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

The playoffs are about 10 days away, and the time for the best hockey of the season is something all fans can look forward to (even for me, who thinks a 7th place finish for the Sens might be considered a triumph).

Now one thing that will come back from time to time, that really needs to be corrected, is overtime. Overtime, by itself, isn't a bad thing. But how long is too long? One extra period? Two periods? Five? It's happened before: games have gone on until 2am when the players are running solely on the powers of Gatorade and, hopefully for them, they aren't playing on a back to back night. Most viewers have longed turned off their TV sets and sometimes the paid crowd in attendance start to head for the exits. It's not that they wouldn't want to watch the whole thing normally, it's just that things like work and family can get in the way of watching hockey in the early hours of the morning.

Before traditionalists stop reading my solution to end these marathon games (you're pretty savvy: you could tell by my subject headline where this was going!), I just want to go over some reasons why it makes no sense for overtime to go on and on while the fans, and even the players, want it to come to an end so they can wake up at a reasonable hour the next day:

1) Who actually watches these all-nighters? I love it when the announcers recall past "classic" marathon overtime games and talk about how historic it was (rarely do they use the words "exciting" when describing them). Well, I never saw them. Any of them. How many of you have actually taken the time to watch a full game until 3am? My point is, if no one's watching, outside of the very few faithful who watch it all no matter what, there is absolutely no point. We all have lives to lead, and it requires sleep to make it to the next day.

2) The quality of the play. First off, how many are actually playing 100% by period five? Answer: None. And usually the goal is some flukey out-of-nowhere play with little drama built up, unless maybe there's a powerplay. And don't forget these series are a best of 7, and that takes its toll on its own. How good will these players be as the series goes on? What if the game falls on a back-to-back night...how good are the players going to be the next day? Yes, they are athletes, and yes, everyone talks about how you have to have the endurance for a full 2 months to become a Stanley Cup champion. But at the same time, if the players are lethargic because of these late games, how good is the quality of the hockey for the fans who pay to see them?

3) Injuries. The longer the game runs, fatigue and stress put on the athletes' bodies for playing longer than what they are used to causes things like pulled groins and hip flexors amongst other injuries.

And another thing...it'd be more exciting. When us, the fans, know that it CAN'T go on forever and you know the actual time frame the game will come to an end, the tension and drama built up to the conclusion will make the game that much more exciting. And that's what we want: excitement. It's what makes the game entertaining. So this is what I propose:

If, after regulation, it's tied, traditional five-on-five hockey for a 20 minute period. Still tied? Let's go to a 10 minute, four-on-four OT. Whoa baby, I'm getting excited just typing that out! And then, after playing a full 90 minutes of hockey the game is STILL tied...let's do it: SHOOTOUT. The fans will be on their feet. Everyone who was just channel surfing will stop to watch the outcome. No one, I mean no one will be leaving the game or turning off the TV to go to bed.

And there's some positive side effects to come out of my proposed format, namely, it adds a little more credibility to the regular season four on four OT and games decided by shootout.

Ideally, we wouldn't want it to come to this. We'd like it if the team on team play could decide the winner and that would be that. But, with my proposal, if the two teams still can't figure out who the winner is after playing 1 and 1/2 games of hockey, there's probably not much difference in the two teams that would decide a winner for that night anyway. Let's end the game at a reasonable time, let's make it as exciting as possible to watch, and let's be able to go to work the next day with a decent amount of sleep. Let's use the shootout.

What's kinda scary is this happened on my birthday...

Man dies after cake-eating contest: officials

Feb 25, 2008

LONDON (AFP) — A man has died after taking part in a competition to see how many cup cakes he could eat at once, officials said Monday.

Paramedics were called to revive Adam Deeley, 34, after receiving a call saying he was choking at a cafe in Swansea, south Wales, in the early hours of Friday but could not save him and he died in hospital.

He had reportedly been attending a party to raise funds for an exhibition by a local artist.

