The SBP Archives - Your less than frequent dose of SBP!

Shaggy hair:




The 70's called, and they're embarrassed.

Alex and I were discussing a hand an ESPN commentator wrote about that busted him out of the World Series of Poker Main Event. At his table, there was someone he deemed a "maniac", talking trash and never hesitating to show off his bluffs. He was the large stack and the players were getting pushed around like no tomorrow. This commentator thought he would make a stand and show he couldn't be "messed with".

The big stack made a raise and Mr. ESPN decided to call with King-Ten. The flop couldn't have hit him much better: King-Ten-x. The maniac bet into him and ESPN decided to move all-in with his top two pair. Only a set would beat him at this point, however, he discussed how he "knew" he wasn't against one.

The maniac big stack called the all-in with big slick, Ace-King. Turns out he DID have something. He flopped top pair with top kicker but was in dire straits. But since this is poker, he still had a chance (about 15%). Sure enough, the turn and river cards came up Queen-Queen, giving both players two pairs but the maniac coming out on top with his ace kicker. Mr. ESPN was busted out of the tournament.

He played the hand as well as anyone could. He saw the big stack was making loose calls and playing very aggressively. After the flop, he had put his money in with the best of it. But the decision to play the hand in the first place was were the crucial mistake was made.

If you are a short or medium stack, you only mess with the big stacks when you have a premium hand. When loose, aggressive big stacks play pots, you tend to forget your "A" game and play hands you wouldn't normally play. King-Ten is hand I would NEVER call a raise with. Ever. It's trap hand designed to cost you chips. Yes, on the flop he had the best hand, but your decision to play is BEFORE the flop.

Remember, the big stack has more chips than you and can bust YOU out of contention. You cannot knock him or her out (yet). That is why you have to have the goods BEFORE THE FLOP to mess with him. Ideally, the big stack will be to your right so you can make a decision as to whether or not you would play before you even bother putting any chips in the middle to begin with.

So who made the worst decision in the above example: The big stack with chips to spare who called an all-in with top pair & top kicker, or the player who called the pre-flop raise with King-Ten?

Big stacks can afford to take more risks than everyone else. Overtly aggressive types like to play more drawing hands and like to re-raise to steal as many pots as possible. However, in the end, if you have a marginal hand, it's still a marginal hand. You have to be patient if you want to double up through them, otherwise one mistake and it's all over.

OTTAWA SENATORS OFFER 5 GAMES ON PAY-PER-VIEW

OTTAWA — The Ottawa Senators announced today the club will be offering pay-per-view games this season for the first time in its history.

For only $10.95 a game, or $49.95 for the five-game package, Senators fans can watch their team face the Red Wings in Detroit on Monday, Dec. 12, at 7:30 p.m.; the Rangers in New York City on Tuesday, March 13, at 7 p.m.; the Penguins in Pittsburgh on Sunday, March 18, at 7:30 p.m. and the New Jersey Devils in East Rutherford, N.J., on Tuesday, April 3, at 7:30 p.m.

Somehow, I don't think ticket prices are going to go down as a result.

For everyone who thought I'd cave and see Snakes on a Plane (SOAP)...you're right, I did. I bought into the internet buzz and expected this film to fall in to the so bad it's good category. And that's what I got. Much like other movies such as Army of Darkness, you stop and look at your buddy and say, "Did I just see what I thought I saw?" and can't help but laugh. The crowd was really into it. When Samuel L. Jackson utters the now infamous line: "I want these motherf*****' snakes off my motherf****' plane!!", a lot of the crowd actually cheered and applauded. I'm guessing there were a few people who saw it already. This movie will probably not translate as well on a small screen.

Interestingly, the box office for this film hasn't been great and considering the buzz behind it before the release, the studio was rightly disappointed by ticket sales. There have been theories that the movie took too long to be released, but I'm thinking because the internet is the place where the hype started, the same people opted to download it instead of paying to see it at the theatre. These internet geeks who get jazzed up about movies like SOAP...there the same ones who hate to pay for films. Right or wrong, that's my theory. Anyway, I doubt a SOAP part deux is coming anytime soon (Although you can catch Snakes on a TRAIN on DVD. Clever!).

