it is argued by probabilists, that warren buffett is a six sigma event, that he is a statistical anomaly. my experience with poker thus far has me nodding my head in accord. maybe this game is about some people being lucky and some people not being lucky. in the past two days, my bank roll lost ~25%, gained 50%, and stands now at a losing 30%. in another post i asked about the play of pocket tens. today alone i have lost 4 times with TT, creating a run of astronomically miniscule and improbable results with this high grade hand. i have tried limping, raising, reraising and whining. i have tied the play to the kinds of players i am facing, rocks to nofoldem holdem. i have done just about all i can think to do..meanwhile, the litany persists, something like flipping heads 80 times in a row. it's argued possible, but it's stunning to say the least. so maybe it's luck. maybe youre lucky and i am not.

certainly not incontrovertible.

i see claims made of 15BB made here. of winning what? 24 times as many weeks as losing? i then look at my record. i have had 10 bad beats this morning. a bad beat being, to my way of understanding it, beaten by 9x as the overcard when you hold the 8s, betting your A from the CO with three limps to you in a loose game; or being rivered by a raiser UTG who reveals a showdown holding of Q9o to make his straight, taking your KKK by storm. and that's just this morning. i appreciate the post which argues that one's EV is more important a criterion by which to judge these things. however, what with my limited experience, some 15k hands, utilizing that approach, i must say, i can EXPECT to win a lot less in the showdowns with my major holdings than i win. however, this is anecdotal--though when the great criterion, BB/hr, is evoked, the amount of money won by these premium hands--as a conglomerate--is so negligible as to question any conclusions to be drawn about them without 10's upon 10's of thousands of instances to draw on for support.

it is insinuated that i lack schooling, and should read some books. i have read both of miller's books (SSH and the other one for beginners),supersystem, killer poker, the illustrated guide to holdem, the complete book of texas hold-em, the psychology of poker, the play of the handsII, as well as a couple of howididitinreallife biographies; i am currently reading weighing the odds in poker, middle limit holdem poker, HE for advanced players, and poker essays III. i also practiced the game on wilson's software for two months before taking to the field. i like to think i know how to prepare for a game of this nature. i am one of the few horseplayers who has made money at that game. it's a very hard game, requiring discipline, assiduity, and hard work.

i have a doctorate in classical literature from stanford university, am a 2300 FIDE chess master, and have, as stated in my first post, lived by the sum of my speculative wits in gambling venues. i know what expectation is, i know what probability is, and i like to think i know when something is anecdotal, and when it is validifiable.

now, by all the information i have encountered, a .05 expectation is deemed superlative, with some outstanding players having upwards of .08 expectation. these figures are produced in NL games, which implies that limit ring games are far less lucrative, and more subject to "chance". given that this is the case, you can understand my uncertainty about the above testaments. i would like to see some math about these testaments, actually, but in order to verify a number, to establish it with some measure of confidence, you need things like win percentage, average mutual/pot per investment, and things like that. maybe you know of another means of establishing confidence, but that's the data i needed to do it in sports handicapping.

please be aware that i am NOT denying your experience. but your experience and mine widely differ, and the sum of the two leaves far greater room for doubt in the curious mind as to the truth of it all. maybe it is all about LUCK, really, maybe it is. and if it is, then all the talk IS anecdotal, and hardly worth the evidence it purports to offer.

(PS. two of the hands i lost were at the 1/2 level, which may account for some of the discrepancy. the 100 dollars had been garnered in the .5/1 limits.)