Its Been a Long Time Since I've Blogged a Good Rant

As I mentioned in my last blog, I am both fascinated and frustrated by online poker names. Some are simple enough and strike me as relatively inoffensive. "aaronbeen", "shaundeeb", "JasonGray", the ones I don't even have to type when I report because they become redundant--these are great. I don't even mind the simple number/name/school combos like "USCPhildo", "mattg1983", "ckingusc", "AJKHoosier1", "JP OSU", "uscjess" (heh heh), "THAY3R", etc (although I think the excessive number of "USC" names, albeit the wrong one, make me appreciate them more than I should).

There are even several online poker names that I really just love and appreciate because they just sound cool: "FatalError", "snagglepuss", "SLOPPYKLOD", "MrCasino", "BigRiskky", "THE_D_RY" to name a few.

Then there are the indecipherable. hfus832gai. YGhas&t76dq. Ones that look like that. First, let me just be up front and admit that I am lazy. I don't like having to set aside two minutes to type out someone's online name. It is also unbelievably difficult to memorize these and I hate not being able to quickly rattle off the online names to other people.

Now this is where I may lose some more ardent online poker fans. To say that I hate when people are only referred to by their online names in real life would be excessive. To say I just don't get why people do it would not adequately address the issue. Why don't we just say my feelings rest somewhere in between those two poles and that I do not like to refer to people by their online name rather than their given one in a live setting?

In my line of work reporting on the online poker pros playing in live tournaments this can be somewhat problematic. Oftentimes players ask me who someone is and I respond "Oh that is Justin Rollo."

"No, I mean his poker name."

"Sigh."

I understand. When you play online poker as your occupation, you have only the name and perhaps an avatar to define these people by. I get that, I really do. But I must admit, it is kind of humorous to me when I divulge their online name and the player I am talking to will say something like "oh yeah, he's a buddy of mine" or "I know him" despite clearly admitting he/she does not even know this person's name.

Brett and I actually got into a bit of a debate regarding the online vs actual name debate regarding photos on P5s Live. One of the odd glitches in our photo galleries on the site is that the captions cannot extend past one line or else it will throw the rest of the photos in a given gallery out of alignment. Therefore, several names must be abbreviated in order to fit into the allotted space.

In these situations, Brett elects to use the first initial of a person's name, their online moniker, and their last name. I always opt to forgo the online name altogether for a couple of reasons. First of all, the space consumed by the quotations marks around the online names further restricts the number of letters you can fit on a line. Second, I find the quotations to look cluttered when they aren't adequately separted from the first and last names with a space. Third, it is much less time consuming to just quickly type their first and last name and photo galleries can easily eat up hours of our time. Finally, and most importantly, I adamently believe that we should never forgo someone's actual name for their online name.

As I explained to Brett, these are people, not video game characters. Craig Gray's mom likely does not refer to him as "My son, MrCasino." This is the obnoxious academic in me I suppose, but I am concerned that our identities in a virtual space are spilling over into real life. I completely understand that many of these guys are only known within the community by their online poker names so, whenever I am writing a post, I always include both. However, in instances like photo captions where one must be chosen over another, I can't reconcile eliminating someone's actual name to make room for an Internet identity.

Part of the appeal of online identities is their inherent ability to deceive and manipulate. It is a chance to be someone you are incapable of being in real life and the control you have over your persona on the web is obviously appealing. Plus, the lack of policing and verification of identities on the Internet results in the opportunity to create an identity that in no way reflects your personality in real life.

It might have been in his WPT Final Table interview with Amanda Leatherman, but I remember Luke "IWEARGOGGLES" Staudenmeier explaining that he chose the name as means of getting action at the table because it is kind of silly. We can't do this in real life as easily. I can't really dsiguise the fact I am a female and I look like I'm 12 when I am playing live, although many times I wish I could. While I can ham it up sometimes--throw on a Little Mermaid t-shirt, wear my hair in pigtails, etc, etc, I still have to work within a certain set of parameters of my actual identity. Not only in online poker, but in other games/sites in the virtual world like WoW, Second Life, and MySpace people are able to become someone they are not or an exaggerated version of themselves with relative ease. As someone who has spent most of their life leading a relatively dull existence, I can absolutely see the appeal.

