Day: July 30, 2008

I felt the pressure. After the discussions here, I was ready to go in, get an early lead and start pushing. It was a good plan. The problem was the first part – getting the early lead.

Early hand: I have Q-7, call one player from the big blind. Flop is A-A-x. I figure I’ll make a stab at the pot. He turns out to have A-A underneath. I was lucky to have folded quickly in that one! Similar hands followed… I just never had anything to work with.

My worst hand of the night: I am big blind. One player limps in, small blind calls. I have A-9 suited. I thought to myself, do I push or call here? I should push. Yet I did not, I called. Flop completely missed me. Checks all around. Turn missed me too but I put in a bet to see if I could steal the pot. One guy stayed with me. The river was nothing. The other guy put in a big bet. I am convinced he has nothing also and I at least have an ace. I call. He had 5-6 suited and had caught the flush on the river. In my head I did a full Chris Farley monologue I’m so stupid stupid!!! It’s exactly the kind of thing commenters have pointed out – my passive play pre-flop allowed a marginal hand to stay in and catch the big hand. Arrghh!

So here I am, someone staying at half the average stack despite not having gotten a decent hand the entire night. With the exception of the above hand, I’ve played OK. Bluffed out some pots. Folded when I should have, etc.

The last hand: Blinds are 100-200, I have ~1300. I have K-3 suited in the big blind. One person puts in 400. I call. The flop is J-8-3. It’s time to push. But… that 400 bet was weird. The guy who bet it usually calls or raises big. What does that mean? Does that mean he’s testing me to steal the pot or does it mean he has very strong cards? I can’t read this guy. Eh, let’s do it. I go all in. I’m instantly called, he has a pair of 4s. I end up losing.

What is a pair of 4s doing calling an all-in bet with two higher cards on the board? Even at 2-1 odds it’s not that great, and he didn’t stop to calculate odds. So – I asked him, why did you call that? He said I took too long to decide, he thought I was bluffing. If I had pushed quickly he would have folded. I found that funny because on three other hands I had deliberately taken a very long time to decide an obvious move, exactly so that taking time later wouldn’t seem suspicious.

Anyhow, it sucked. I must have a good hand or two somewhere, but I don’t remember them. There’s no margin for error if you’re not getting cards and I made at least one big error.

Running Total: $-44

The New York Times recently had an interesting article about Tom Coburn, a Republican who puts holds in the way of lots of legislation. He is being dubbed Dr. No.

In the Senate, Mr. Coburn has continued down his singular path, driving Democrats and some Republicans to distraction with his prolific use of the “hold” — the ability of a single senator to object to moving ahead on a measure without a debate. He currently has holds on nearly 80 bills, the most of any senator.

It’s bizarre how much power one Senator has when he chooses to exercise it. But I read this very differently than the NYT does. Rules are rules. The entire idea of a hold is the villain here.
It’s a strange idea to allow one Senator the power to stymie 99 of them. But as long as it’s there, Coburn is right to use it.

The hold is not a magic bullet either. There is no reason that it has to honored. “Why in the world does the Republican leadership allow itself to be bullied by the rogue far right of its caucus, which has perfected the art of stopping good bills that help good people?” Mr. Reid asked.

So Reid has no problems honoring the Republican’s hold. But he sang a different tune before. When the godawful FISA legislation was working it’s way through, Chris Dodd put a hold on the excreable bill.

Dodd’s hold during FISA was not respected. Reid conspicuously ignored it. He treats holds from the GOP side with the utmost deference for Senate traditions.

I wanted to call this post, “Don’t Hate the Player, Hate the Game”. Don’t hate Coburn, hate the hold. But the player is Harry Reid. If he is willing to ignore the hold in one context then there is no reason not to do it whenever he wants. There is Dr. No, unless it’s Harry Reid.

And although I disagree with many of Coburn’s stands, I agree with one of his primary motivations, giving time to actually read the bill. There has been some truly awful legislation signed in the last eight years that Congressmen admit they had no idea they had voted on. Coburn does both sides of the aisle a service to read what he votes on, and to force time for others to do the same.

Update: Reason says it also, and then more.