Mean Gene
Mean Gene
Pittsburgh's most decorated poker blogger, which I admit is like being the best shortstop in Greenland

Subscribe with Bloglines

My Articles

Presto, the Arlo, & the Hammer
An Online Code of Conduct
The Ethics of Ratholing
"The Professor, the Banker..."
"Ace on the River"

My Columns

Lose the Shades
If You Can't Say Something Nice
Whither the Kicker
The Lady is a Champ?
Covering the WSOP (or not)
Statistics, Luck, and Poker
Poker and New Orleans
Managing a Bankroll
How To Tell A Bad Beat Story
Telling Lies
The Power of Poker Tracker
Advanced Card-Handling

My Greatest Hits

5 Things To Do Before I Die
Cafeteria Nostalgia
Mean Gene's Dubious Dating Tips
Poker and Business?
There's No Such Thing As Luck?
Isabelle, Je t'adore
No Shirt No Shoes No Service
Well, The Food Was Good
Good Morning, Mr. Matusow!
The Weekend of our Discontent, I
The Weekend of our Discontent, II
Books That Left Their Mark
Ode to a Fish Sandwich
Bill Simmons Ain't the Poker Guy
The Sports Guy Still Ain't the Poker Guy
Again, The Media Tackles Poker
Five Years After 9/11
Hitting Pretty Girls in the Face
Sixth-Graders Suck

Fellow Poker Bloggers

Guinness and Poker
Cards Speak
Tao of Poker
Up for Poker
Boy Genius
Chris Halverson
Poker Grub
The Fat Guy
Todd Commish
Poker Works
Bill Rini
Bad Blood
Love and Casino War
Double As
Lion Tales
Paul Phillips
Daniel Negreanu
Poker Nerd
Poker Nation
Poker in Arrears
Human Head
Sound of a Suckout
Chicks With Chips
TP's Table Talk
Royal Poker
This is Not A Poker Blog
Chick and a Chair
Go Be Rude
Poker Cheapskate
Poker & Other Stuff
Seven Two
Musical Poker
WPBT Online
Isabelle Mercier
Cardschat Blog
Amy Calistri
BJ Nemeth
Annie's Blog

Poker Sites

Cardschat Poker Forum
Barstool Sports
Card Player
Internet Texas Hold-Em
Poker Pages


  • 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
  • 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
  • 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
  • 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
  • 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
  • 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
  • 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
  • 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
  • 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
  • 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
  • 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
  • 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
  • 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
  • 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
  • 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
  • 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
  • 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
  • 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
  • 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
  • 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
  • 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
  • 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
  • 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
  • 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
  • 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
  • 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
  • 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
  • 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
  • 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
  • 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
  • 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
  • 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
  • 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
  • 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
  • 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
  • 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
  • 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
  • 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
  • 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
  • 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
  • 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
  • 05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
  • 06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
  • 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007

  • Powered by Blogger

    Friday, January 14, 2005

    In For a Quicky

    I planned on writing a review of "Tilt", but I ended up hanging out at the bar until 1AM arguing over our volleyball team's tactics. So I didn't see "Tilt", as I thought I'd be home by midnight and could tape it and watch it tonight. Then again, gee whiz, you think maybe ESPN will show it again tonight? And every night for the next week? From what I've read it sucked, as I predicted in an earlier post. And from what I saw it sucked, too--it was on one of the TVs at the pub we got to. It was like that scene in "The Simpsons" where attorney Lionel Hutz is about to defend Homer on some charge and he comes into the courtroom and says, "Mr. Simpson, you're in luck. I watched "Matlock" in a bar last night. The sound was off, but I got the gist of it".

    A review in Slate panned the show, and the writer wisely asked Paul Phillips what he thought would make for an interesting series about high-stakes poker. Phillips said, "In what other line of work do people spend every day trying to take their friends' money? Except for the real lowlifes who have no friends, it's inevitable that you make friends with people you play with a lot. There are so many ways it can impact a relationship."

    Which I've always wondered about. I remember during the Borgata WPT event (the one where Hoyt Corkins slow-braised Phil Hellmuth) that Daniel Negreanu and Erick Lindgren and Ted Forrest were cheering Mohammad Ibrahim on--as well they should, being that they're friends. Friends who play poker together all the time and are therefore trying their damndest to take each other's money. Now, I like playing poker with my friends, and it's delicious to win, but I'm only winning the odd fiver or so. I'm not walking away with a couple hundred thou of their money. It's a strange warping of friendship, and it might have made for an interested show. Of course, that's not the path ESPN chose to follow.

    We should have known this because "Tilt" comes to us from the duo who wrote "Rounders", which is credited (quite rightly) for kicking off the poker boom. Chris Moneymaker said he started playing poker after watching "Rounders", and his WSOP victory brought millions (both people and dollars) to the game. Everyone wants to be Mike McD, and after seeing an amateur win the World Series, anyone COULD be him.

    I've written and deleted probably 5 reviews and/or criticism of "Rounders", mostly because the points I wanted to make about the movie were already out there. But there are two things I want to mention, one's just an observation, and the scene that, to me, ruins the movie.

    Here's the observation--"Rounders" is unusual in that it's a movie whose very success makes it an anarchronism. The main crisis in the movie is Mike and Worm trying to raise enough money to pay back the debt Worm owes to Grama (and Teddy KGB). We see Matt and Ed hustling from game to game, golf clubs and frat houses and finally a fire hall filled with off-duty cops, where Worm's fundamental scumminess rises to the top (a side question--can you survive in prison with a nickname like "Worm"?). Mike then has to play heads-up against KGB with his life on the line. There's your drama.

