Bad-beats a better player make?

[KDF]

I’ve heard it said that the better player you are, the more likely you will get so-called ‘bad-beats’. The reasoning is that if you have shown some apparent skill, people will tend to tighten-up their starting requirements and play better cards against you. Therefore, as you get deeper into your session you can expect players having better holdings in the pots that they stay with you then you may have seen earlier. Your aggression can get exploited if you fail to realize the changes, and thus: the ‘bad beats’. This theory effects intermediate to advanced players at your table. The weakest will still make bad calls and draw out on you with improper odds.

What are some thoughts on this subject?

[pudley4]

No.

To look at why better players will experience more "bad beats" we need to look at the definition of what a "bad beat" is. It's when a player makes a bad call and draws out on you with improper odds.

Now, will a good player put a "bad beat" on his opponent? Most likely no. Why? Because the good player will only be in the hand if he has the proper odds to continue. So if he wins a hand, it's because he had the best hand all along, or he had the proper odds to continue.

So if good players don't put out "bad beats", who is left? It's the bad players. As you stated, they will make "bad calls and draw out with improper odds", which is the very definition of "bad beat".

So if you're only in with proper odds, but your opponents are not, you're not going to put a "bad beat" on them, but they will put a "bad beat" on you.

[SoBeDude]

There is another possibility. You can put a bad beat on someone even when you're not a moron.

I did it in a 10-20 game last november. I remember it clearly. I had pocket jacks looking beautiful when the flop included a magic jack to give me the Set.

I check-raise and am "tossin chips with both hands". Funny, I'm gettin called.

Turn makes both of my opponents a flush or a straight, I don't remember which. I'm blindly still firing chips.

River card hits:

Jack

I beat two big hands with four of a kind. a one-outer at 45-1 odds.

I just didn't know I was beat. I was betting for value, and not thinking about drawing odds.

-Scott

[brad]

youre only drawing to one out if someone has a higher set.

etc.

[SoBeDude]

ack good point.

If the board paired I'd have a house. so ten outs. hmm. maybe I did have the odds to play. probably not to bet though.

-Scott

[34TheTruth34]

You can put a bad beat on someone even when you're not a moron.

LOL, I agree. Certainly a good player can draw out as well as anyone else and put a bad beat on someone. To me, a bad beat doesn't have as much to do with odds and # of outs, but with whether or not a player should be in the hand.
For example, the other day I flopped a set of eights on an J-8-5 flop. My opponent had flopped a set of fives and hit his one-outer quads to beat me on the river. Was it a bad beat? Yes. Was it, statistically speaking, very unlikely? Yes. Did it hurt? Yes. But, can I get mad at the guy? Of course not. He has every right to be in there. No player in their right mind would fold a set to just a raise on the flop. Every player, good or bad, is going to be in the hand until the end. And if the one-outer comes, it comes.

Now contrast that hand with the guy who calls 3 bets cold preflop with T4s. Then, he calls a bet and a raise on an A-J-4 rainbow flop, another big bet on the turn, and hits a 4 on the river to win with trips against AK and QQ. He may have had more outs than the guy in the first hand, but IMO this type of hand is much more of a bad beat and angers me far more than hands like the first one.

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
if you have shown some apparent skill, people will tend to tighten-up their starting requirements and play better cards against you. Therefore, as you get deeper into your session you can expect players having better holdings in the pots that they stay with you then you may have seen earlier. Your aggression can get exploited if you fail to realize the changes

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be a reason to value-bet slightly less and to bluff slightly more.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I don't like your reasoning here. While better players tend to get "bad-beated" more so than worse players, it's not for the reasons you mentioned. What is actually happening is that the best players are NOT in the pot with poor cards and poor draws when the pot odds aren't there. Therefore the good players don't GIVE bad beats very often. However, the BAD players ARE in the pot with poor draws and poor odds, giving them the opportunity to give out bad beats to the good players. I think your definition of bad beat needs to be adjusted for you to understand this concept. If people see that you are a good player, and therefore play better against you, then they are LESS likely to be giving you a bad beat, because they are playing better cards against you.

[KDF]

Thanks for the opinion. Remember, I never said I think this way. This thinking is a common misconception more related to poor adjustment, usually made by good, but not great players. I used the term 'bad-beats' loosely, indicated by the preface "so called". I personally tend to be a purist when it comes to a real 'bad-beat'. My definition: any big hand beaten by the one (sometimes two) hand that can beat you.
Ex.: You hold JT; Board on river= JT6JA (no str8flush), your opponent turns over AA- the only hand that can beat you.

Ex.2 You hold A [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] Q [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] ; board on river 9 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] T [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] J [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] 6 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] ; after the raising war your opponent turns over 8 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] 7 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img]

These are 'real' bad beats. My topic referred to "so called- bad beats"; which I have interpreted to mean 'anytime a hand you think is good gets beat'. This could be as little as top pair top kicker being beat by two small pair. They are "so called" because, they are not really bad beats, they are just plain ol' beats. But in reading some expressions on this forum and listening to the comments of many players on the losing end of these hands, they often call such losses 'bad-beats'. I think this is wrong.

The point of my post was to extract the opinion you expressed. "What is a bad-beat anyway? How can you get all of these bad beats if they fear your play and therefore play better cards?" The point is: this 'bad-beat' syndrome is failure to adjust to how the others have adjusted to you. If you have shown strong skills, or have a skillful reputation and most players fear or learn to fear you, be wary when they stay in the hand with you. I think it’s a big mistake not to notice the adjustments made by others; it can lead to a long string of so called 'bad beats'.

[Jim Easton]

You hold JT; Board on river= JT6JA (no str8flush), your opponent turns over AA- the only hand that can beat you.

AJ beats you, too.