Sort of. Well, I got a big scare anyway, but didn't get hurt. Last night at Marc's bachelor party (good time, btw!) we had to hail a cab to head back home. Ivan called down one and was trying to talk the driver into letting all 6 of us get in. No question, that's over capacity and cabbies shouldn't be letting people do it, but Ivan tried anyway. Now, I had the rear passenger door open while this conversation was going on, and I couldn't hear it too well. But I did hear Ivan say, "Ok, let's get in". I put my foot inside and that's when the cabbie decided to floor it. I mean, he just shot off like a jet. So I'm bouncing alongside the cab with my foot stuck in it, scared that I might get thrown under the car. I was stuck for about 2-3 seconds (but it seemed longer) and luckily nothing happened except my heart rate going up as I was able to push myself away from the cab. I know cabbies don't have the best job and they have to talk to a lot of drunken, irate people over the course of a shift, but there's no need to put someone's life at stake over it.

There has been very little news going on in the NHL league as teams prepare for training camp and I have been dying to talk a little hockey, so let's go over a few things that have happened.

- Bruce Garrioch thinks there might be a deal for P.J. Axelsson to the Sens for D Anton Volchenkov. Alfredsson played on the same line with P.J. when the Swedes took home the gold medal at the past Olympics and they were perhaps the best line. That would be a good addition if it happened, but unfortunately Garrioch is the source. He has the worst track records for trades, so I'm not holding my breath.

- The IIHF and the NHL still haven't hammered out agreement with Russia on handling incoming players. The Senators were somewhat lucky to land a deal for rookie C Aleksei Kaigorodov to play for Ottawa with his Russian team. He's said to have loads of potential, so we'll see what happens, but GM Muckler is lucky with all the hoopla regarding Evgeni Malkin playing for Pittsburgh. It isn't going to get any easier until a deal is reach with Russia, and Muckler was playing with fire when counting on Kaigordov to play.

- Speaking of Malkin, he might have talent, but he's a selfish, arrogant prick. Contrast that to fellow countryman Alexander Ovechkin, who has a passion for the game, plays hard but isn't a jerk about it. I remember a game he crashed into G Ray Emery by mistake, and after the whistle he came over and gave him a tap on the pads with his stick and patted his shoulder as a gesture to say "sorry". But at the same time, when there's a rivalry he's all fire. His battles with Sydney Crosby the few times they played were fun.

- I read Nicklas Lidstrom is getting the C for Detroit. Unfortunately for anyone who accepts it, they'll never be able to fill the shoes left by retired Steve Yzerman. With Brendan Shanahan also gone, it just seems that the players fans identify Detroit with have all disappeared. Sort of like if Sundin left Toronto, Brodeur left New Jersey or if Alfredsson left Ottawa. You can't picture them wearing another jersey. In addition to counting on flaky Dominik Hasek in net, I can't picture Detroit being the dominating team they have been in the last few years this time around.

Lynx owner Ray Pecor met with Mayor Chiarelli to reportedly announce his intentions to have the team stay in Ottawa for the 2007 season, while no immediate plans have been made for 2008. But, reading between the lines, all that means is that they are actively searching for a new home for the Ottawa Lynx and next year will likely be the final opportunity to see Triple A baseball in this city.

Attendance is rock bottom in the International League at 1,900 per game. The next lowest attended team gets about 4,000. By coincidence, that's the amount Pecor says the teams needs for the team to break even.

Doesn't seem like such a hard task for a team to stay...be the 2nd last team in the league in attendance and you'll be fine. Truthfully, that still may not be enough, but the history of sports teams and Ottawa isn't anything to be proud of. Ottawa fans seem to be extremely finicky and don't want to come out to support their teams. I'm not sure why that's the case. Even myself, who doesn't follow many other sports other than hockey, take the time to catch the odd baseball game. When lacrosse's Ottawa Rebel were in town and the Ottawa Renegades football team came to the city, I watched a couple of games for the atmosphere and good company, and I enjoyed myself.

Some say it's management, price, location, competitiveness, but the Lynx prove Ottawa isn't a sports town. You can go for less than a price of a movie, it's centrally located, and they have an above .500 record and always have a chance to win.

1,900 per game. Terrible. Ottawa is getting what it deserves.

Growing up, I loved playing video games. I was very fortunate to acquire the Colecovision, Gameboy, Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Nintendo 64 and more recently the Gameboy Advance and the Playstation 2. That's a lot of video game playing. There are so many cool systems out to purchase. Right now the Xbox 360 is all the rage, and Sony will be releasing the Playstation 3 soon.

But I don't think I'll be buying another one anytime soon.

You see, the games these days...as brilliant as the graphics are, as super as the sound is and all the attention to detail to the story and characters...they're just so...HARD.