"Quite a spread had been laid on and when the party finished in the early hours, there was quite a lot left over," an unnamed witness told the Sun newspaper.

"Someone suggested seeing how quickly they could eat the mound of fairy cakes that were left. But suddenly, someone started choking."

The paper reported that five cakes got stuck in Deeley's throat, although police say they are still investigating the cause of the death.

Inspector Paul McCarthy said: "The issue concerning cakes is something we are looking at as a contributory factor in his passing."

In a statement, cafe owners Amanda Davey and Paul Dyke said: "It was a tragic accident and very sad and should serve as a cautionary tale."

The Welsh Ambulance Service said it attended "after receiving a report a man was choking". The local coroner will open an investigation into the death in the coming days.

Chris Stevenson is one of the sport writers for the Ottawa Sun. I actually don't have any problems with him (Don Brennan is another story) and was just wondering out of two articles he wrote, he hardly mentioned anything about call up Brian Lee who played his first game last night against the Sabres. Maybe I was overrating Lee's performance and I just wanted his opinion:

Chris, you barely mentioned Brian Lee in today's Sun after he played a great game in his Sens debut, even picking up the third star on RDS. Did he not leave much of an impression on you up there in the press box?

Response:

I guess when the team you cover scores five goals in the last eight minutes to win the game, that becomes the story.

Well I'm not going to sit here and say that WASN'T the story. It looked like the game was turning into another Ottawa Senators self-destruction, falling 3-1 at the start of the third with more defensive gaffes once again being the cause of their woes. But, they didn't quit, scored five goals in a row and took it 6-3.

Now you might have noticed there hasn't been as nearly as many Senators posts as there was last year, mainly because it's hard to write about the same problems that have been plaguing your team for the last 3+ months, much less trying to find anything good to write about. With a shortage of this "good" material, seeing 21 year-old Brian Lee excel in his Sens debut was exciting for a Sens fans.

Now it's a double-edged sword in some ways. When you call up a rookie for his very first NHL game, he really shouldn't be seeing too much ice time, as a playoff bound team like the Senators should be giving more ice time to the veterans to prepare accordingly for the post-season. BUT HE PLAYED 18 MINUTES LAST NIGHT! To give you perspective on that, Luke Richardson played less than 12, while Chris Phillips and Anton Volchenkov logged about the same amount of time. Really, Lee should have been playing Richardson type minutes, but since the defensive corps have been struggling so much, he was given all this time to show what he could do. What was nice to see was how cool and calm he played including making a nice stop with his skate blade on a puck that trickled behind Martin Gerber and was heading towards the net. He made simple plays (which the others should be doing more often instead of trying to go through four opponents on their own) and looked confident.

So, Chris Stevenson wrote two articles about last night's game, he mentioned it was Lee's birthday and the skate stop, but that was pretty much it. I thought, sure, Ottawa rallying from behind is the main story, but why not talk more about Lee, especially since he played so well Bryan Murray said he'll stay with the Senators when Redden returns which will likely mean someone else (Richardson) will be scratched? I just thought he deserved more accolades. The Ottawa Citizen gave him more kudos...I don't know. The Sens are a struggling team right now, and no one is expecting them to do anything in the post-season. But this Lee kid, maybe if he keeps this up he can provide some sort of steadiness to a defense that has been anything but since the the new year.

# posted by SBP : 8:36 PM  1 Comments

Different times call for different measures. When you're playing poker, you must take occasional risks to have a chance at winning otherwise you will be blinded out before you have a chance to win. Sometimes what may come across to novice players as being overtly conservative may be, in my mind, the correct play, but in other situations playing it "safe" is simply just playing poorly.

The best drawing hand you can start with in hold-em is big slick, Ace-King. You haven't made a hand yet, but if you do it has the potential to be very powerful and win you a big pot. If you can get them suited that's even better, but even if it isn't it can get you the best top pair, the nut straight and flush amongst other hands.

