Bean Bag, Moral Dilemma, Poker

We have a new roommate moving in. He has this gigantic bean bag thing that is awesome. I named it Charlie. Matt and I have been finding new ways to have fun with Charlie. Charlie is plenty of fun to just sit in, but today we discovered that it is fun to use it to block our other roommate in his room at the end of the hallway. I think I'm going to sleep in it tonight. It might be scary, because when you sit in Charlie, you are about 3 feet off the ground, so the chance for injury will be high, but I think it's worth the risk.

Last night Matt and I went out and got drunk. We didn't mean to. First, we went to Granite City. I usually go on Mondays with a few people from work because they have some good specials and we are members of the Mug Club. It was a great night, so Matt and I headed over to Sadie's and to sit out on the patio and have a few more drinks. While we were there, we got into an argument with the bartender. She had recently been propositioned by a patron (we go there a lot so we know this). His proposition was that if she went on a date with him, just a date, that he would sign his new Mercedes over to her. Of course the conversation turned to sex, and the question was posed: would you sleep with somebody if they were going to sign an expensive car over to you. Here's the kicker, it can be an attractive person that you would otherwise be willing to have sex with. I said yes, Matt said yes, the bartender said no, and another female in the bar said no. I understand that there are different ideals regarding sex: no sex until marriage, only sex in loving relationships, sex for fun. The different personal views on sex would lead to a different answer, but it seems that if you fall in the sex for fun category then you wouldn't have any qualms for accepting a car for something that you were going to do anyway. She didn't go on the date with the man.

I went 2-4 against DymondBoy last night. To be totally honest, he's as good as I am if not better. We played 2 matches again today and I went 1-1. I think that we both realized that it won't be profitable to play each other because he signed up for a $50 match and wouldn't join my $30. I did figure out how to beat him, but it won't last. Like I said yesterday, he shifts gears incredibly well, but his downside is his tightness. I know that he is bluffing occasionally, but he's very tough to play. How I rolled over him in the second match was to keep the accelerator pegged to the floor. I raised every pot and reraised quite a few of his raises. I bet most of the flops. The only time that I wouldn't bet or raise was when I was confident that he was trapping. The match ended like this: blinds were 100/200 and I had the lead at 14k/6k. I raised on the button with 34dd, he reraised and I called. I took a glorious flop of Ad 5c 7d, giving me a double gutted straight draw and a flush draw. I knew right away I was going with it and hoped that he had an A. He checked, I bet pot, he moved in and I beat him in the pot. He showed me a glorious T9o with no diamonds, making me nearly 69% to win the pot. The river brought the 7d and I locked it up. Even if he has an A, I'm still favored at nearly 56%. The only way that I'm boned is if he has a higher flush draw, but I was willing to take that risk. I really don't want to play this guy anymore. I can continue to play the same way, but I think that after a few more matches he would figure out a way to fight back and I'd be a dog again. This is why I will always prefer live play to the Internet. Honestly the guy is as skilled as Matt, but when I play Matt heads-up I can get a read on him and can usually beat him. Oh well. I also played a match last night when I was drunk. It was ill-advised, but I won. My bankroll is a shade over $360 right now, and in typical me fashion, I've stalled, but I'm sure that I will also crank out a streak of wins and get to $550 by the end of the week.