I like to thrown in a cartridge (oops, that's old school. I mean, CD) into my game system and just sit down and play. I don't want to consult a catalogue to figure out how to move and which buttons do what.

A PS2 controller has three different joysticks and 12 buttons (14 with the "select" and "start" buttons). That's a lot of options. Too many, in my opinion. I remember when Street Fighter 2 came out, the idea of having six buttons blew my mind. But now my brain just can't handle it a lot of the time. Whenever a new game is played, I spend half the time staring down at my controller, trying to remember where the X and square button are and what each one does. I go back to the instruction manual to learn my onsceen character can do other things if you press the other buttons at certain times. Then I forget what the first buttons I was pressing do.

The games themselves seem to require hours & hours of dedication to beat them. Even an old school game that's been suped up for today's market, like Gradius V (a sequel to one of my old favourites, Lifeforce), is nearly impossible to master. It's so hard, for every hour of playing time they add an extra continue for you to have any chance of seeing the ending. I've put in at LEAST 12 hours and still haven't finished it. That's just crazy. The levels get harder & harder as you progress, and there's no way you can finish it without having your tiny ship get blown up a few times. I just can't take it. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is another game. I was doing ok, then there's a car race your character has to win and I can't do it. I've attempted dozens and dozens of times, and still can't beat it. It's sitting on my shelf now, collecting dust.

So when I see these new 3D games, I get intimidated. I don't know if I can beat them without devoting 1/2 my life to it. I think it's great that technology allows for all these cool-looking games, but can't they just make them a little easier....for old guys like me?

I'm sleepy and ready to call it a night after busting out in poker first (yikes, I win one game a week ago and I'm on top of the world, now I'm just a b-u-s-t bust). Anyway, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby got the call a few nights ago, and here's two words for it: Pure Hilarity. Well, it wasn't non-stop laughs from start to finish, but when it hit, it hit well. Will Ferrell just looks funny. He has a natural talent with comedy and is one of those guys that will do anything for a laugh. When a movie makes me laugh out loud several times, you know it's done its job.

Recommended.

I was quite intrigued to read that the World Poker Tour, one of the reasons poker has reached the popularity it has, will be heading to Niagara Falls the end of October for a televised event. Pretty cool. No, I can't enter, as the buy-in is probably somewhere along the $5,000-$10,000 mark. Still, just knowing Canada is taking part is pretty awesome and it will be neat to see a bunch of the poker pros making their way up here.

But, that all took a back seat when I heard that some top name professionals, such as the 2000, 2004 and 2005 World Series Main Event Champions Chris "Jesus" Ferguson, Greg Raymer and Joe Hachem, have filed a lawsuit with four other pros against World Poker Tour Enterprises. At first, it seems ludicrous, but after hearing what the players have to say, I tend to agree with them.

The chance of another poker television program coming to your TV screen is reduced because the WPT has a clause for the casinos that they are not allowed to host any other type of televised poker tournament. This is simply a way to create a monopoly, and eliminate the competition. If WPT is the only choice available if all the top casinos agree to it, this reduces the amount of tournaments players can participate in and fewer choices for the TV audience. Only WPT wins with this clause.

The players themselves have no control over their likeness and name. Anything captured by a WPT camera can be used for profit/propaganda without requiring the players' approval. They could legally use someone's image to promote an entirely different product unrelated to WPT in any media. They could find themselves unwillingly, for example, endorsing a WPT product they do not believe in. And not even getting paid for it.

That last statement is important because poker players are unique as they have to buy-in to the tournaments that they play. No one plays for free. When you see a top pro like Daniel Negreanu make it to the final table, yes he's rich but he fronted the $10,000 buy-in himself to play. The WPT does not pay for anyone's appearances, the players do it themselves. When you hear the TV announcers rave about the multi-million top prize for the winner, that's all from the players who decided to play, none of it is from WPT.

It will be interesting to see how this lawsuit unravels. WPT Enterprises have already denounced the lawsuit and will fight it. The thing is, these poker pros who've decided to press legal action are already self-made millionaires and can live off their reputation alone. They can decide not to play any WPT events from here on in and still enjoy quite a sweet living. There are putting their reputations on the line without a real great reward for them at the end, and all this makes me side with the players in this anti-trust case.

With a lot of news devoted to Canada's involvement in Afghanistan, it's not unreasonable for the average Canadian to ask why is Canada risking 2,000+ soldiers lives for a war that doesn't seem to have concrete reasons for us to be there.

