In Translation (Karol)
"These are warning shots, after your next move I'll give you what I got."-50 Cent
There's a guy that we had to ban from our game that is taking shots at us, primarily at Dawn (though I recognize that the "NLHE fad" comment is directed at me for being uninterested in mixed games) on his corny blog. And while it's fine for me to take shots at Dawn, I'll be damned if some geek who was pity-invited to our games because Dawn felt sorry for him does the same. What I always disliked most about this guy, from my very first interaction with him, was his passive-aggressive way of putting people down and then pretending that wasn't what he meant at all. And since he's too much of a bitch to say what he means, I'll translate for him:
What he says:
What he means:
I was disinvited from a $20 home game that I badly wanted to attend because I acted crazy and dickish. So now I'm going to pretend that I really didn't want to play in that game anyway.
What he says:
What he means:
Dawn doesn't like me anymore, waaaaah, so I'm going to take bitter potshots at her posts and our ads rather than just admit that I was an asshole who alienated everyone at the game.
What he says:
What he means:
I am unlikeable and don't want to risk going out to Vegas for two days to discover it's not just NY bloggers who can't stand me.
What he says:
What he means:
Actually, I invite people that I later refer to as "producers".
What he says:
What he means:
I desperately wanted to be a part of the poker blogger community but as that didn't work out, I now trash them.
There's a guy that we had to ban from our game that is taking shots at us, primarily at Dawn (though I recognize that the "NLHE fad" comment is directed at me for being uninterested in mixed games) on his corny blog. And while it's fine for me to take shots at Dawn, I'll be damned if some geek who was pity-invited to our games because Dawn felt sorry for him does the same. What I always disliked most about this guy, from my very first interaction with him, was his passive-aggressive way of putting people down and then pretending that wasn't what he meant at all. And since he's too much of a bitch to say what he means, I'll translate for him:
What he says:
You have to find people who have some serious poker experience to make the game meaningful (i.e., not a $20 buy-in children's game).
What he means:
I was disinvited from a $20 home game that I badly wanted to attend because I acted crazy and dickish. So now I'm going to pretend that I really didn't want to play in that game anyway.
What he says:
I'm not the type to fill a subject line of my posts with the word Me over and over again, pimp out for external advertising (all my advertising is merely for my own affiliate sign-up accounts)
What he means:
Dawn doesn't like me anymore, waaaaah, so I'm going to take bitter potshots at her posts and our ads rather than just admit that I was an asshole who alienated everyone at the game.
What he says:
There are some important projects going that need my attention, so I would have to go for a quick weekend (probably leaving Saturday morning and returning Sunday night). The idea of going for a quick weekend and just to play a small-stakes tournament seems a bit pointless. Sure, the field will be soft, but so is every $80 buy-in tourney in Las Vegas that run every five minutes on the strip for 365 days every year. What's special about this one?
What he means:
I am unlikeable and don't want to risk going out to Vegas for two days to discover it's not just NY bloggers who can't stand me.
What he says:
I've never attended nor run home games primarily for the money
What he means:
Actually, I invite people that I later refer to as "producers".
What he says:
Ultimately, I'm not a fan of what doubles for “poker blogging”. It's mostly self-aggrandizing blabber from people who aren't actually students of the game, and are instead seeking the Internet-age Warhol-style celebrity: On the Internet, everyone is famous to 15 people.
What he means:
I desperately wanted to be a part of the poker blogger community but as that didn't work out, I now trash them.
posted by Karol at 11:44 PM
26 Comments:
Wow. Wow. Wow. I was just wondering what I was going to say about Mr. Sadsack Loser. This is a nice start.
ouch
and these are just warning shots?
scary
Is this for real? A poker blogger argument about poker blogging...you guys should be fighting over how to play 88 UTG instead.
Hmmm...note to self - if I have to piss off one of the IHO girls, make it be Dawn. But don't let Karol know about it. Russian mob hits and all that stuff scare me.