However, how many times have we entered a pot with Ace-King only to see three rags on the flop? No pair, no draw, and now there's a big bet in front of you and you're deciding whether or not to call. The poker community has an amusing term for A-K: Anna Kournikova: looks good, rarely wins.

That's why I don't consider it a bad thing if I raise pre-flop with A-K and everyone folds. It's not like having pocket Aces or Kings where you definitely want some action: A-K is still only Ace high and you're an underdog to anyone holding a pocket pair. Here's another expression you should commit to memory: better to win a small pot than to lose a big one.

So what would you do in this situation: You have A-K at the start of a tournament and you make your usual 3x the big blind raise. A player behind you elects to go all-in, putting your entire stack at risk. It's to you: do you call?

As I mentioned, it's the start of the tournament. The blinds in relation to your stack are very small. The gamble to double up early in a situation where you'd likely only be a slight favourite (about 60-40 to two random cards if the player is a maniac) is simply not worth it. And not to mention you wouldn't mind playing the game a little and not be busted out on the first hand. Folding Ace-King in this spot is not a bad play in my view.

Now let's say a player goes all-in at the final table of a tournament. The blinds are very high, and the average stack is only 10x the big blind in question. In this case, yes, you absolutely must call in this situation, especially against a short-stack. Folding Ace-King here is too tight, because with the blinds as high as they are, the premium hands you're going to get dealt will be few and far in between before you run out of chips. You need to find a spot to get your chip stack at a comfortable level so you a) don't get blinded out and b) you have a chance to win. In this instance, there's a good chance you have the player dominated (i.e. you're up against Ace-rag) and you're putting your chips in with the best of it anyway. The likely worst case scenario is that you might be up against a pair, in which case you'd be about a coin flip. If you're up against Aces or Kings, well, that's just incredibly bad luck. But even if that was the case, safe play here won't save you. You must take a gamble when the blinds are very high in relation to your stack. Like in baseball, go down swinging. Make a stand with your good hands and give yourself a chance to win, not finish in 4th place.

Another thing you want to avoid is having your chip stack so low, you can't force the blinds to fold to your all-in because you have so few chips left in front of you. If you can raise no more than 3x the big blind, for instance, almost anyone would call with any 2 cards they have if they're the big blind, and with have A-K, you're only a 3-2 favourite against two random cards. And it doesn't it always seem the bad beats hit you in a spot where you're risking elimination?

Be aggressive, and conservative, where appropriate with Ace-King.

A nice long weekend...four days off in a row, who can complain!? is so far completely wasted. I started to feel a little under the weather yesterday, and hoped a good night's rest (I get to sleep in, after all!) would make everything better. Well it hasn't gotten better, and I'd say it's even worse. Headache, coughs, runny nose, bleah...and you know that feeling when you're lying down just wanting to take it easy for awhile, but then you get up and your headache gets EVEN WORSE when blood starts rushing back into your brain? Yeah, there's a nice feeling.

So anyway, a lot of people, especially at work, go on about how they "envy" me because I live by myself. I answer to only number one, I can come and go as I please, do what I want, when I want. But times like this make it unbearable and let me tell you, it ain't all sunshine & lollipops because you can purchase a 56" HDTV without asking. Some people wanted to be left completely alone and undisturbed while they recuperate, but not this guy. No, I'd give anything right now to have someone whip me up some chicken noodle soup, maybe prep a hot water bottle or go to the drug store to pick me up some aspirin. See that's the thing: I feel so horrible and too weak to even want to walk to the store to get some pain relief. And I have no groceries in the house...who can bring food to me, other than Pizza Pizza? This is a long weekend, everyone's got plans! Everyone's out of town or whatever. This s-u-c-k SUCKS!!! Boooooooo! If you're feeling at all , well, healthy right now, I curse, curse you!!! I just likely cursed a lot of people...

