Clocking the deck: NLHE
 

Here's a hand i played at a live tourney at the taj.

blinds were 50-100, i had a stack around 5500. one player had me covered. I was in BB with AQ offsuit, two limpers, and the SB call. I didn't want to rush the hand, so i checked.(comments are welcome.)

the flop came rags, SB and I check, and the chips start whizzing....i fold. next hand.

in the SB, i get AQ again. Again, two limpers. now that there were no A's or Q's on the flop for the past two boards, I figured that and A or Q was "due". I know that every board is entirely random, and this thinking is similar to betting red on roulette when the last three numbers fell black. any merit to this at all, howver?

so i raise, flop falls a Q high, and I take it down uncontested.

comments?

Re: Clocking the deck: NLHE
 

From a purely probability standpoint--there is no 'merit' to this at all. The way the cards play from round to round have no relation to the way they played the round before.

Its just like flipping a coin, or in the case that you brought up (roulette). It is rare to see heads come up 10 times in a row, but it can happen (however unlikeley it is, 0.5^10= ~.09%)

Re: Clocking the deck: NLHE
 

obviously there is no merit to your "due" theory. my proof is this simple: go find ten people who believe in this theory, and then ask how many of them are long-term winners.

as to your play, both hands depend on the looseness of the game. my inclination is definitely not to raise with big offsuit cards out of position unless i thought there was a very significant chance of buying the pot. in most tournaments, play is sufficiently tight that being in position on the flop is worth a bet or more in expectation, and you are going to hae to act first on each round. your opponents are also likely to pay you off on weaker hands if you do not represent strength early.

and yes, it is definitely inconsistent to raise with this hand in SB and not BB. think about it.

Dues
 

"Now that there were no A's or Q's on the flop for the past two boards, I figured that and A or Q was "due". I know that every board is entirely random, and this thinking is similar to betting red on roulette when the last three numbers fell black. Any merit to this at all, however?"

The math says no.

Do not ignore the dealer's shuffling; see if you can detect any weaknesses.