but we want to know as much information before we put our chips in the pot as well. If there are 'generic' options that cost less, give me the information to decide if it saves me money, but there has to be an incentive to taking this option if I'm on a healthcare insurance plan.

Prevention. From a national standpoint, to state, local, corporate, and personal, I think most of America has failed in this regard. The lack of incentives (since obviously just plain good health is not incentive enough) at each level has led to a ballooning for the need for various heathcare items that could be avoided. Obesity - to whatever extent, is one of the leading causes for needing healthcare. Could there not be corporate, state, or federal incentives for joining health clubs, achieving certain levels of body fat %, weight status, cholesterol levels, etc.? If a company (and IBM has done a program along these lines and seen huge savings) were to give incentive to their employees - monetary bonuses - to achieve certain levels of weight loss/status, do you not think employees would take advantage of such a program? Why does everyone in my health care group get the same insurance rate when I have been more healthy as a general rule than them? This is how car insurance works, why not health care?

Availability: From the homeless to the reckless college student to the working poor, there are many in America without health insurance for one reason or another. But most all of us agree, that every person needs some form of basic coverage. However, once again, we mostly disagree on the definition of basic as well. From my knowledge, most states do provide healthcare for children from poorer families. These leaves the adults and why they are without healthcare. One debate I cannot begin to accept is that there are 40 million people in America without insurance because they cannot afford it. After looking recently at health plans, there were some basic plans for just $100 a month and there are catastrophic/disability coverages for less. Yes, that can still be a lot of money for some, but not all 40 million of those that are uninsured. Could it be that many Americans are choosing to gamble without health insurance for a certain amount of time and pay for the expenses out of pocket? I believe more and more everyday are taking this route because of their and others experiences with the current health system.

I'll continue with Part II shortly or in a day or two, the subject of which will be the cost of medical items, insurance, and procedures. I will also try to formulate a theory or two to get my mind working on what could possibly be down to help solve this issue.

Political Rants

Everybody realizes this is for the most part, a poker blog, but it is also a blog for myself as well. And because my mind works in absolutely mysterious ways, I'm going to put a few political topics up, after all, it is the season!

I am actually going to try to present the topic journalistically, and have no political affiliation. This does not mean that I won't necessarily support one side of the issue, but merely give differing views, as seen through my eyes, of different sides of the argument.

Maybe it gets people to think about the different topics, maybe it just helps my inner demons. Either way, you can review them, pass over them, comment on them, ridicule me, slam me, or ignore me. Either way, I hope you enjoy yourself!

Over .... For now

Well, it ended for me last night. A quest for a 3rd straight FPN Fall Championship. In 2005 and in 2006 I was League Champion and had a bye straight to State. This year, the road was considerably more difficult this time, as it led through regionals at which they only advanced 10% of the field.

On top of that, I barely made it this far. I played league at Old Broadway this year, as did many of the others that I know. Of course, this makes the league more difficult in my mind - but this had been the case in the past 2 instances at the VFW in West Fargo and at JT Cigarro's. On paper, it looked good, making points 7 of the 14 (16 possible) weeks I played. But the problem was, I didn't go deep in the tournaments I pointed in, except the last two, which were the least attended. Therefore, I actually only made the regionals because of a double qualifier at the site.

That brings me to last night. I'd been playing pretty well lately and cards had been falling fairly well for me as well, so I was pretty confident coming in. My plan was to try to double up early to get myself safe from the jump from 100/200 to 200/400 that occurs right after the first break. First step towards that was this following hand. I have 32c UTG and limp for 100, the guy to my left makes it 400 and it's folded to me. I have to admit that this is probably not a play that normally should be made, however ... I decide to call 300 of my remaining 2900. Couple reasons: Flop hits me hard, it will be well disguised; second, I don't believe the kid necessarily had a great hand; third, he was invading - literally - my personal space at the table and I wasn't liking it (not a good reason obviously). Flop came out Kc5c3d and I checked to him. He bet 500 and I immediately but calmly said all-in. He proceeded to table ATo and said my K is good - as I show my hand. He was a bit upset that I called 400 preflop with that hand to say the least, but I was happy.

