A few follow-ups to my recently hyped up heads-up match.
The war is over.
And so is the trash talk! Not only that, I will appease my feminist readership (both of you) by revising my stance of woman poker players. I'm a fan. It's nice to have a break in testosterone at the table and your presence does usually increase my profit margin. Please note that I said usually. I recognize that the majority of under experienced women players who are following their man's lead into the gambling world give serious women players a bad name. The stereotype lies with them. Mrs. Goodson is in that second group, a serious (and good) poker player.
I still hold true that the average man is better prepared to excel at games of risk and math than the average woman. It is how we are wired. I'll be happy to debate this in the comments, but otherwise I will say no more of this. I'll leave that to @DickManly.
There was one problem with the match. It was limit poker. Both myself and Mrs.. Goodson were expecting no limit. Personally, I have never played limit hold'em, but that doesn't mean I am unfamiliar with the game. Goodson admitted to more experience with limit, but I was fully prepared to accept a defeat sans shannanogans. I consider myself a quick study.
The experience did confirm my suspicions about limit. I liken it to bracket drag racing. Bracket drag racing allows two cars with differing top speeds to compete by setting a speed cap. A car exceeding the top speed is disqualified. It puts limiting rules on the cars for a specific reason--to equalize the racers. Limit hold'em puts limiting rules on the players for every grade schoolers' favorite reason--just because. Mrs. Goodson and I didn't need equalizing. I'm all for poker variants, but I can only see limit as a device for casinos to maximize rake. To each their own, but it's just not for me.
A Lesson in Poker for the Haters
Mrs. Goodson has a following that managed to draw enough support to make some forsake their own gender. I could never do that. Now that the war is over I include myself in the @panndyra fan base. Notice, her blog has moved from the Enemies of HellsColdDay to the Friends list. However, all is not quiet on the haters front. The Goodson support group has made their comments on the nature of my win. I openly admit that I was not ahead until the river, and the last of our chips were committed on the turn. I hear the word on the street for such an abomination is a "suck-out."
Until recently I had a challenge issued on my site stating that I (a) must accept any challenge, and (b) promote whatever the winner wanted if I lost. I have never promoted anything I didn't choose myself. Sooo...for no lack of challengers, I've never lost. I've played heads-up no limit hold'em about a dozen times live as well. I have lost twice, but both were part of "best two out of three" contests, so I could argue that I never lost live either. And guess what, a good percentage of my wins were suck outs.
I'm not that lucky. Whenever you have a significant chip advantage over your opponent, it is a good idea to put them all-in when possible. My heads-up strategy? Make attempts to win the game. It sounds unorthodox, I know. I suspect that I'm behind when to the short stack calls or raises, but as long as I have a significant chance at a draw I stay the course. If I lose, I'm confident in my ability to regain my lead, and if I win, game over. Neither of my recent heads-up games (against @panndyra and against @rawrstar) ever had all my chips at risk, all I'm saying is that there is a reason for that.
In poker and in life, winning doesn't make you popular, it makes you richer.
About that challenge, there is a very good reason why it has been taken off the table. No, it's not because I'm afraid of blemishing my perfect record. It will all be explained in my next post where I will make an announcement that will somewhat change the focus of my play and this site. There's a bit of a crusade in my future...