Check out this pic...every video game nerdlinger's dream! All those consoles you see on the shelf are attached to ONE TV, awesome! Notice how Goldeneye is already primed to play on the N64. And check out that full sized arcade machine on the right of your screen! I tell ya something, there are basements, and there are basements furnished by Scott! I should also point out there's still a bunch of other consoles connected to other TVs in his house (Hey Scott, I didn't think you'd care I'm posting your pic, it's all good!)

I don't often endorse products on my blog, but let me tell you something, if you do lots of long distance driving or consider yourself geographically challenged while behind the wheel, you should really consider buying yourself a GPS navigation system.

Driving to Atlantic City last week was much easier because of it. Aside from a visual display of the roads and intersections you encounter, it also provides voice prompts for when it's time to make a turn or take an exit ramp. A voice will tell you, "After 800 metres, turn right" for instance, and it will follow up with a second voice prompt telling you exactly when you should do it. And it will even tell you if you should stay in the left or right lane after you make these maneuvers.

There are no additional subscription fees to pay once you acquire your GPS unit. All you have to do is enter your starting address followed by your destination and it takes care of the rest. I'm never a big fan of driving in areas that I'm not familiar with, especially in big metropolitans with 8-lane highways to navigate. It's all a breeze with this device.

And the price is pretty reasonable. You can get a decent unit for between $150-$200, and most devices include maps for both Canada and the USA. Not too shabby at all! SBP recommends a GPS navigation system for you!

Here is a question I sent for Gary Bettman for their online NHL radio show yesterday. I actually didn't hear the broadcast when it aired so I don't know if he answered it, but the new "clearer" video evidence (in this technological age, how was it NOT available for review yesterday?) clearly demonstrates Pronger's total disregard for the rulebook after Colin Campbell did not impose any suspension or fine. I bet even with the "fuzzy" video, someone like Chris Simon likely would have been banned for life. In case you didn't hear about it, Ryan Kesler, a player for the Vancouver Canucks, had his calf stomped upon by Chris Pronger a few nights ago during a game:

Why is the league so scared of disciplining star players like Chris Pronger? The impression I'm getting as a fan is that the NHL has two sets of rules when imposing fines or suspensions: one for the elite players, the other for the 3rd and 4th liners. Pronger, in my opinion, got merely a slap on the wrist for his two one-game suspensions in last year's playoffs, and now stomping on Ryan Kesler deserved a harsh penalty, especially when we saw the dangers of a sharp skate blade when we saw Richard Zednik's throat get cut by a skate a few weeks ago. He gets no discipline and in turn, no reason for him to stop his dangerous style of play. Why is the NHL condoning this?

Perhaps inspired by the manner in which the Anaheim Ducks deployed tight-checking, physical hockey, the NHL has started to shift this season to what we hoped would be avoided: defense first, low-scoring hockey where the fans come out on the short end of the stick.

Maybe things would be different if the Ottawa Senators managed to win the Final, or if the Detroit Red Wings could have avoided some bad luck and knock out the Ducks in last year's Conference final. But you can't change the past and the result is the brand of hockey we have today.

Perhaps it's not as bad as I make it out to be, I mean, penalties are still called (not the ones where someone's head gets cranked by an elbow shot to the face, but if a stick reaches someone's waste, you know the ref is blowing the whistle) but there's no question defense is what NHL teams are using to win. Pretty much everyone agrees the top teams are in the Western Conference, but is it because the most talented players are out there? No. The reason is all the best defensemen and goalies all play out West. It reads like a future Hall of Fame induction ceremony: Nicklas Lidstrom, Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Sergei Zubov, Adam Foote, Rob Blake, Dion Phaneuf: All top D playing for Western teams. In nets, you have Roberto Luongo, Marty Turco, Dominik Hasek, Evgeni Nabokov, Mikka Kiprusoff...all clear #1 goalies for their respective teams. Out East I'd say outside of Zdeno Chara and Martin Brodeur, there's not much comparison. And it's no coincidence there's isn't as much scoring as there is out East.

