While the movie 'Charlie Wilson's War' is mostly Tom Hanks fluff, the actual story of Charlie Wilson and the Soviet/Afghan war is very interesting and shows the positives and the disastrous negatives of funding rebel forces in a foreign state, especially if you pull the funding of the infrastructure, education, sanitation, food, shelter etc and just throw money at people who want guns, power and to rule.  We'll probably make the same mistakes yet again here.  As always.  When media attention goes away from a problem it doesn't mean the problem isn't there, but Western governments don't see poll points in unexposed tragedy.

I've heard 'expert' commentators say that this uprising is merely part of a larger 'war' that is coming between Sunni and Shia across the whole of the Middle East.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding the war, yet we don't seem to be doing anything as far as they're concerned.

The first part I can see being true.  It's been coming for a while.  Obviously religion and creed is being used on both sides by select people who want power and control, seeing the deaths of others as needed collateral damage.  It has been the way for millennia.

The second part does fascinate me.  The West seem desperate to not offend at least four Middle East and Asian countries (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel and obviously China).  For at least the first three there are clear links to influential people in those countries and to the top end of US Government past and present.

I don't think any of the Western countries, even if we all pulled together (which has proven to be a political impossibility historically and I see no sign that can change) have the resources to effect a full and positive change all the way through to the end game.  Money, tanks and possibly troops will be thrown at the problem.  Another ten to the penny leader will take over, be declared the country's saviour.  The problem will be announced fixed.  Credit will be claimed.  And the real problems will still be there and the innocent people will still be fucked, just a postponed fucked.

Very happy to leave that to your discretion mate.

Personally I love playing in Binions.

All the fish remind you of your online home?   

Haha, nicely played.

It's more to do with feeling that you have walked into a 1950s old school Vegas movie.  Plus the fact I found the Regs there to be the friendliest of all of the Vegas card rooms and there were a ton of interesting characters to chat with.  It just makes a delightful change of pace from plastic atmosphere and sunglassed angry Regs in the Rio games.  You actually have fun in a tournament there

Very happy to leave that to your discretion mate.

Personally I love playing in Binions.

I had exactly the same spot as the blogger's recent example at the Monte Carlo just gone.  Internet player (very good as well tbf) sat there having a long private but in front of everyone chat with his young  railer mate, both exceptional confident about the young man's chances.  Then he started to advise everyone at the table to play on Lock because the games are soft.  After that I couldn't take him seriously.

Lovely read.

One thing that is missed out though is how the internet kids were treated when they first went on the live scene.  Then it was the other way around, long time live pros sneered, laughed and generally made them as frosty a reception as possible.  I completely agree that the internet kid side of the equation has over compensated by their reaction and some just have the arrogance to ignore the fact a recreational player generally wants to have a fun and happy live experience, while not respecting the sums involved in the game or the other people at the table.  However it's not solely the fault of the internet generation, sections of the old live guard have a certain responsibility as well.

On the plus side I'm really psyched to watch 'Hey Bartender'

I never was one of the Zimbler haters.

Until he mistook the Star Wars theme for the Superman theme.

He's now dead to me.

Great updates and Tighty, you're top quality in the booth Sir.

I've never put crisps in my sandwich.

[I just felt that going all in would put him in the worst spot, the most often - If I jam, and he spend 13seconds hovering between call and fold buttons then I feel like I win because I've made him guess - there's a lot to be said for just putting your opponent in the toughest spots you can, makes you harder to play against and people are more reticent to tangle with you.]

sorry I couldn't be more conclusive! I basically reached at Jamming as the option because I disliked chk/call and chk/folding.

Checking and calling felt like it let all his weaker ACE hands off lightly (they can just chk/back and try win) whilst allowing him the pleasure of value-betting nicely against me, Checking and folding sort of felt like he could just go all in with everything and make me life quite unpleasant.

I just felt that going all in would put him in the worst spot, the most often - If I jam, and he spend 13seconds hovering between call and fold buttons then I feel like I win because I've made him guess - there's a lot to be said for just putting your opponent in the toughest spots you can, makes you harder to play against and people are more reticent to tangle with you.

Agree with this completely.

Out of the other options I think Check/call is the worst.  Yes I don't know your dynamics and history to the depth you do from the lines in the OP but it just feels like we'd be spewing more than being right.

I still think we should be thinking we are bluffing and on the odd occasion they call with worse we can say 'Fuck me, I was ahead, pleasing.'

My only question mark would be if it's too early to squeezing pre with this, probably ok though.  Streets like.

If you know these guys are going to call off a couple of bets before giving up a ton of the time then well played throughout.

Fun spot.

I don't think worse calls, I'd be thinking if I jammed I was purely trying to get straights and small houses to fold.  Now would he fold these hands?  Well from your reasoning you've been bashing him up recently, so his mindset may well have turned into 'I'm going to flop something big and let Dave barrel himself off to me,' which matches up exactly to your thinking of him not raising straight wraps on the flop or A5 on the turn.  Solely based on this I think we can get him to fold the straights and small boats sometimes, to put it bluntly he may just chicken out of his plan when you jam.  We're giving him a gut check when he has a history of bottling out in the past.  He's shown history of this in your description.

You've said he's folded to almost all of your triple barrels and river c/rs before?  What about the few he has looked you up with?  What has he had here?  Complete nuts or has he been able to call more marginal holdings (and probably more correctly versus you) on these occasions?  I think this is key just to see where he's at in his head.

I think you can get him off some better hands, whether or not he has enough of them to make it profitable, pffft think it's close.  Maybe just about yes.  If he has a Ax house well, we're screwed.

I'll take whatever's left if any please.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-2329991/CHARLES-SALE-TalkSport-host-Ronnie-Irani-axed-breakfast-show.html

And that'll be the last time I click a Daily Mail link for the year.  What an awfully pompous and venomous piece.

As for Ronnie, tbh really didn't think he was good as a radio presenter.  But he does seem like a decent guy and I hope he falls on his feet.  Not long before the Keys and Grey breakfast show then.

Confirmed 1% please.