Next hand was the big one. AQs UTG, I limp for 150. Same kid makes it 500 to go, and the BB calls, and I call. Flop is 5s4s3h. First off, when I see this flop, I KNOW I will NOT be folding to any bet on the flop. BB leads for 700, I call (because of action behind) and raiser goes all-in for another 1,450. BB calls, I have around 3,200 total and decide to just call, leaving myself with enough chips if I don't hit. Ad comes on turn, and she checks. At this point there is 8,000 in the pot, and I really saw no point in putting the last 1,000 at risk if need be although I was 99% I was ahead - reasons for this have more to do with the player who checked. River is a blank and I scoop the pot against the BB KK as the raiser mucks (a pocket pair)

From this point though, thing got rough. I struggled to stay around 8,000 for much of the rest of the tournament, getting QQ once and stealing at 300/600, stealing with 45 at 300/600, all just to stay afloat. Then this hand that haunts me. Based on a personal read from a very recent hand, after the kid on the button made it 1800 total to go on my SB, I had A9c. Here's the mistake: Based on my read, I either move all-in here or fold. I call and the flop is KK5. Here's the problem with the flop: If I am to lead out, he most likely will not believe me and put pressure on me, if he bets, I have to put the rest of my chips at risk with a check-raise and be 100% right, but even if he has 33 he could call. Check-check on the flop, so when a 7 comes on the turn, I bet 1,500 but he min raises to 3000. I decide to fold, still feeling he's making a move, but I could still be behind. I leave myself with 3,800. Very next hand it's folded to me on the button and I move in with AJ, turns out it was a good time to look like I was steaming as I get called by AT out of the BB and I make a better 2 pair and move to 8,000. I steal from UTG with A9 and that sets this play up from the SB. UTG raises from 400/800 to 1800 and I have 33 in the SB. I decide to call and put pressure on him on the flop. Flop is K57 and I bet 1800, he deliberates but eventually moves in for another 1400 at which point I fold, knowing I'm beat leaving me with 4400. I really though he'd deliberate about the K (I hoped for an A actually) but still decided to move with his mid pocket pair.

We color up and move to another table with 24 left. I steal once with 78s to move to 6000 (blinds 500/1000) and then the final hand. After going through the BB, I am in the SB and it's folded to me. I have Q8d and I move in for 5,000 total, knowing the lady who has about 7500 total in the BB, has to have a great hand to call. Unfortunately she wakes up with AKd and I fail to improve.

The only hand I really regret how I played is the A9. I think the play in that situation was to fold, I lost 3,300 that I could have really used on the following hand! LOL - hindsight is always 20/20.

Hopefully, for me, things will still run even keel this weekend at Dirty River, after those 2 tournaments I'll decide about playing the Dead Money Open.

Good luck at the tables ... except against me!

'Best' Poker Players

This has gone through my head at various times over the years: What makes a person a better poker player than anybody else? Does it have to do with starting hand selection, their bankroll, the stakes they play at, how often they play?

Over time, it has seemed to me, that no matter how 'good' you consider a player, any leak in their game can severely diminish their profit potential. But, again, should pure profit be the only mark to which we measure the ability of a player? In other words, if someone grinds, recreationally, at smaller stakes, and shows a consistent profit every year doing this - enough to pay for all costs in addition to some profit for pleasure - is that better than a player who, admittedly by the previous player, could beat him at nearly any game, but because of a leak in his game, does not show the profit of even the recreational player?

If the larger stakes player loses huge pots in games he has no business in, whether it be just because of the stakes, or the other players seated at the same table, that leak does not necessarily mean that we would consider one player worse than another. However, this one leak, is enough to keep this player from showing a potential profit.

What if you do have a very profitable player, but he cannot manage his money and is always broke? Obviously we don't consider him a poor poker player, but depending on the point in time, the money (we've all been here) can affect how one approaches a game, be it cash or tournament.

What if you have a profitable player, without a huge leak, but is going through various personal issues? Births, spouse problems, personal money, family deaths, etc. can all affect people differently, but in my experience are one of the biggest effects on a person's game.

In determining a 'good' poker player, do you completely separate the above issues from the actual play? Do you consider some but not others?

I've typically looked at a poker player as a 'whole' person. Someone who understands the game to a point that they can see all the angles, knows when they're over their head, realizes where their comfort zone is, realizes where their opponents comfort zones are, has the ability to take advantage of the weak players when they can be taken advantage of, has the ability to take advantage of the strong players when they are playing weak. But, in addition to their play, someone who can manage their personal life so that it does not have an affect on their game. Whether this is recreational, amateur, or professional, this ability is among the most important and yet most difficult to accomplish.

The margin for profit in any one game can be extremely small; no matter the stakes. One bad session can set anyone back weeks, months, or years. No one is above letting various things getting to them. Whether it's personal issues, their bankroll suffering, or just lack of confidence due to just plain bad luck, everyone has to go through these situations. Even the most accomplished pros will say that at some point in their live, maybe multiple times, they've gone broke.

None of us are as good as we think we are when things are going well and we're nowhere near as bad as we perceive ourselves to be when things don't go right. The ability to understand why things are how they are is nearly as important as understanding what your opponents cards are in any given hand.

The one thing I would love someone to figure out for all of us - Tell us how to switch from one frame of mind to the other, because when you're on the low end, it seems impossible to do until one day, it just 'happens' for you ...