Out of the top 25 scorers in the league, only 9 come from out West. But again, this is what is winning hockey these days. The trap is in full deployment, and thoughts of eliminating the red line and increasing the size of the offensive zones to create more goals initially was successful but no more.

What's my point? I want offense to win. I want to see Ovechkin in a playoff series against Crosby, I don't want to see another Vancouver-Dallas 1-0 game snoozefest like last year. Who would you rather pay to see, Ovechkin or Turco? I vote for the former, but that won't bring your team a Stanley Cup like the glory days of the Edmonton Oilers.

But I have no idea how the NHL can correct this.

I totally stole this from the Team 1200's website. I'm living until I'm 74! If I ever get hitched it'll add some years to my life, nice! :-) (But who knew being tall is almost equivalent to being a smoker?)

THE LIFE CALCULATOR

Punching in the Life Calculator
Start with age 79 (today's average life expectancy)

1. Gender? Female = plus 1. Male = minus 2.

2. Do you have an annual physical exam? Yes = plus 3. No = minus 3.

3. Grandparent lived to 85-plus? Add 2 for each long-lived grandparent.

4. Do you volunteer on a weekly basis? Yes = plus 2. No = minus 1.

5. Do you live alone? Yes, minus 3. No, 0 points.

6. Are you able to laugh at, and learn from, your mistakes. Yes = plus 1. No = minus 3

7. Do you have a confidant who listens to your problems? Yes = plus 1. No = minus 2.

8. Do you play puzzles and games? Yes = plus 4. No = 0.

9. Daily aerobic exercise: swimming, jogging, biking? Yes = plus 3. No = 0.

10. Eat balanced diet of fresh fruit, vegetables, whole grains? Yes = plus 2. No = minus 3.

11. Do you smoke a pack of cigarettes daily? Yes = minus 4. No = 0.

12. Live with, work with or have friends who smoke? Yes = minus 1. No = 0.

13. Do you "yo-yo" on and off diet fads? Yes = minus 5. No = 0 points.

14. Own an interactive pet (dog, cat)? Yes = plus 2. Passive pet (goldfish) = plus 1.

15. Left-handed yes= minus 1. Right-handed = 0.

16. For every inch of your height that exceeds 5'8", minus six months.

17. Are you a religious person, and do you practice your faith? Yes = plus 2. No = 0.

18. Two or more daughters? Yes = plus 3. No = 0. (Daughters are elder caregivers).

19. Use stress management (meditation, quiet time, spa)? Yes = plus 4. No = minus 3.

20. Walk to work? Yes = plus 2. Ride to work? Yes = plus 1. Drive to work? Yes = minus 3.

21. Cosmetic surgery? Minus 5 for each decade you have a procedure. Minus 1 for each additional procedure per decade.

22. Do you fear the uncertainties of growing old? Yes = minus 2. No fear = plus 1.

23. Substance abuse? Yes = minus 6. Shared use of substances = minus 3.

24. Sexual promiscuity (multiple partners, STD risks)? Yes = minus 6. No = 0.

25. Engaged in long-term, relationship of trust and mutual respect? Yes = plus 5. No = 0.

26. All friends same age as you? Yes = minus 2. No = plus 1.

27. Written specific life goals and completion time frames? Yes = plus 1. No = 0.

28. Family history of cardiovascular or cancer prior to age 50? Minus 2 per occurrence.

29. Family history of obesity, diabetes, chronic depression? Minus 2 per each occurrence.

I made my way to the 2nd table and sat down, shaking hands with the people around me and quickly scanned the stack sizes at each seat. Looks like I was faring well, out of the 10 people there I think I was third in chips. The first hand I was dealt, pocket 6s, I called when it was min-raised in front of me. The very next hand I got dealt 6s again with the same min-raise in front of me, both times just hoping to flop a set but it never happened. I thought to myself, you know, it's kind of expensive speculating on a 7.5 to 1 shot, so maybe I might raise in mid to late position with them if I'm first to enter a pot, but otherwise perhaps calling with these low-medium pairs isn't the best idea. A few hands later I'd be in the same predicament with pocket 4s, but I folded and saved myself some chips in the process.

