Truman's House - Saturday, June 6th @ 6:00pm (2 Viewers)

Not open for further replies.
I come bearing gifts


Your eggs expired two days ago :(
What blur. I think a game happened. My only notes:

Berg and I did a 1K flip (5 each) of NLHE face up. Berg wins. Q high > J high.

Crack coffee confirmed hover shakes on cup #3.

Berg ran me over on all turn cards. I folded away half of my losses and shipped the other half to IBetOnEverything Clay.

Keith confirmed new look. "If you dress good, you play good.".


There might be food in there.


Good times. This crew was perfect. No one is safe from verbal tirades. Defend opinion with sword in hand. Need 14 steak bombs right now.

When is the next one again? Looking forward to Golf and Mohegan Sun on Friday June 19th.
I love how the top shelf in the refrigerator is sagging under the weight of the growlers. :D
I got Tim to fold a lot. When Tim wasn't folding, I was shipping $1800 to various people at the table. I sorta remember breakfast and JButler driving down the wrong side of the road in Nashua. Great beer, great people, great time *

* - I'm never drinking again, again.
If I could have chosen between throwing dozens of special needs infants into an active volcano and enduring my hangover for 10 more minutes this morning, I would have gladly satisfied the island gods. It felt like a fucking tiny gnome was trying to burrow out of my skull with that rock hammer from the shawshank redemption.

Woke up earlyish and got on the road. Typing this in dead stopped traffic on a ny interstate. Great time last night. That Julius was fucking phenomenal. I donked my heart out but somehow ran good. Thank Christ there is no justice in poker.
It felt like a fucking tiny gnome was trying to burrow out of my skull with that rock hammer from the shawshank redemption.

I'm glad my 3 yr old can't read as I burst out laughing when I read this he said "What daddy?" and came over to see what I was looking at on the iPad.
Great time as always. Playing an orbit of SAYPLO was kinda hilarious. All players committed to $20 flip for 11 hands. Jose binks 4 of them. +$600 for jose that orbit. This is a .25/.50 game featuring $500 per side flips, orbits of mandatory flips, and big pots during the PL and NL hands. Noraml Truman's house mayhem was a little more degen than average this weekend.

Left early (2am) so I could get a safe drive home. Table was still 7 handed after I left.
Bergs, thanks for hosting, as always, and a big bow to CLB for two rounds of cookies. Great lineup and plenty of fine beer. Look forward to playing with everyone again.
just wanted to jump back in this thread to say thanks again to berg for hosting and for giving his guest room over to me to sleep it off before heading back to jersey. and as roman mentioned, cheryl's cookies were amazing as usual (again, not a euphemism).

the game was fantastic. quick TR:

i arrived at 3:30ish and clay was pulling in behind me so we park and start down to berg's (we parked on a side street because on-street parking at berg's is not possible). we see a guy walking up to the house with a big tray and are like, "wtf they already ordered food we're fucking starving." but no, it was tim with the "gifts for the gods".

after this year's BBotB which was organized and funded by berg and keller, tim had the idea that a bunch of us should fund a decent couple of gifts for rob and rob as a thank you. after some brainstorming we came up with a custom tap based on the truman's house design for berg and custom crack coffee glasses based on an in-progress chip design for keller. as usual, J5 was beyond generous with his time in modifying the designs for their relative purposes.

the results:



so in turn, thanks to tim for organizing the production of the gifts. great ideas and i think they both turned out perfect.

anyway, back to the TR - we walk in and berg and cheryl got busy looking at window brochures (as one does at a poker game), so tim surreptitiously put the truman's house tap on the kegerator and we waited to see how long it would take rob to notice it. i said it would like 40 minutes and tim proposes a $5 over/under (you can see how early this was in the game. lol $5 props) with his taking the under for 30 minutes. i accept and we sit as berg stares in the direction of the tap for multiple 30-second long episodes as he sits directly next to it for the next half-hour yet remains totally unaware. finally we point it out and he loves it of course and we present keller with his glasses and tell him to get his ass moving with the chip design and purchase.

i drop two buy-ins in under an hour before hitting my stride, all assisted by the plethora of amazing beers available in berg's new basement fridge. pretty envious of the tree house up there. their julius was certainly the highlight for me. also liked the new ballast point belgian and the brewmaster jack which i hadn't even heard of. then we order some steak bombs and i tear through mine like it owed me money. first real food i'd had all day, so i was starving.

i don't think we played a single hand of NLHE all night. it was only SOHE (before we got too many playas and after we got back shorthanded), big O, PLO, PLO8, and crazy pineapple. i think i lost every pineapple pot i played.

