Ask Me Anything (Dusty Schmidt aka Leatherass in the well)

^^^ I know you didn't mention it, I just inferred the motivation behind your question. If it's not the case, apologies and all. Wasn't trying to put words in your mouth.

Tbh I think it's only natural that these questions will be asked, regardless of whether LA is accused of unethical behaviour or whether he's the one exposing such behaviour

congratz on becoming part of Team Pokerstars Online pro.

No one other than random speculators have said he was a conspirator but I thought it was pretty obvious that LA was the whistleblower behind it if you know any of the characters involved. But it's not a bad thing. We need more people standing up for what is right in online poker and whether they're friends or enemies collusion is just downright cheating. Whether it was LA or someone else I am glad they have done what they have done to expose this. Since this is a well and I haven't asked a question yet:

Are the rumors that PS pros get 100% rakeback true? If not what are the real benefits? Congrats on that by the way!

You have a post announcing that you are now part of Team PokerStars Online and that you will be playing there exclusively.

I found this bit of information really interesting because you have gone on record saying you like to table select between sites as well as condemned the shortstacker issue which now only exists on PokerStars. I know you are aware of the shortstacker plague at Stars ... why would you endorse and exclusively join as a spokesperson a site that allows activity that you have publicly condemned? To me, it looks like you are either privvy to some information regarding the upcoming announcement in mid-April about the issue from the site OR you sold out in order to get some free live wsop buy-ins and endorsement $$ from the site.

On a scale of 1 to 11, how psyched are you to be a PokerStars Pro?

bazerk said:

Wow, that's a very busy schedule (~25 events?)...as always, I wish you well; if you go deep in an event that overlaps with another do you have a plan to optimize 'running back & forth' between the potentially 2-3-4 games (or will it be mad dashes as Chris Ferguson did a few yrs back)? I'm visualizing a scooter would be more effective than the mad dashing though...

Click to expand...

#416

I will definitely take a pass if anything over laps haha.

dg1267 said:

We have them at Full Tilt, Carbon, Ultimate Bet, and a few others. But I read somewhere that you only play PS and FT and didn't want to download other clients, so FT would be fine with me.

Click to expand...

I'm strictly a Poker Stars player these days effective today.

sindri_93 said:

First off congrats on becoming a PS pro.
Does that mean you will be forced to play only on PS?

Click to expand...

#418

Well, I wouldn't say it was forced (like it's a bad thing), but yes I will only be playing at Poker Stars.

F Paulsson said:

Time for some strategy!

Villain is new to me, but seems like the aggressive sort of reg, possibly on the loose side. The flop peel depends on my backdoor draws, my overcard and the fact that on such a dry board I'll often be able to just bet the turn when checked to and win uncontested.

Once he bets the turn, I read his range to be polarized between KQ and better, and stuff trying to bluff a scare card. I find it rare for people to bet with AJ in a spot like this, so raising seems to accomplish little that I can't accomplish by just bluffing the river when checked to (because I think 3-barrel bluffs with air on dry boards are rare). Still, I'm interested in thoughts on the hand.

IPoker Network $200.00 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 595917
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

CO: $198.00
Hero (BTN): $200.00
SB: $264.00
BB: $295.50
UTG: $209.00
MP: $200.00

Pre Flop: ($3.00) Hero is BTN with Q

T

2 folds, CO raises to $6, Hero calls $6, 2 folds

Flop: ($15.00) 5

J

2

(2 players)
CO bets $10.00, Hero calls $10

Turn: ($35.00) K

(2 players)
CO bets $24.00, Hero calls $24

Click to expand...

I would raise it and be willing to get all of the money in. You just picked up a massive draw and you have huge fold equity with a turn raise because your opponent will now have to risk his stack and will fold even strong hands in those spots.

WVHillbilly said:

What are your thoughts on HS players who migrate from account to account to gain an advantage by looking like unknowns to their opponents?

Do you think all poker sites should allow players to change their screen name?

Click to expand...