    What would Mike and Worm do if that situation came up in 2005 instead of 1998? They wouldn't be racing all over New York City looking for a game--they'd be holed up in Mike's bedroom 4-tabling the 15-30 games at Party. The poker boom that "Rounders" kicked off has been manifested itself for the most part online, where you can find games at just about any limit you want at any hour. True, you can't see your opponent twisting apart Oreos and figure out by which piece he eats whether he's bluffing or not (another side question--if you saw KGB do that, and thought it was a tell, would you be confident that it was really a tell and not just him PRETENDING it was a tell? Me neither) but I think Mike and Worm would have considerable success playing online instead of hustling live games. Watching "Rounders" now shows a romantic, dangerous side of poker that online play, in large part, now overshadows.

    The scene that ruined "Rounders" for me was NOT the scene where Petra comes up to Mike's room, throws herself at him, and is inexplicably rejected. By definition, no scene that features Famke Janssen in a slinky black dress can be a terrible scene. It was an absurd scene, it made you question the sanity of the protagonist (and the writers), but it had Famke Janssen in a slinky black dress.

    The scene that had me shaking my head was the one where Mike goes to the bar to drop something off to his law professor, and Petrovsky invites Mike to sit down and have a drink. The two get to talking, and Petrovsky tells Mike about when he was a young man, how his parents insisted he go to rabbincal school, and how he realized he couldn't follow that path because he didn't truly believe. He went to law school, became a successful and respected man--and yet his parents never forgave him, and never spoke to him again. Ouch.

    Mike asks, "If you could do it all over again, would you make the same choice?"

    And Petrovsky smiles and says, "What choice? We don't choose our destiny--our destiny chooses us."

    This is, without a doubt, one of the stupidest lines ever spoken in cinema history. Not the words themselves--we've heard similar claptrap in countless other movies. But look at the man who's saying them. He's a JUDGE, for Chrissakes. He's a LAWYER. He's a professor at a LAW SCHOOL. He's this archtypical wise and caring mentor. And his advice is just wait for destiny to intervene?

    Is not the law supposed to govern the CHOICES people make in their lives? I mean, having destiny choose for you is great when it decides to make you one of the best poker players in the world. It sucks when it chooses to hand you the shitty end of the stick. Can you imagine a defendent in Petrovsky's court standing up during his sentencing hearing and saying, "You Honor, I know that giving that crack cocaine to those Girl Scouts was wrong. Selling rocks to pre-teen girls in exchange for their cookie money is something I shouldn't have done. But...(cue music, close up on eyes welling with tears) was my DESTINY. From the moment I slipped out of my mother's womb my life led me to this point. I know that exchanging hard drugs for the sexual favors of pubescent girls is wrong, but this is what destiny CHOSE for me. My mother wanted me to be a pediatrician, but destiny decided I'd be involved with kids in a different capacity."

    No one with a properly installed bullshit detector would have let Martin Landau speak those words. Especially in a movie about POKER, for cryin' out loud. What is poker but a series of decisions, with good players making better decisions than bad players. If the result of every hand is already predestined, what's the point of playing? Why don't we all just write a check to Phil Ivey and take up surfing?

    OK, enough ranting. I did enough of that last night at the bar. Up till 1AM arguing about the same thing over and over again. And the last hour of that I wasn't even drinking. I think only Drizztdj would care about this, but we play in a co-ed league (4 boys, 2 girls) and we're running a 5-1. Which involves lots of switiching back and forth and up and back and knowing instinctively where you need to be. Instincts we lack. We had the same conversation last night we've had over and over again, I think we should be playing a simple setup, but the rest of the team likes playing this way even as it costs us 5-10 points a game because we're running around like the Keystone Kops. Oh, on top of that, our setter (the "1" in the "5") is one of our guys, so we have a girl hitting in the power position. It's absurd. We know a lot of the people on the teams we play against, and they keep asking the same question--why the hell are you playing like that? Don't ask me, I just show up and do my job like a good boy.

    Steelers play tomorrow, the whole city is bedecked in Black and Gold. Jets played us tough the first time around, but we didn't have Burress or Haynes, and I think playing 2 OT road games in a row is gonna take a serious toll on the Noo Yawkers. Gonna be cold, about 20 degrees at kickoff, and the fans whipped into a frenzy. I look for the Steelers to be physical from the start and grind the Jets into a greenish paste. But we shall see, and I shall write about it. get this widget Please visit Pokernews site for more poker news, poker strategy articles or poker rules.

    Play Poker Online
    Play Poker Online at Full Tilt Poker
    Learn, Chat, and Play with the Pros at the fastest growing Online Poker Room.


    Play Poker Online at Blind Bet Poker. Bonuses and promotions by online poker rooms like Doyles Room, Titan Poker, Full Tilt Poker and Noble Poker. Poker strategy for beginners, advanced, and professional poker players. A poker terminology section, news & online poker tournaments.

    Poker Forums
    Definitive online poker portal, featuring a poker odds calculator, poker forums, an excellent poker bonus code section with deposit bonuses.

    Full Tilt Poker Freerolls
    Party Poker Strategy Guide

    The 2006 WSOP
    Total Coverage
    From the Urinals to the Hooker Bar



    Poker Savvy