last hand of the night was a 3-way SOHE pot with berg, roman, and me. i think the final board was QQT3x no flush, no straight. i had AA/77yy. flop had checked through, so i was 99% sure AA was the nuts on the NLHE side. whatever on turn there was betting. berg potted all in on the river, roman briefly tanked and flatted. roman had about $120ish left after calling berg and the pot itself was $500ish at that point, so it's not a giant mistake, but i should have just flatted. instead i put the rest in and got quartered by roman who had AA on NLHE and a 10 on PLO. ended +$540, but could have easily saved that last bet.

game broke at 4ish and berg and i head off for IHOP. i had had a bit to drink, but over 12 hours, it mingled well enough with a steak bomb and half a dozen cookies that i was okay to drive. back to chez berg at 5:30ish and hit the bed. wake up at 9:30am feeling minutes away from death, but i try to get a bit more sleep before i shower, and hit the road. finally up and dressed and only then did i see truman for the first time since i'd arrived. he was mauling his big stuffed bone and let me give him some loving before i was off. bergman was still asleep upstairs and cheryl was out as well, so i told truman goodbye and hit the road.

I dug up the recently passed NH gambling bill that Dealer Rob was talking about on Friday. Turns out that we were mistaken on a few things. Here's the bill text, as passed: (Don't shy away from clicking on the assumption that laws are all super-long and incomprehensible. It's super-short and to the point.)

It does legalize "table stakes" poker, i.e., no-limit cash games. However, it leaves in place the $4 maximum bet in limit poker and house games, and it uses that $4 limit as the maximum of total forced bets for a table-stakes game.

However, the $150 limit applies as a buy-in limit only. There is no betting cap: "the amount wagered by a player during the play of a hand shall not be limited except by the amount of chips the player has in his or her possession on the table." It is not clear if $150 is a limit on the amount to which you may buy your stack (at $100, you can only buy $50 more), or if it's an increment (at $100, you can buy $150 more).

Anyway, New Hampshire will finally have big-bet poker. However, it will be limited to $1/$1, $1/$2, $1/$3, or maybe $2/$2 or other weird blind structures, and it'll at least start off short-stacked. Also, the way this is written, it seems to legalize only no-limit poker, not pot-limit. PLO seems to be off the table, but we may see NLO if there is sufficient demand. And, y'know, if all the players don't get raked to death first.
Well, as approximately 50% of a certain type of lawyer, I would read that statute a little differently.

-Blinds, antes, and any other type of forced bet shall not exceed $4 per player - so $4/$4 is OK - $2/$5 is out. Button ante for the table is out.

-I don't think it precludes poker with limit or pot-limit structures - "shall not be limited" refers to the statute, not the game structure. $10/$20 limit with a $4 ante is fine, as long as nobody buys in for more than $150.

-The last sentence, however, I would read to place a $150 buy-in limit per player over the course of the entire session/game. Makes a lot more sense on a practical level as well - they're trying to limit losses to $150/night. That's one's a pretty big buzzkill.

What do you think Jack?
Good point on $4 blinds. I think you're right there. I overlooked "per player."

Where I'm seeing this precluding pot-limit and > $4 fixed-limit is in how it defines "table stakes." The key part of that definition seems to be "[amount of wagering] shall not be limited except by the amount of chips the player has in his or her possession on the table." Fixed-limit and pot-limit do limit wagers by another standard, so it would stand to reason that they wouldn't fall under the heading of "table stakes" and this wouldn't gain any ground by this new language.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for this to open the door to as many options as possible. Unfortunately, NH's legislature tends to be super-conservative in gambling matters unless the state itself is party to the gambling (*cough cough* $20 scratch tickets). I wouldn't be surprised if the $150 is a per-session or even per-day limit rather than an increment, which would really suck because no such limit currently exists. (I've personally bought into $2/$4 and $4/$4 for $200 without a problem, and total rebuys for individual players frequently exceed $150.)

Of course, I'm just a hobbyist when it comes to these things. It'd be nice to hear from more actual lawyers. Gawds forbid the state use unambiguous statutory language that the average person can understand.
it's poorly written, but that's pretty much the job of state legislatures: to fuck shit up and cause people to incur unnecessary legal expenses when the legislature could have told us what the fuck they meant in the first place.

but it's short enough to quote in it's entirety here for review:

RSA 287-D:16 said:
No single wager by a player, on any game of chance, shall exceed the amount of $4. Provided, however, that in games of poker where the chips have monetary value, play may be conducted under “table stakes” rules where the amount of blinds, antes, and any other type of forced bet shall not exceed $4 per player but the amount wagered by a player during the play of a hand shall not be limited except by the amount of chips the player has in his or her possession on the table. In any such “table stakes” game, the amount of chips a player may purchase during the course of play in said game shall be no greater in value than $150.

the bold and italicized portion is that which is proposed to be added to the statute.