That does not change the fact that these online personas are not actually us in real life though. I know this is going to sound rather paranoid and silly, but I am sincerely worried for the day when a fabricated construction on the Internet is able to become its own personality and entity outside of the computer without a name and a face behind it.

I have got nothing.

Things have gotten very bad, very quickly. My bankroll is in freefall. It is almost as if it is trying to commit suicide. I take it to rehab, I try to get it to calm down, I give it naps, breaks, love, and affection and it continues to behave like the Britney Spears of bankrolls: intent on self-destruction. I moved down. I haven't been doing anything crazy. I play $3 and $6 sngs, when I dropped below $300, I put myself on $3 or less exclusively. Yet, I still can't stop it. I don't even feel like I am playing badly or doing anything wrong. But, don't they say that if you can't spot the donkey at the table it must be you? Everyone at these tables seems like morons to me, but I have to wonder:

Do I suck??

In the spirit of full disclosure, let's document this descent into donkness via my SharkScope stats:

What's that noise you ask? Oh that is just me: throwing up in my mouth a little. From the graph, you can tell that I do have a tendency to dip. I run bad. About once a month, I have a spell where I run really really bad for a couple of days. Except this time, I have run really really bad for two weeks. There was a day this week where I was 90/10 with one card to come and lost 13 times. I don't win races, I don't win 80/20s...come to think of it, I just don't win.

I have been so frustrated I couldn't bring myself to blog because my bankroll (which is sitting around $220) is lower than it has been in a couple of months. In a matter of 10 days, I have seen all my work over 2 months completely erased. While there were some instances where I may not have made an optimal play, I really do believe I am not playing badly. But, a recent thread on 2plus2 has me wondering if I even think of good/optimal play in the same way as others. Essentially, the thread deals with how tough online poker is going to get. The title of the thread prompted a resounding, "Zuh?!" from me. I don't find online poker to be "tough" in the sense that, "oh gosh, that guy who just reraised me with QJ off suit out of the small blind is so smart and so good, I can't fathom how I am ever going to beat him". Rather, it is tough the same way being locked in a room with a child infected with rabies is tough. In other words, I don't play well against abosloute nutjobs. It is not that rabiesbaby is smarter than me: it is that I can't really think of a way to use logic and intelligence to reason with him not to bite and maul me until I am dead.

During the thread, one guy gets ragged on for being frustrated by a guy calling a raise and a reraise out of position wiht 35 suited in a tournament. Here are my issues:

1) This tourney is assumed to be deep stack, when I don't think it is explicitly said.
2) 35 is made out to be a genius for getting it all in on a 3j5 flop as if it is not entirely in the realm of possibility that someone has a set of jacks here.
3) Two pair, especially a small 2 pair like that facing what is more than likely at least one overpair is not a hand I am going to be labeling as the second coming of Christmas.
4) Finally, someone brands the play as a "well-disguised smart play" and compares it to the game of Negreanu and Ivey. I sincerely doubt that either of those players are going to, in the early stages of a tournament, put in 30% of their stack out of position in the hopes of flopping a marginally good hand. Just this week on Pokerroad, Gavin Smith, whose game is often compared to those guys, balked at someone calling a raise out of position with gap suited connectors, so I just can't buy this reasoning.

This is why I want to focus my graduate research and dissertation on online poker and new media. Because live players and online players can look at the exact same hand or player and come to very different conclusions. I think that is the case with any poker players, as there are obviously a variety of ways to play any given hand, but the divide between online and live opinions just strikes me as so divergent.

I played a little 4/8 limit hold em at the boat this weekend, and I was just so happy to be sitting at a table with actual people. I could look them in the eye when they did something dumb and make them feel bad about it. The play was much more solid than the limit games I have played online and, more importantly it was a lot of FUN. I would be lying if I said that I was going to stop playing online, but it definitely will never compare to live play for me.

I think I need to start anew on Stars. I may put a little more money on there so I can comfortably play SNGs at the $6 and $10 levels. Take a couple of days off. And then start again, hoping and praying that things will get better.