Good Logic or Bad Beat?

I wasn't exactly sure where to post this, so I apologize in advance...

Consider the following situation:

Player A makes a preflop raise with a dominant hand.
Player B makes a lousy call with a weak hand and outdraws player A on the flop.
Player B goes all in on the turn and player A calls, having also made a hand.
Player A re-draws the best hand on the river.

Question being, did A deliver a bad beat on B (having called the all-in as a huge dog), or is it fair to say that A shouldn't have been in the hand in the first place and set himself up to lose money?

[Mr. Curious]

A true bad beat is when someone catches a miracle card on the river. Say you have AA and someone else has 72 and the flop is 77A. The turn is a brick and the river is a 7. 72 just "caught perfect" and delivered a bad beat to the AA hand. So your scenario is theoretically possible if Player A was a "huge dog".

[ QUOTE ]
or is it fair to say that A shouldn't have been in the hand in the first place and set himself up to lose money?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds to me like someone is trying to rationalize winning a big pot with a crappy hand against a hand that had it dominated...

If anything, Player B should not have been in the hand, but then if there were no player B's, we would not have fish to win money from.

I screwed that up. The question was whether A delieverd a bad beat or if B should not have been in the hand in the first place. But either way I see what you're saying.

my favorite is when you have a showdown and someone hits river. and then the other person gets all pouty and accusing the other player of being lucky, when the player who got the river card was leading when the showdown commenced (i.e. the person complaining hit a lucky card on the turn)

[AaronBrown]

It all depends on the numbers. When B went all-in, A had to figure what he might have had. As it happens, he had a good hand, but that's not always true. Plus A appears to have had a decent hand, with a chance of beating a very good hand (since that happened) and possible a good chance of beating a pretty good hand. So A's call might have been sound, or borderline or stupid. I don't think you should call it a bad beat if A was just lucky, he has to be both stupid and lucky.

Even if it was stupid, you don't say how many outs A had. If it was more than three, I don't really consider that a bad beat. Someone will draw one of 4 cards out of 44 one hand in 11. A true bad beat should be a very unlikely draw, especially if it requires both a lucky turn and lucky river card.

[Sean D]

ie:

EP makes it 100 to go preflop. I call with 77. Flop Q 7 2. He bets 150, I make it 400, he calls. Turn 2. He checks, I go all in, he calls with KK. River is a K. Did he put a bad beat on me? Maybe, maybe not. But who really cares.