I think people who do that at high stakes are flat out cheating the community, without question. When a low stakes player does it to maybe get his account set up with rake back you can hardly blame them. I would probably do the same and in the end, the poker room is better off because most people can't afford to give up rake back.

At high stakes, it is absolutely cheating. We push such small edges at high stakes poker you can't afford to:

A. have an opponent know everything about you and nothing about them.

B. You thinking because it is a random new account that you figure the person is possibly a recreational player and play them way differently than you would play a professional.

I haven't really thought much about that. It could be a good debate I am sure.

The Dark Side said:

congratz on becoming part of Team Pokerstars Online pro.

Click to expand...

#429

Thanks! I am very excited.

bubonicplay said:

No one other than random speculators have said he was a conspirator but I thought it was pretty obvious that LA was the whistleblower behind it if you know any of the characters involved. But it's not a bad thing. We need more people standing up for what is right in online poker and whether they're friends or enemies collusion is just downright cheating. Whether it was LA or someone else I am glad they have done what they have done to expose this. Since this is a well and I haven't asked a question yet:

Are the rumors that PS pros get 100% rakeback true? If not what are the real benefits? Congrats on that by the way!

Click to expand...

#430

Unfortunately I can't answer questions related to my contractual relationship to Poker Stars. They treat us very well is what I am sure I can say.

GiantBuddha said:

On a scale of 1 to 11, how psyched are you to be a PokerStars Pro?

Click to expand...

#432

I would say 111

Did you estimate the opportunity cost that it represents for you to give up the ability to table select across sites? If so, how did you do it? What kind of BB/100 difference does this represent?

No offense Ice, but wouldn't you have taken the deal? I'm sure he doesn't like SS'ers but I'm sure he's okay with it on the deal he's given.

What is a good win-rate at stakes <100NL? If you saw a player with a winrate of, say 5BB/100 over 50k hands would you consider them a solid player, or do you think they have some leaks they need to fix?

dg1267 said:

No offense Ice, but wouldn't you have taken the deal? I'm sure he doesn't like SS'ers but I'm sure he's okay with it on the deal he's given.

Click to expand...

Look first and foremost I have to say I am a fan of Dusty Schmidt.

Second, I felt my point was very fair and I was disappointed but not surprised he skipped it over. Frankly, NO I wouldn't have taken the deal UNLESS they told me they are making changes to the site in April that SSing will be abolished. But I try to be a person of principle.

We've all read many posts and blog entries from Dusty explaining how he feels that SSing is the #1 most dangerous thing to the health of the game in online poker.... then he turns around and joins the one site that allows it in a professional capacity?

A simple "I can't comment on the changes" or "good point" or even "You know I did take the money, I just felt it was the best move for my poker career at this point" would have been fine. I could respect that.

Skipping it over? Bush league.

Well, I would still give him some time to ask questions on what he can and can't talk about before calling him "Bush league". But I understand your point.

Not to derail LA's well discussion here, but I'd just chime in and say that I'm a person of principal as well, and I hate SSers as much as the next guy. But in the real world you really need to pick your battles -- would you take food out of your family's mouth over such a relatively minor principal? I'm not talking a big principal, like cheating or stealing or other illegal/immoral/unethical situations, but basically what amounts to a personal bias against a certain practice (SSing, in this case).

While SSing is annoying to most of us, it's still a legal and arguably legit strategy that, thus far, is tolerated by the sites. I suspect that FT (and potentially PS) addressed the SS situation as they've done simply due to the outcry from a lot of reg/deep players. They didn't actually ban SSers, they just gave 'em their own sandbox to play in, so it's not like any of the sites are making a statement that SSers are unwelcome. They just don't want their deeper stacked regs (and rake generators) to leave over it, nor do they want to lose SSer revenue either, so they made some arrangements to try and appease everyone.

My point being, despite LA's hate for SSers, I don't see how taking a career boosting, lucrative position with Stars means that he's a "sell out." Now if he were going to work for Absolute Poker/Ultimatebet, that might be a different story, but here I think it's just not an issue.

