Scales:

If scale beings with white note:
RH 1
LH 5

Exception: B major or B minor: LH begins on 4

If scale begins with black note:

Use fingers 2 and 3 on group of two black notes and 2, 3, and 4 on a group of three black notes.

Exceptions: c# minor (RH begins with 3), E-flat major (LH begins with 3), f# minor (RH begins with 3), B-flat major (LH begins with 3).

Arpeggios:

If first two notes of arpeggio are white:
RH 1 2 3 5
LH 5 4 2 1

If first two notes of arpeggio are white, black:
RH 1 2 3 5
LH 5 3 2 1

If first two notes of arpeggio are black, white:
RH 4 1 2 4
LH 2 1 4 2

Exceptions:

E-flat minor
RH 1 2 3 5
LH 5 4 2 1

B-flat minor
RH 2 3 1 2
LH 3 2 1 3

A couple weeks ago, I was characterized by a business colleague as being a ‘perfectionist’. Quite frankly, I’m not really sure how to take it. On one hand, that label could be construed as a compliment (e.g., having very high standards or detail-oriented). By the same token, however, it can be used as a euphemism for obsessive compulsive disorder, paranoia, being critical or opinionated about things, or someone who focuses too much on details and misses the objectives. While I’ll give that person the benefit of the doubt, my read on the situation is that a lot of it is due to my having a different ’style’ of management from that of an earlier generation (i’m in a ‘unique’ position at the company, which is why I can blog about this without fear of reprisal). But I do not consider my standards as being insanely high or higher than of those who have garnished success in their lifetimes.

I believe that every now and then we need to take an honest look at ourselves and see what we can do to make things better. I’ll be spending much of this week reflecting on 2005 in hopes of finding ways to improve myself so that I can make a difference. In some ways, 2005 was all a blur. I got sidetracked on a lot of things, but at the same time, I’ve learned a lot and have ventured into new hobbies/strategems that I believe will help me in my professional experiences.

Last night, I watched the dozen or so episodes from this past season’s The Apprentice (Trump version) (DVR-recorded). While I do like the show’s concept, I’ve been disappointed with the caliber of the contestants from the previous two seasons. However, after watching this past season’s The Apprentice , I came out quite impressed with some of the contestant’s personal attributes. Particularly with the finalists-Randal and Rebecca. Both have impressive backgrounds and education: Randal’s a Rhodes Scholar, has 5 academic degrees, MIT alum, a business owner; Rebecca’s 23, Chicago alum, financial journalist, started up a non-profit agency when she was 15, etc.

I didn’t watch the beginning of the first episode, so I don’t know how everyone found out about Randal’s exemplar academic background, but I wonder if the other contestants’ knowledge of his background helped him win points? Nonetheless, he was a very effective leader. He made very intelligent decisions, respected his teammates’ opinions and really backed up his credentials.

If there’s one thing that wasn’t highlighted on the show, it was the fact that Rebecca probably had it tougher in some respects because she had the catty blonde clique to contend with on her Capital Edge team–which could help explain why she had a 1 and 3 record as PM. Randal was more fortunate to work with a group of guys who seemed to get along for the most part (Clay was a real jerk at times, but I bet he sensed someone would kick his ass if he didn’t stop his antics; Marcus was a bit overly sensitive and could be a real slacker, but he knew when to shape up when it mattered). Still, both Randal and Rebecca pulled off some great performances in spite of the circumstances.

I definitely learned a lot from watching Randal and Rebecca lead and hope I can emulate some of their moves. I know I have potential, but I also need to plug some leaks in my own game by not committing the same gaffes that the weaker players such as Clay, Alla (sp?), Marcus, and Toral have been guilty of.

Entered a $750k Guaranteed Tournament on PartyPoker this afternoon (paid $378 for the buy-in). First place gets $150,000. I was doing ok until I tried to pull a semi-bluff (on a K high flush draw) on the flop by going all-in (heads up). The opponent immediately called. I hit my flush on the turn, but the river put out another diamond. My opponent’s holding AA. Ace of diamonds. Finished 682 place out of 1891.

While it’s disappointing to lose in that fashion, I take comfort knowing that I’m improving as a player (can make good reads) , knowing when to chase (implied odds), knowing when you’re beat.

There’s a saying in tournament poker, “In order to live (win), you must be willing to die (lose).”

Chin up.

P.S. Merry Christmas, Hanukah, Kwanza, etc, everyone.

I’ve experienced some crazy swings in the last 10 days or so in Poker. Two Sunday’s ago, while multi-tabling $400 NL, I won over $2,600 chip and last Saturday, made another $1,800 chips. Then I lost $2,500 or so the last 4 days due to overly aggressive play (at least i’m still up overall for the past 2 weeks though). About $900 chips was the result of unfortunate events (the nut full house losing to quads) and set-over-set all-in situations. But the rest was due to inexcusable play.

One trend I’ve noticed is that it seems like every time I go to a home game (every month or so, about 10 of us meet up at a friend’s house to play poker for 6-10 hours), I play like crap afterwards. It’s probably because a lot of the players I play against there have unconventional styles which you don’t really see too often in online poker. So because I adjust my play to the table (home game)…and that carries over to online. Just have to remind myself to play extra tight after a home game.

I better hit the Lotto jackpot tonight…

I’m often reminded of the old saying about how people like bacon but no one wants to see how it’s made. We ought to be realistic of what we can and can’t do in our lifetimes. We’re all heroes [to ourselves, mostly].