See you in a couple days!
BTW, mr anonymous - we all KNOW we misplay 88 UTG, what's the point in blogging that? No humour there.
CRAP! I was just reading that blog the other day (linked from somewhere else), can't remember who's it was.
Haha! Nice! I found the site in Google in about 5 minutes.. lol. Why not post it though? I can not wait for Vegas as an Andy Warhole 15 minutes, 5 people read me, Ghey Bloggah!
Yeah, once I thought to search google, I found it. Really kinda surprised though.
"(i.e., not a $20 buy-in children's game)."
Sometimes homegames aren't about the money.
I'm pretty sure these were post-warning-shots shots.
Of course, now I've got to go read his blog to figure out what he did to deserve the clip-into-the-liver treatment....
Good luck in Vegas, ladies. Hope to see you in January.
No, really, warning shots. I held back. A. Lot.
He didn't do anything different than usual.
When I read is blog post and saw the why-go-for-just-another-tournament line I thought to myself, "That donkey just doesn't get it."
Was wondering the other day why he wasn't on your blogrolling list. That should have been a clue that he was on your shitlist.
"During a lunch break, we talked a bit about reasons people create online poker journals (or blogs, as some people insist on calling them)."
That's my favorite (not intentionally slanderous) excerpt from the offending post. Just chock full of flavor.
Yeah, you went pretty easy on him. Geez.
Not that it makes a difference but I read the offending post this morning and promptly sent an email explaining how I thought the jabs were juvenile.
I love the $20 Crackhouse game. The company is tons o' fun and even though I'm a "World-Class Champion" (see Karol's quiz post) I'm learning a lot about playing cash games.
Bravo
You missed one from an earlier post:
"But, back to our mix. I was delighted that we were enlightened enough to give a chip-declare game a try. "
That was the one that really put me on edge, then I read the last one and pretty much just took him off the reading list.
As a friend of mine said upon my "did he just write this??" question:
"he writes a terrible blog
i don't read terrible blogs
nor do i care about terrible blogs"
and suggested I do the same. tada.
I don't even know what a "chip declare game" is, but then I'm only into NLHE because it's a fad.
stop being such a fad follower.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
It is a hi/lo game with an extra round of betting at the end. You can elect to play for hi, for low or for both ("pig").
You 'declare' by taking two chips and, away from view, putting either 0 (low), 1 (high) or 2 (both) in your hand. The declarations are then made simultaneously. Then there is another round of betting. If you are the only player going in a certain direction, jam as hard as the stakes allow.
If you go for both, you have to win both (what this means can vary).
I am clearly not enlightened.
I don't know what started the problem, but I'm on whatever side Dawn and Karol are on at because I like their trio of blogs.
Whew! That was quite the airing of grievances.
This is the best Festivus ever!
bahahahahahahahahahaha
You're right on the money, Karol. Being a snob is a false front for feelings of inadequacy.
What a fucking tool.
I've been reading your blog for a while now. Ironically enough I started right after SIF and I had our own falling out. He posted a hand on the WORLD WIDE WEB, I analyzed it and said he shouldn't have played it that way, and he got into a snit. He then engaged a poker expert to give him enough evidence that he could declare he was right.
My best poker bud and I had quit talking to Bradley for a while already. We didn't invite him on our trips to AC or Vegas, and my bud only spoke to him when he stalked her out online.
This seems to be a pattern, he starts off stable, but after you've been friends with him for a few months, he starts to talk down to you, until everything he says is laced with a passive-aggressive insult. He also can't imagine he's wrong about anything, which makes it hard to have any kind of conversation.
The weird thing is that he said this had happened to him before, and he blamed it on my being "too competitive". He said he'd had other friendships fail for this reason as well.
Just wanted to give you a note to say it's not you, its him. Feel good about yourself and don't let this get to you.
Post a Comment
<< Home