This table was definitely a more skilled bunch than the previous one I was at. Not too much limping, pre-flop raises were more respected and most pots were contested heads-up. Aggression was definitely the key...only a couple of times when I called a raise did I end up taking chips. Raising in late position with A-7 suited and pockets 7s amongst other hands earned me some good pots. When I was the initial raiser, about 85% of the time I'd win the pot in question.

One hand I actually shouldn't be telling you about because it's so embarrassing, but maybe you'll learn something as I learned the hard way. I was distracted for just a brief second that cost me chips. It was folded to me on the button, and I already decided that if that was ever going to happen, I would try to steal the blinds capitalizing on the fact that I played few pots and had what I perceived as a tight image. The blinds immediately folded to my raise with Q-7 offsuit, but what I didn't notice was the first person to act had already limped into the pot. Where did my head go? Anyway, he called my raise and I thought, hmmm, good chance he just has a small or medium pair, so if there's a high card on board if he checks I'll bet out. Sure enough, an ace flopped and he checked to me, I bet out and he called. Yikes. We both checked the turn, then a Queen fell on the river. He bet out 1/4 of the pot...was he trying to steal? I wished he just bet on the turn and I'd already be done with it, but since I just plain didn't want to believe him, I called, and he had Ace-Jack and I lost a pile of chips. I wasn't pleased with myself, falling asleep at the wheel not noticing someone had already entered the pot when I tried to steal, then compounding the problem by not giving him credit for a hand. I can only learn from these mistakes though, and the experience will no doubt help me later on.

The blinds were up to 300-600 with a 75 ante and I was hovering around 12000 in chips, playing just enough hands to stay afloat. Unfortunately, the previous example brought my chip stack down to about 8000 before posting the big blind. I started feeling desperate and that I better start thinking about making a move before getting blinded out. The first person to act min-raised to 1200, and anyone who knows me knows I hate min-raises because that usually means they're looking for a call. Everyone folded to me in the big blind and I held A-Q. A good hand, and only another 600 to call. It's weird how it didn't feel right to call in the first place. I actually thought this might be the time to push, but with that min-raise I figured he had a strong hand, likely Kings (not Aces or Queens as I had one of each) but the pot odds were right to see a flop. I decided to check in the dark as I hate acting first in these situations, and the flop was A-3-4, all clubs. I already checked and the raiser bet out 5000. This was the moment for me...with my chip stack I'm either all-in or folding here. I wasn't worried about a flopped flush, as I didn't think someone would bet out that strong with a made hand. I thought he had Kings, perhaps with the King of clubs, or maybe he had Ace-Jack and again, I could still be ahead. I decided if one of my cards was a club, I'd push. No...they were both red. But I couldn't help it, top pair, decent kicker, if I'm right and he has Kings I'm a favourite (albeit a small one). So I pushed all-in, despite the deal I made inside my head that I'd fold if I wasn't holding a club. It was only about another 2000 for him to call, he thought he was up against a made flush, turning over a red Ace-King, but was pleased to see my Ace-Queen, drawing to only three outs that would not come. He bet out that strong to freeze out the flush draw; that's what a good player does.

Overall, I made more good decisons than bad, but key mistakes, and that last hand, I don't know, it was so hard to get away from. If I had a larger stack of chips I probably could of picked another spot to get my chips in, but with the blinds creeping up as high as they were, I thought it was a good time to try and double up. Top pair with the 2nd best kicker...a laydown I simply wasn't good enough to make.