There has been a website set up (www.canada-afghanistan.gc.ca) to explain these reasons. On the home page it states:

Canada is in Afghanistan today to:

• defend our national interests;
• ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs; and
• help Afghanistan rebuild.

I would like to probe each of these statements.

1) Defend out national interests: What exactly is the national interest with/in Afghanistan? Prior to 9/11, I do not recall Afghanistan ever being a threat to Canada. In fact, there was a time when Americans were arming Osama Bin Laden to fight the Russians. They were are allies, in some respects. Has the Taliban made any threats towards Canada, prior to establishing a military presence there? Have we instead risked national security by taking a more aggressive approach? Statistics show that we do not trade much with Afghanistan. Imports total less than $375,000, while exports total $9.6 million, a drop in the bucket when you consider Canada's GDP is $5.39 billion.

2) Ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs: Canada has a reputation of being a peace-keeping nation, and when citizens of other countries read of Canada's desire to aid in the fight on the war on terrorism, this sent a chill around the world. If Canada of all countries, it seems, decides to engage in war, do we really have any chance at peace? And by deciding to go to Afghanistan, is this really leadership, or are we just a herd of sheep led by the USA and the U.K.?

3) Help Afghanistan rebuild: Canada has a provincial reconstructiont team (PRT) which "reinforces the authority of the Afghan government in Kandahar Province, assisting in the stabilization and development of the region. It monitors security, promotes Afghan government policies and priorities with local authorities, and facilitates security sector reforms." The plan is to have the PRT in place until February 2007. If the country is as worn-torn as reported, every rich nation should aid Afghan civilians in rebuilding their towns and infrastructure. However, this "deadline" of February 2007 doesn't seem to give it a lot of time.

Why February 2007? What will become of Afghanistan if there is a complete withdrawal of Canadian soldiers; will civilians be safe? What is the final goal of Canada's involvementl? Is the Taliban the target of Canada's mission? If the Taliban are completely eliminated, has Canada been successful? Would capturing Osama Bin Laden end the conflict? Has diplomatic measures been attempted? Have there been any direct threats against Canada we shoud be aware of?

I don't pretend to have all the answers, because I don't. I don't know exactly why we are overseas fighting. If someone can give me a straight answer, I'd love to hear it.

Movies that deliberately pull at your heartstrings aren't for everyone and World Trade Center does not pretend to be anything else. The true story of two Port Authority police officers trapped underneath the rubble of the Twin Towers, this movie wants the audience to feel for these guys, to see how evil can bring out the best and goodness of those who have suffered. And in my view, it does it very well.

Critic Roger Ebert asks the audience would we feel any different if it were a different tragedy, say, if it were a story of victims from the earthquakes that leveled Turkey? We cannot hide from our experiences and our knowledge when watching films. When we relive the horrific visions of the people jumping off the top floors of the World Trade Centre or the collapse of the buildings itself, we can't help but recall where we were, what we were doing and how we reacted to these events. No question, it is easier to tap into our emotions because these events happened so recently, but World Trade Center never feels fake or insincere, so the movie does what it is supposed to do and it can't be faulted for us having lived through 9/11.

Because this is a true story, there are some scenes that seem to hit the audience over the head with its complete lack of subtlety (then again, it is Oliver Stone). One scene that comes to mind is the vision of Jesus giving one of the trapped officers a bottle of water in the desert sun. A lot of people will watch this and say, "Give me a break!" But, if this is what the officers dreamt (or, more likely, hallucinated), how else could you film it? Scenes like this will likely divide some audiences on this picture.

I also admire this movie because trying to pull drama out of a situation were two guys cannot see each other, cannot move and are almost in complete darkness: how can you make this compelling? World Trade Center does not leave the camera on these two characters for the entire two hour running time, but still dedicates a large amount of screen time to them. And it is always engaging.

Oliver Stone opted to tell the story free from politics or conspiracies: He lays no blame at anyone's door, and does not question America's actions before, during and after 9/11. Americans will likely look at this film as further proof they were innocent bystanders struck by those jealous of their liberties & freedoms, and the resolve of the USA is never in doubt. It is naive to think this way, but this is a minor consequence a straightforward story like this may have for the viewer.

I feel that as I get older and appeciate more & more the life I have, it is easier for me to rally behind films where the human spirit triumphs over great adversity. It is the simplest of stories, and countless have been told for ages on this never-ending battle. It doesn't mean each telling will be good, but I can say to you World Trade Center is definitely worth viewing and a story you won't forget.

# posted by SBP : 3:45 PM  3 Comments