Getting It All-in Blind at Walker Hill

Blind All-in:  Betting all one's chips before any cards have been dealt.

I discovered two very good reasons not to move up to the higher-limit games at Walker Hill Poker Room Friday night.  First and foremost, I put in my third straight losing session since arriving in Seoul just about three weeks ago.  But more than that, it was witnessing the most reckless form of gambling known in poker - the blind all-in - at the $5/10 game that confirmed my lowly place on the $1/2 tables.

To be clear, this wasn't just someone's last $50 thrown casually into the pot at the end of a losing session.  No, this was a $4000 blind all-in - 4,000,000 won to be exact.  It was 3 am, the stacks were - as always - ungodly deep, and for no obvious reason, "The Gambler" decided to blindly shove all $4000 of his chips, showing no fear or concern about the outcome of his recklessness.

What could drive a player to such insanity?  Maybe this guy was an adreleline junky.  Maybe a millionaire.  Maybe a degenerate gambler hell-bent on making a big payday.  Who knows?  Two things are certain though.  One, he had absolutely no fear or respect for money.  And two, he didn't even flinch when he got called by AK...

AK vs. The Gambler's J5.  AK had J5 covered in chips, so the pot stood at $8000, plus the blinds.  If you're a poker player, it may pain you a bit to hear that this shining example of poker foolhardiness was rewarded.  But yes, a jack came on the flop, with no relief coming to AK on the turn or river.

The reason I mention that witnessing this confirmed, at least to me, my place in the $1/2 game is not that I don't think I can play at a higher level.  I think I am capable.  But this hand demonstrated to me in a paradoxical kind of way, the need to detach myself from the monetary value of the poker chips to play at my best.  AK made a good call.  But even knowing it's a good call, could I have made it?  Or in the back of my mind would fear of financial loss have made me much my cards?  Even with AA, would I have the detachment necessary to make the right decision?

I say paradoxical because I certainly don't mean this Gambler is anyone to be admired or imitated on the poker table.  Not if your intention is to win.  What I mean is, to play your best, I think you have to lose your fear and respect for money.  Anthony Holden is quoted, "Poker may be a branch of psychological warfare, an art form or indeed a way of life – but it is also merely a game, in which money is simply the means of keeping score."

Keeping score.  Poker may be the only game where it is required that winning brings financial gain and losing brings financial loss.  Poker isn't really poker without that precise risk looming over everyone at the table.  I find that detachment from the value of money is doable for me at the $500 buy-in level, though not easy or "natural."  Maybe it's just a matter of the size of your bankroll that determines your detachment level.  I'm not sure.  But I do know that even holding AA, I'd probably muck to the $4000 blind all-in.
 
Before I go, I do want to mention one note about the $1/2 games Friday night.  I promised to relate one hand that I witnessed.  This was the single largest pot I've ever seen on any $1/2 NL table.  It involved three players building a pot of $2100.

I only caught the tail end on the river.  A guy named Sid shoved all-in for his $600 stack on the turn, with about $500 and change already in the pot.  He got two callers, who were very deep, holding about $500 apiece at the time of the turn bet.  This put the pot at about $2100.

When the cards were flipped, Sid showed a Q-high club-flush - the second nuts.  I think the board read AJ54 (roughly), obviously with three clubs out there.  Caller One showed A4 and Caller Two showed J5.  Neither had a club.  These were both pretty marginal calls considering the deepness of their stacks.  There were any number of better two-pairs, not to mention an array of flushes.  It's possible to rationalize the A4 call, though not easy.  The J5 call, though, boggles the mind.  He was facing a huge all-in and a call in front of him.  He could basically only beat two bluffs, but chose to stick in his remaining 250 big-blinds into the middle.

Neither caller filled up on the river.  There's some justice left in poker I guess.