So I lasted about 2/3 of the field, with well over 700 people out of the 1050+ busting out before me. If you think of the fact I lasted about 1/2 the field last year, hmmm, guess logically the next step is for me to go all the way! As for my travel companion Nino (who did all the driving back and forth, including the 11 hour return drive, thank you!) managed to bring his stack up to 6800 before his flopped set of nines got cracked on the river, when his opponent's pocket Kings spiked a third King. One hand he told me about involved him folding Ace-Ten in the small blind. "You told me Ben not to play those trap hands from an early position raiser so I folded!" But when this player to act first threw his 500 chip in, he didn't declare a raise so really it was just a flat call. Nino didn't know of this rule and folded in error, and had he completed the bet he would have made the nut straight on the flop. Of course, there's other considerations like where the guy raised and who's doing the raising when you're holding this hand, but his heart was in the right place and he told me about his fold like he was proud of it, so I couldn't help but feel somewhat good that he actually listened to some of my advice.

It didn't pan out this time, but I'm not quitting yet. I'm planning to head to New Orleans in May to play a seven card stud tournament, and that will likely be the last one for me this year, barring a windfall of cash I'm not aware of. It's funny how a card game can captivate me so much; I'm hooked. It's disappointing to lose, but it makes me want to try it again. And again, until I get it right.

I got back a little earlier than I hoped from Atlantic City, not just from the tournament but the flash flood warnings has us leave New Jersey around 6pm, and with the slow roads, we didn't hit Ottawa until about 5 in the morning. I got up today at 1pm...good times! Anyway, I had a fantastic time at the tournament, I did a lot better than last year in Vegas, but unfortunately did not walk away with some extra money or the ultimate prize, a gold ring.

The rest of this entry will be all about some poker hands I played, so if this does not interest you, why not check out Forts blog? (There you go Marc, free plug!).

At the earlier stages of a predominately amateur tournament (this one, for your information, had about 1,050+ players entered), you'll always get players who play much too loose, love any two cards that are the same suit and love chasing their straight or flush, regardless of the price it costs. I played my usual solid style, noticing most of the players were playing about every 2nd hand with plenty of multi-way pots, kept patient and picked my spots before entering in a pot. I thought things were going to go my way when I completed my small blind with Q-8 with one limper in front of me, the big blind checked and I flopped top pair. 8s got me my first few pots last year in Vegas, so seeing another 8 earn my first pot of the day I saw as a good sign.

Anyway, there were two hands that got me lots of chips, one perhaps overtly risky but the other simply taking a good hand and milking it for all it's worth. Maybe you'd have played it differently, as each one involved an unhealthy rise in pulse.

There were five limpers in front of me and I had A-J in the small blind. There weren't too many hands that were raised pre-flop, but those that were usually involved only two persons in a hand. With blinds at 50-100, I raised to 500 wanting to thin out the field and maybe take it down right away. I got two callers, the first hesitated but called. The next player who sat immediately to my right remarked "a donation to the pot!" and threw in his chips. He also had this habit of checking his weak hands by exaggerating the taps on the card table, so I knew he didn't have much. The flop was 9-6-x with two clubs. I bet out, wanting to take it down right away by representing an overpair. The first player folded, but I got a call from Mr. Donation. I immediately put him on a flush draw and the next card was a six. So with a pair on board, I bet out again and he called me. Now at this stage, about 70% of my chips are already in the pot. There's absolutely no way I'm folding regardless of the next card (maybe not so much if a third club hit). The final card was a another 9, so I declare an all-in, just wanting him to fold (and I actually thought the board's two pair with my ace kicker might even be the best hand) and he did, revealing his K-7 of clubs in the process. My heart was racing after my all-in declaration, but it paid off and almost doubled my chips. I eventually bounced out Mr. Donation (he was a nice guy, but he really was donating his chips to me just like he said) when he moved his short-stack all-in with pocket 10s and I called with A-J (A-J strikes again!)and I caught an Ace on the flop.