Just my opinion, obviously, and I respect everyone elses.

dmorris68 said:

My point being, despite LA's hate for SSers, I don't see how taking a career boosting, lucrative position with Stars means that he's a "sell out." Now if he were going to work for Absolute Poker/Ultimatebet, that might be a different story, but here I think it's just not an issue.

Just my opinion, obviously, and I respect everyone elses.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what I wanted to say - so thanks for saving me some typing.

No matter the situation - whether it is a relationship, your job, a business deal - whatever it is - each individual person decides their own deal breakers. And even tho Dusty hates ss'ers - it has not been a deal breaker for him with Pokerstars. He has continued to play there and support them as his favorite site. So he is not selling out by accepting a business arrangement with them that is all +ev for him and his family.

Also Sean (icemonkey) - I think it is highly likely your post was not skipped over because he was snubbing it. He most likely either missed it - or had to go and had time for a quick no brainer response to Paul but did not have time to either respond to you yet or read your post and decide how to respond to it.

So patience ..and ouch on the Bush league comment lol. (love you anyway!)

dakota-xx said:

This is exactly what I wanted to say - so thanks for saving me some typing.

No matter the situation - whether it is a relationship, your job, a business deal - whatever it is - each individual person decides their own deal breakers. And even tho Dusty hates ss'ers - it has not been a deal breaker for him with Pokerstars. He has continued to play there and support them as his favorite site. So he is not selling out by accepting a business arrangement with them that is all +ev for him and his family.

Also Sean (icemonkey) - I think it is highly likely your post was not skipped over because he was snubbing it. He most likely either missed it - or had to go and had time for a quick no brainer response to Paul but did not have time to either respond to you yet or read your post and decide how to respond to it.

So patience ..and ouch on the Bush league comment lol. (love you anyway!)

Click to expand...

I agree. I don't think I've seen Dusty skip a single legit question yet ITT, even if he just says "no comment", so I doubt he would start now.

Patience young IceMonkey.

Really appreciate the answer to my question on players switching accounts. I think it's set to be a pretty hot button issue for a while now, so hearing your thoughts is really appreciated.

icemonkey9 said:

Look first and foremost I have to say I am a fan of Dusty Schmidt.

Second, I felt my point was very fair and I was disappointed but not surprised he skipped it over. Frankly, NO I wouldn't have taken the deal UNLESS they told me they are making changes to the site in April that SSing will be abolished. But I try to be a person of principle.

We've all read many posts and blog entries from Dusty explaining how he feels that SSing is the #1 most dangerous thing to the health of the game in online poker.... then he turns around and joins the one site that allows it in a professional capacity?

A simple "I can't comment on the changes" or "good point" or even "You know I did take the money, I just felt it was the best move for my poker career at this point" would have been fine. I could respect that.

Skipping it over? Bush league.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a little jealousy and envy got the best of you. And I lol at the fact that you would deny PS if they offered you a pro sponsorship. That's just laughable and -EV at all levels.

To dmorris & dakota - how can LA *literally* write "the number one problem with online poker is shortstacking" and then say it must be a "relatively minor principle" to him??? Are you kidding me? And to write something like "taking food out of his family's mouth" is the biggest exaggeration of the year, thank you for making me lol at that.

Sounds like a little jealousy and envy got the best of you. And I lol at the fact that you would deny PS if they offered you a pro sponsorship. That's just laughable and -EV at all levels.

Click to expand...

That's about the dumbest comment I've read on CC in a while, so congrats for winning that award. There's no jealousy at all, I think I have an absolutely 100% legit point here. I'll stay patient and trust Dakota & WV's point that he probably skipped it because I trust and respect those members. I mean really KK, you think I am "just jealous" OR is the truth that I respect Dusty and am asking him to comment on a valid issue? Your attack on me doesn't invalidate my argument one single bit pal.

Just because it is not a deal breaker does not mean it is a relatively minor principle.

But - okay enough de-rail by all of us.