20 thoughts on “Episode 90: Tony “Bond18” Dunst”

    • Yes, I wasn’t sure I was going to like it, but it was a good listen. It reminded me of the Taylor Caby interview in that it revealed a take on so many things that is just completely different from my own. I do think that you two identified a bit of an inconsistency in some of what Tony was talking about freedom and professionalism, but as someone who has done good jobs I was ill suited for and good jobs I love, I take it more of a sign that in the right job, you don’t mind the sort of things that irritate you about the wrong job. Suits are comfortable, though!

      Something i was wondering about as the interview wound down – you started the interview talking about how stuck in makeup Tony was, and you ended up talking about how satisfied he was with his poker career to date. I’m not sure whether this is incongruous or not, but the intersection of backing and the tournament circuit is fascinating to me. I cannot for the life of me see how the finances make sense.

      • Interview with Taylor Caby revealed mature personality with deeper dimentions.
        Tony Dunst reveals personality dominated by ego.The ego fascinated by a superficial content and judgement.
        I like both interviews and the contrast.

  2. Great interview. I loved his honesty.

    By the way, what did the villain call with in the strategy hand (I apologize if I missed it). I was curious if it corroborated with your analysis of him having a strong range for calling pre-flop.

  3. Hi guys – this is Andrew (not Brokos) whose hand was discussed. Thanks to AB and NM for discussing this and your collective wisdom – very helpful. Couple thoughts…

    BTW Dana, villain had KJh, so he called off his stack (snap called btw) with top pair, K kicker right before bubble burst. I thought his play was poor, but hey it worked out for him.

    Regarding the comment about open-sizing. I agree I probably should less than 3x here. The only reason justifying that IMO, is that a 3x open makes a statement to the small stacks at the table “If you 3b jam I will call.” Regardless of whether or not I would call, I think that statement is being made with the larger open which I believe adds fold equity. As it turns out, one of the only stacks that could do me serious damage is the one who calls, so it’s a moot point I suppose, and as Nate mentioned I could have accomplished the same thing with a smaller open.

    Regarding the mistake to 3b shove instead of simply 3b raise post flop… this is more interesting. I guess I feel like by jamming, I’m willing to say to villain, “if you have the J – I’m okay with that” (flop was Jc 9h 4c) – that message should be very scary to him. If I raise but not jam, if he has J, he would likely re-pop or jam himself at which point my decision making gets harder I think. By jamming, I take his ability to put me in that difficult spot out of the equation. The counter to this, I suppose, would be that if I raise and not jam, and then he does jam – I can still find a fold with roughly 30bb left. The problem with this, however, is that I think I’m calling off with two overs and flush and straight draws – no? Herein may be my error though, that if he were to re-shove and I put him on AA, KK, QQ as well as AJ, then I should be able to find a fold with 30bb behind on the bubble. Hmmm, interesting spot I think.

    Thanks again for the discussion!

    Andrew

  4. And one other thing…. I failed to mention when I submitted the hand, that I had been quite active raising and stealing before bubble, so that weakens the villains calling range a bit pre-flop.

    • Dave,
      I thought there went simply mentioning Tversky as Kahneman’s research partner, who helped him do most of the research behind Thinking Fast and Slow (the book mentioned) but who is deceased and was not the book’s author. I did not hear them single out any specific Tversky book.

  6. I enjoyed it. I didn’t immediately think ego as much as confidence, but that is subjective I think.

    Great job with the questions. I didn’t think the freedom vs. professionalism stuff was controversial or contradictory, but the relationship stuff was a bit. Even if one settles down with someone who has never even heard of poker (much less plays it), as the relationship progresses, if it is to progress, it is natural for that partner to want to know more about poker, discuss it, and possibly to play it. It is silly to think Tony can avoid those problems by never beginning relationships with poker players. I wrote it off as a deep cut he never wishes to revisit, which I won’t criticize.

    Afterwards, I thought of one contradiction I wish would have been explored, and that is the way poker is portrayed on TV. For a short example, see the Coleman controversy after One-Drop. I was really impressed with how Tony, an internet kid, talked about the need for discipline and hard work. I wish all young players could hear him talk about that. Instead, all they see is the Royal Flush girls and bricks of cash on the TV table.

    • I agree with pretty much all of this.

      One nice / painful thing is, though, that even if all you see is Royal Flush girls and bricks of cash, poker itself will kick you in the butt and teach you the necessity of hard work (if you are paying attention).

    • In Asia traditions ego is known as maya or samsara – the state of being fascinated and trapped in the illusory belief.

      • I do not agree.Royal flush girls,bricks of cash are the most important part of the show.
        Dan BLizterian do much more for poker economy than 100s of Negrenau types.

  7. It seems everyone (and I am no exception) particularly loves the hand discussions – so maybe for the 100th episode you could do a run down of the most memorable (for whatever reason) hands you’ve ever played? You could do a top 10 or something, possibly with a mix of flat out good stories, and hands that you can also use to discuss a bit of strategy or that are particularly instructive. That would be pretty great, I think. You could also get all the regular guests to contribute their own “most memorable hand”.

  8. Thanks for the reminder Chris, I forgot to add my two cents on ideas for celebration.

    I love AB’s idea of nitcast stories. I also like the idea of outtakes, or listener’s favorite LOL moments listening to the show. One way to step that up is to have listeners submit their stories via audio file. Your dear sound editor may hate that but giving voice to the people is usually fun.

    Updates from past guests would be interesting.

    And since you may have lots of new listeners due to syndication, perhaps revisiting the genesis of the idea for this show, and some observations from our hosts on whether it has met/exceeded their goals and aspirations.

    Perhaps the best way to get at that last idea, is to have someone interview Andrew and Nate.

    • Im with you there Russ. A continuous stream of hand analysis would just frazzle and bore me. Better to get the Nate/AB ME Tournament adviser set. Hearing Nate and AB’s development since Podcast #1 to today would be of great interest to me. Lucky to have them in Poker world.

  9. I have a wish,idea for a celebration of the 100th episode.
    I wish you could add non verbal channel to your nitcast.
    I love Shaniac interviews with TP,Bart Hanson and his dopestories.
    I have to say that video stream with Shaniac makes interview just spectacular:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPsJuNHK53k&list=PLpkliKJ8JsTS34zlW9Iy4zz43s0A0w2xU
    Video extend possibilities to discuss PLO,Stud hands,etc.Holdem hands discussion could be enhanced with help of PokerSnowie.

  10. I was wondering what became of Bond18. His and Andrew’s savvy videos were my favorite. Enjoyed this episode.

  11. Sorry but after a while I found interviewee became a bit whiny himself and wondered what “girl” would want to spend their life with you? I’d like to hear some women respond to this self absorbed pro. After watching Bet, Raise, Fold…I come to my own conclusions, uninformed as they maybe. Nice suit though.
    Makes me appreciate Gareth and Leo a whole lot more.

Comments are closed.