Another big hand ended up being the only big pocket pair I'd get dealt for the duration of the tournament, but again, I practically doubled up because of his insistence in "gambling." The blinds were 100-200 and I picked up Queens. Ding ding ding ding ding! Knowing the play of my opponents, I knew I'd get some action and get well paid... as long as I avoided a bad beat. I made my standard raise to 600, and got one caller. I had to act first, but with a powerhouse hand, it doesn't really matter all that much. The flop came 4-5-5. I immediately checked, knowing full well Mr. Slick (he had black, greasy hair all slicked back with a big pair of shades) would try to steal. He bet out 1900. 1900? Does that bet scream "Call me, I made trip 5s!" or does that bet mean bluff? I voted for the latter, and since calling the bet was 1/3 of my stack, I elected to go all-in and not let him catch some runner-runner garbage. He contemplated for a few seconds and announced, "Okay, let's gamble" and turned over 2-3 of spades (btw, there were no spades on the flop). 2-3? This idiot is making calls with THREE high? What are you hoping to flop? In this case, a straight draw, so I still had to dodge and Ace or a 6, and a good thing two Kings followed so I doubled up and avoided getting knocked out as he had a few hundred more chips than me. But still, this is a perfectly good example of why I avoid playing these low suited connectors: you're usually always taking the worst of it, you can get sucked into it when you flop to your draw and then you end up not even making your hand, losing a pile of chips in the process.

Those were the big hands outside of some other hands I played for the first couple of hours, and I managed to turn my initial 4,000 chips into about 14,000 before our table got broken up and I moved to a 2nd table. In my next blog entry, I'll tell you about some other hands I played and how fate can sometimes be a little cruel. (Holly, if you're reading, I changed my poker picture for my blog entries as per your request!).

The hotel has been booked, the currency converted, bags have been packed (well, not quite, but shouldn't take long)and I'm off to Atlantic City tomorrow for another WSOP poker tournament. I'll be driving with my co-worker friend Nino and we've already decided to stake ourselves each 10% if we manage to finish in the money. I'm not as jittery as I was at last year's one in Vegas, but once I get there the excitement level will hit. I expect about 900 or so entrants, which to some may seem like a lot but is actually reasonable considering the thousands of players that entered the WSOP main event the last few years. With a field this size, you have a much better chance of going somewhere. At least I think I do.

I feel like a better poker player than last year. I'm a little more confident to try to make moves in places where there's a good chance to steal, for instance. And my experience in Vegas will certainly help.

You know what'd be cool? If I actually went all the way and took it all. I mean, the odds are I won't, but, what if? I think that's the main thing that makes me want to go to these tournaments, and why I'm also seriously considering heading to New Orleans late in the Spring to play another one of these tourneys. I may or may not be as good a player as I think I am, but I won't know unless I try. And since there's no mortgage payments that will be missed or groceries that can't be bought, I can afford to dabble in these events from time to time. And if I can make a big splash, it'd be all worth it.

"Remember, hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies."

There's a lot of debate about the ethics of downloading and whether or not an artist/studio should be able to invest money in equipment, talent, marketing, etc. to turn out what can be converted to a computer file that isn't tangible and is accessible to anyone with a PC & internet connection for a profit. What Nine Inch Nails has done, for me, is provide a happy medium that some might say still isn't 100% free so it still sucks, but whatever, I don't mind giving some money to bands I want to support. NIN has released a new album today that is, for the moment, only available for download, and this very big 36-track compilation can be obtained for free. Sort of. What they're offering is the first nine tracks as downloadables off their website for absolutely no charge. That's right, $free.99! Now this is good, because if you don't like what you hear, you didn't waste anything except for a bit of time. And if you want to download the entire 36 track album, they charge a very reasonable $5.00 for it. I can't recall getting what would amount to a double CD for only $5.00: that's a terrific deal.

They are going to release actual CDs next month at a charge of $10 for a double-disc set, which is still a good price considering all the music you get. Unfortunately, I'll have to wait a little while as the website currently has too much traffic and had to be shut down so for now, I'll be patient. Once it's up again, I'll enjoy some free music and there's a good chance I'll buy the rest of the tracks, too.

I imagine other bands will start following suit if they haven't already.