- i agree with Ben with regard to the statute permitting $4/4 blinds
- i agree with Ben that the statute permits any type of betting structure within the game so long as there are no forced bets greater than $4 per player
- i agree with Ben that the statute permits, for instance, $10/20 limit games provided that the blinds themselves for these games do not exceed $4. so, typically, the blinds in a $10/20 LHE game would be $5 and $10. here, they are limited to $4 and $4. they could control for this variation in the size of the pot by requiring every player other than those in the blinds to ante $1. no big trouble. however, the playability of a $10/20 LHE game will be hampered a bit because...
- i also agree that the statute appears to limit the total buy-ins during "the course of play in said game" to $150 per player.

obviously the trouble comes in defining "said game". clearly the legislature is capable of distinguishing the amount one can wager in a hand since it did so by limiting forced bets to $4 per player "during the play of a hand". here, they pretty clearly mean something else. how this rule is applied in the various rooms (how many rooms are there in NH?) could vary and will depend on the relationship between the rooms and the regulators (whichever form, if any, regulators take in NH). in the heyday of the casino control commission in NJ, casinos would typically have a dialogue with a CCC representative who could provide some guidance as to the position of commission and what, if any, action might be expected if the casino offered a certain game or certain rules within a game. i have no idea how this works in a practical sense in NH.

consider that a reasonable person could interpret the last sentence in the statute as amended to mean:

(1) players can buy in for $150 at each variation of poker offered (i.e., hold em, omaha, stud, etc.);
(2) players can buy in for $150 at each table offering any poker variation;
(3) players can rebuy for an additional amount exceeding $150 if they start a new "game" by taking a break of a sufficient length;
(4) players can rebuy for an additional amount exceeding $150 only on the following calendar day after their previous $150 buy in.

i'm sure we could come up with at least half a dozen of reasonable interpretations of that provision.
There are 5 or 6 licensed "charity" cardrooms in New Hampshire that I can think of: The River in Milford, Rockingham Park in Salem, Seabrook Poker Room, Hampton Falls Poker Room, Manch Vegas in Manchester, and some small-time place run out of a hotel banquet area in or around Keene. I'm sure there are a couple others, but the rooms I listed probably account for the vast majority of licensed poker played in the state.

They're fools if they think that they can establish $150 as a per-day or per-session loss cap without causing a big problem. Most of the cardrooms would have to drastically change how they operate and hire extra employees just to keep track of cash-game rebuys, never mind to make sure they don't exceed the limit. Even if they were to pull it off, they'd be shutting out a lot of their customers—a virtual army of "old man coffee" types who bleed $20 or $40 at a time from open until close.
I will bet that the $150 buy in limit is applied in the form of max buy-in/re-buy at the table, and rebuying will be permitted.
I will bet that the $150 buy in limit is applied in the form of max buy-in/re-buy at the table, and rebuying will be permitted.

I wouldn't bet against that being the application. I will be curious to see.
Jack, great summary. I did not know about the glasses and tap - awesome gifts.

That new NH law is a mess, and I believe enforcing a $150 cap per player per day will be difficult - that would be a bad interpretation of the law. We had a fair number of hands where people were unaware that the game had changed. My favorite is Jose scooping a 700-800 BB pot against Bergs and Tim thinking it is O8, all-in on the flop.
I put the pictures up, and said it on the facebox, but I'll say it again here. Those glasses are amazing, and the fact that I have a poker community that would surprise me like that that is something I am truly spoiled by.

When the tap handle came out, I was initial both psyched and disheartened. I was like, "no one asked me if I wanted to contribute. Hmm... what the hell is going on here?" But I thought it was a great gift. Then they brought out the Crack Tumblers and I was blown away (and immediately understood). These things are great. J5 nailed it. They were the perfect gift. I couldn't be more thrilled.
People will find this thread years from now after the nuclear apocalypse and wonder "why did they put crack in glasses, anyway?"

I love love love the tap handle. Fits the room perfect and CLB loves if too. You guys are making me want to finish the basement :)
I cumulatively folded 2000 BB's on various turn cards against Berg believing I was behind. Don't drink lots of beer, kids.

Guinness, Berg, and folding are just LOL in a single post.

I'm still blown away that we did a $1K flip and it was like the most natural thing in the world. I don't even think some of the conversations stopped at the table.

We're 1-1 each HU41K now....tie breaker at DCS V....
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom