Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About HermanKahn

  • Rank
    Poker Forum Nut

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. Yeah. Unfortunately, I just read the article: that dangerous narcissist scumbag he's thinking of running with is a complete disgrace. How anyone in the party would give that *********** slimeball the time of day is beyond me. How did they get from Harry Browne and Carla Howell to chicken suits and power-mad bookies in such a short time? Oh well. I guess Ayn Rand was right after all. Lately I've been working with libertarians trying to infiltrate the Republican party. I don't imagine they'll make much headway against the crony-capitalist war pigs, but at least they might have a shot at keeping
  2. Believe it or not, I was a non-voting delegate to the Libertarian Party nominating convention for the 2000 election. If Raymer weren't famous for winning the WSOP, I'd be for him 100 percent. Unfortunately, since Libertarians have a reputation for being loony gun-toting hippie outlaws (er, not that there's anything wrong with that), I hardly see how running "a gambler" is going to help anything in the eyes of the public. On the other hand, since nobody takes the party seriously anyway, the media coverage might be good for drawing attention to the issues. He's articulate enough to pull it off
  3. Songs from the 1920s to listen to as you're playing the WSOP, thematically arranged from beginning to end: Masculine Women! Feminine Men! (1926)http://www.redhotjazz.com/Songs/merritt/masculine.ramLady Luck (1929)http://www.redhotjazz.com/Songs/caramblers/ladyluck.ramReady for the River (1928)http://www.redhotjazz.com/Songs/caramblers...ForTheRiver.ramDustin' The Donkey (1925)http://www.redhotjazz.com/Songs/u6/DUSTINTHEDONKEY.ramThe Pay Off (1928)http://www.redhotjazz.com/Songs/caramblers/thepayoff.ramI Know You're Lying (But I Love It!)http://www.redhotjazz.com/songs/coon/yourlyin.ram Red Hot
  4. I don't use off-the-shelf software because it's not nuanced enough. You'll learn more if you keep track of how you play with a pen and paper and calculate your leaks yourself. Seriously. Cumulative totals are misleading because they don't take into account table dynamics and shifting your game to match your opponent. Sometimes it's 100 percent correct to be TAG, sometimes LAG, or something inbetween-- who gives a damn what my average is. Likewise, if you don't play differently when you're in a six-handed game versus a nine-handed one (or at different stakes), you've got a problem. However, if
  5. Because you're a peon. Haven't you learned how our great American system works yet? When you hold the absolute last place in society's pecking order, showing insubordination and ungratefulness is outrageous and unheard of. Or any independent thought. Or balls. Nope, you better know your place and like it. Be a good, obedient little consumer like you're supposed to or you'll "get a bad record" and never find another master again.
  6. Oh, probably. I might add that anyone antisocial enough to drop out of the workforce to play poker isn't likely to be in a position to need a hardcore SSBI background investigation in the first place. And if they did, they'd probably fail for a whole host of reasons...walking out on the job would be the least of their problems. (e.g. alcoholism, hookers and blow, shady associates, gambling addiction, atrocious credit, gross degeneracy, etc.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Scope_...d_InvestigationOn the other hand, being a good, dependable cog in the machine is vastly overrated.
  7. No he won't. The DoD security clearance adjudication manual used to be online: leaving your job without notice is only a very minor character blip, if anything. "At-will employment" works both ways, doesn't it? Nobody gives a damn about some delivery boy quitting--It's not like he's the CFO of Merrill f*cking Lynch. As long as he's good at bankroll management, reducing his expenses and living frugally, I say go for it: making $7 an hour at anything is for complete suckers. Unless he has kids to support, he's better off opting out of wage slavery altogether. Craigslist provides dozens of ways t
  8. I say if it's making the same decisions for hours on end, it's a non-adaptive piece of sh*t and 100% beatable by any nuanced player. Hell, bring them on. I'll have a whole table-full, please.
  9. Yeah, so what? I don't tilt, and if you were more in control of yourself you wouldn't tilt either. It not cheating, it's called "self-discipline." Not everyone can be a genius, but even a dullard can develop patience and inner calm. In fact, I daresay a dullard with discipline will whomp the *ss of a genius on tilt anyday. Seriously, all jokes aside, it's that important. Now is the fact that I'm a winning player significantly correlated to the fact that I don't tilt? No doubt. Once you accept that bad beats are just part of the game and turn your chat off, I can almost guarantee your stats wil
  10. No, no, hell no, and no. Don't have to. LOL
  11. Ya think? (sw) Anyway, we're not disagreeing about much. I'm just saying that once you calculate all the odds and factor in your opponent's psychology, sometimes "the wrong play" is the right one. Because poker is a "people game played with cards" not a "card game played with people", it's entirely possible to improve your odds by deliberately worsening them as long as you remain credible. Predictability is the kiss of death, as any good strategist knows.
  12. First of all, thanks for the post. Even where I disagree, it was definitely interesting reading. .Not at all. People genuinely helping each other is cool, but if you don't need it, you don't need it. End of story. As far as I'm concerned, the entire online poker community staking system as we know it can kiss my lily-white, exquisitely-formed, sweet smelling ***. LOL Not always. Here's something Michael Kinsley, a former student of Nobel-prize-winning game theorist Thomas Schelling (widely regarded as "the Godfather of Game Theory"), recalled in a classroom lecture of Schelling’s whose les
  13. I understand his point (and I don't think we're disagreeing about much), but my bottom line is I WANT TO BEAT THE BEST, **** playing losers. Beating losers just to say I won doesn't mean anything to me. If I want to make money playing poker, I'll stick to cash games. However, jumping in the Big Game or onto HSP isn't really an option if you want to get respect either: the stink of "rich amateur" will follow you around no matter how good you are. I'm 100% not interested in being written off and p*ssed on as "the next Andy Beal". Something that's kind of dysfunctional about the way people earn r
  • Create New...