theroy

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
YOUVE NEVER HAD ONE BAD BEAT NOT ONCE?!?!? are u fuckign kidding me ho wlong have u been playing

[/ QUOTE ]


Nope. I had a good beat once. I had 23o, and there were 9 all ins in front of me in a 10000 NL game. I said ehhhhhh wtf who cares it's only 10K right? Flop came 332r and the rest is history. I bought a porsche.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sheer artistry here.

[conslice]

i play tight agressive and used to win till this month. i only see 10-15 VP the hands im loosign are all bad beat so when i post them ppl just make jokes and [censored] and its not worth my time such as today 109 in BB flop is 10105 guy bets double the pot and im thinkign 55 or im outkiked so i just call 9 on turn makes me 10s full of nines and he bets pot once again i just call because now i have the nuts and im not worried about beign drawn out on and althought a heart could kill my action so could raising so i call to let him lead on river river is jack of ahearts and a flush is completed he goes all in and im pretty sure he has 55 now but nope JJ yet another 2 outer river. the last 5 10 times ive htis sets into overpairs ive gotten them all in but they outset me on turn or river, i dont liek to complain because i know ppl will just make joke sand its a waste of everyones time but when i came up with this theroy it made perfect sense to me and would be a legitimate explenation to the fact that me a winning poker player who used to win has been playing the same solid poker but loosing countless buyins to the river. i have a freind in 2000nl who makes more money then i could ever dream of and i run all these hands by him he just says bad beats they happen, but for a month straight 1000-2000 hands a day. and aside from that i am not the only one in this spot i have another freind who is in same boat my freind in 2000nl says this guy adam is just as good a poker player as he is but looses because he cant manage his bankroll. well i happen to know that this guy adam lost a 60 buyin bankroll playing solid untilted poker and now has to play low low nl holdem. anyway this post is to long im done typing

[djoyce003]

you can't lose 60 buyins on bad beats. If you are playing solid untilted poker you will win way more than you lose on the bad beats. More than likely he's playing extremely tilted poker. I played tonight...I took 2 bad beats, and lost a little on them. On the other side, I still managed to win $100 just grinding away value betting my good hands against weak opponents. The point is bad beats happen, but it's the 1000's of other hands that don't include bad beats but just standard hands where you are winning and losing money. You should be posting those, not the example you posted above because yeah, that happens, it sucks but it happens. Post some real hands and listen to the advice.

[Dommer]

When you nut peddle and play more marginal hands improperly as soon as you get a couple bad beats it just kills all your profit, and it seems like you are really unlucky. In truth all the mistakes you are making with your other hands are killing your profit thus making your bad beats really hurt. How much is 500$ in bad beats if you should be making 6k a month at that limit?

[conslice]

i shouldnt say all bad beats, i also lost 3 buyins yesterday to AK i raise to 5 preflop flop comes AAJ or KKJ and twice i lost to AJ and KJ and once to JJ in pots that were heads up or 3 way no more then 1 or 2 players. i guess those dont really count as bad beats

[RedRum]

[ QUOTE ]
*** You are ignoring this user ***

[/ QUOTE ]

Another one bites the dust

Drink More,
RedRum

[wegs the wegs]

Well if your theory is correct, which it may or may not be, but if you are confident that you are just one of the many self-proclaimed unluckiest good player out there, maybe poker isn't for you. I mean if you know the universe is out to get you, there really is no use trying to beat the universe, cuz you won't win that fight.

However my guess is that you won't stop playing poker. You're convinced that your play is right and that over time you'll get the best of it. You'll keep playing and keep taking the bad beats and keep thinking that you're just cursed. It's alright, most players are like that. Just keep this in mind, only the one who lost the pot is convinced luck exists.

[Marlow]

Back in the dark ages of 2+2 (like 4 years ago), Jim Bryer had a post on this very thing. Jim, of course, is an excellent player and thinker. In his post he maintained that the “long run” is in fact much longer than my life or yours. He said that some people, though very very few people, who have a long “long run” of even poker can have either exceptional luck or terrible luck. I’m certainly not a math person, but I’m sure that there are incredible flukes like this. I imagine that probability dictates that there HAVE to be.

But look, you aren’t one of those people. The chances of you being that guy are astronomical – 1 against. You are going through an extended bad patch, or you have some serious leaks, or both.

[TreyOfLight]

[ QUOTE ]
Back in the dark ages of 2+2 (like 4 years ago), Jim Bryer had a post on this very thing. Jim, of course, is an excellent player and thinker. In his post he maintained that the “long run” is in fact much longer than my life or yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always thought that this problem was unique to limit poker. Bad runs are possible anywhere, of course, but if you can put all the money in as a favorite, you should see that in the results in a short time.

Suppose you're getting money in the pot, on average, as a 55-45 favorite. I played around with this binomial distribution applet and the odds of losing drop off precipitously as sample size increases:

n..... chance of losing money overall after n equal 1:1 wagers as a .55 favorite
100 18.3%
200 8.9%
400 2.5%
800 0.25%
1000 0.08%

That's not even a large sample size. As n grows beyond 1000, the chance becomes small enough that no online calculator I found could express it.

Now, I'm not a statistics person or all-round supergenius like many of this forum's posters, so maybe this is total crap, but the result matches up with my intuition and with anecdotal evidence from this forum which suggests that, overwhelmingly, winning players win.

Does this make sense?

[vulturesrow]

Thanks for that post Trey, very interesting. I think that theoretically, and someone can correct me if Im wrong, the 'long run' occurs over an infinite or near infinite number of trials. That said, as your experiment shows, it is very unlikely if you are playing theoretically correct poker that you will be a consistent loser.