Who here believes in luck? [rant - sorry]

I don't know if i'm going to get flamed for this but after playing this game for four months...two of which after finding this site out...reading all the stratagies for tourny and ring games...reading people's hand histories and the advice given...using that advice to changing my game around...

i have come to the conclusion that...no matter what i do i can not win at this game because my luck is horrible.

i seem to be the only player here constantly loosing money and i've showed probably hundreds of hand histories to my friends (friends who have made hundreds to thousands of dollars on PP) asking if i've done anything wrong...and the reply is always..."wow why was he in the hand...you got owned"...

i know there are some hands that i played wrong and resulted in my failure...but the majority of the hands i lose i swear im' playing them right...i have the correct read...but they river me...i know it's a part of the game and i know that it happens to everyone...but the amount of times it happens to me is what i'm concerned with...

i make 50 dollars...then i have the perfect read...the perfect trap and i end up losing the 50 i made and the 50 i sat down with...i do make money...but i lose it faster than i gain due to things like this...

this is a rant and i'm sorry...but does everyone here believe that if you play good and play decent you can come back from these bad beats?...the sheer amount of them makes me cry and all my friends agree that i just don't have the luck required to play this game at all...

plus...NL25 and NL50 are all lotto games to me now...i even have one of my friends watch me play and help me out...he's amazed at the crap i run into...

sorry for this..just wondering if anyone thinks i'm a retard for thinking this way...and if nobody believes in such bad luck

post some hand histories!

On an infinite timeline there will come along not one but an infinite amount of poker player who get nothing but pocket aces throughout their whole career! No results are impossible to attribute to luck unless we have some kind of hand histories to prove that luck is not the only thing to blame!

If you keep on thinking like this you'll keep on losing. I battle it too sometimes. It can be really tough.

Having someone piss on you for the fifth time in one night can really make you mad, but you have to be confident that in the end good plays and good players will win out, and they WILL. That's what I tell myself whenever I get a bad beat. It's not about what happened this hand, it's about what will happen over the thousands of times that situation comes up during a hand and I know that I will win out over time because I'm a better player who made a better play who had the best of it. Winning is great, losing sucks, but the key is to distance yourself from the end result and focus on the way you played the hand, what you did well, what you could have done better, and focus on that. Because over time, all that matters is you make good plays and go into either/or situations with the best of it. If you manage that, you will win over time. That is a FACT.

Of course none of this applies if you actually suck at poker.

really the biggest "luck" parts of hold'em are the turn and river. If you have a solid preflop, and flop play, you'll do fine.

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

On an infinite timeline there will come along not one but an infinite amount of poker player who get nothing but pocket aces throughout their whole career! No results are impossible to attribute to luck unless we have some kind of hand histories to prove that luck is not the only thing to blame!

I really don't think this statement is truthful. Obviously in reality it's hogwash, but I'm thinking mathematically. I might be totally wrong, but....

lim(n->oo) 1/221^n = 0

Does that not say that given infinite time (hands), no one will get pocket aces forever?

off topic! Noticing your avatar...

What happens if v^2 > c^2 were possible? We get imaginary time! Did you know that Stephen Hawkins created a mathematical model which eliminates the need of a singularity during the creation of universe by using imaginary time?

Just a random thought...

Originally Posted by evman150

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

On an infinite timeline there will come along not one but an infinite amount of poker player who get nothing but pocket aces throughout their whole career! No results are impossible to attribute to luck unless we have some kind of hand histories to prove that luck is not the only thing to blame!

I really don't think this statement is truthful. Obviously in reality it's hogwash, but I'm thinking mathematically. I might be totally wrong, but....

lim(n->oo) 1/221^n = 0

Does that not say that given infinite time (hands), no one will get pocket aces forever?

Yes, you are wrong! We don't live forever, so it would only need to apply for the number of hands someone would play throughout their career!

Anything that is not entirely impossible repeats itself infinitely many times in infinity. This has some very weird consequences which defy logic. For example if we assume that space and matter are infinite, then exact copies of yourself, planet earth and even this galaxy should repeat itself infinitely many times!

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

off topic!

What happens if v^2 > c^2 were possible? We get imaginary time! Did you know that Stephen Hawkins created a mathematical model which eliminates the need of a singularity during the creation of universe by using imaginary time?

Yes I had heard of Stephen Hawking's ideas on that topic. Very interesting stuff to say the least.

If v^2 > c^2 were possible, then the denominator becomes a complex number and the result would be a number in the imaginary plane. But who is to say the Lorentz Transformation Equation either a) holds for numbers not in the domain of reals or b) holds for any numbers period?

Of course I believe b) not to be an issue, but a) definitely is not resolved.

I just don't see how v could be bigger than c. That is of course unless the Lorentz Transformation is brutally wrong. But if you look at the LTE and take the limit of it as v->c....

lim(v->c) 1/1-v^2/c^2 = 0 (really it's indeterminite) therefore the limit of the whole LTE is 0 as v goes to c. What does this mean? The amazing implication is that to an observer in frame S ("still" ref frame), something travelling at c would appear to take no time to get anywhere, or be anywhere, but from someone going at c in ref frame S', infinite time would pass in S.

All very interesting stuff, and definitely something I plan to do a lot of research on as I work towards graduate studies in Astronomy/Physics. 2nd year starts in two weeks!

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

Originally Posted by evman150

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

On an infinite timeline there will come along not one but an infinite amount of poker player who get nothing but pocket aces throughout their whole career! No results are impossible to attribute to luck unless we have some kind of hand histories to prove that luck is not the only thing to blame!

I really don't think this statement is truthful. Obviously in reality it's hogwash, but I'm thinking mathematically. I might be totally wrong, but....

lim(n->oo) 1/221^n = 0

Does that not say that given infinite time (hands), no one will get pocket aces forever?

Yes, you are wrong! We don't live forever, so it would only need to apply for the number of hands someone would play throughout their career!

Anything that is not entirely impossible repeats itself infinitely many times in infinity. This has some very weird consequences which defy logic. For example if we assume that space and matter are infinite, then exact copies of yourself, planet earth and even this galaxy should repeat itself infinitely many times!

The thing is, nothing is infinite. Infinity is just a mathematical concept and has no application in the real world.

It's like quantum mechanics, which says if you tap your finger on your desk an infinite number of times eventually your finger will go through the desk. Yes that is true, but it is not an application of the truth, it is the application of a concept which is simply the means to finding the truth. But infinity itself is not the truth, merely a means to an end. Just a mathematical concept which creates beauty from chaos.

I really need some sleep. I have exams in three days.

Originally Posted by evman150

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

Originally Posted by evman150

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

On an infinite timeline there will come along not one but an infinite amount of poker player who get nothing but pocket aces throughout their whole career! No results are impossible to attribute to luck unless we have some kind of hand histories to prove that luck is not the only thing to blame!

I really don't think this statement is truthful. Obviously in reality it's hogwash, but I'm thinking mathematically. I might be totally wrong, but....

lim(n->oo) 1/221^n = 0

Does that not say that given infinite time (hands), no one will get pocket aces forever?

Yes, you are wrong! We don't live forever, so it would only need to apply for the number of hands someone would play throughout their career!

Anything that is not entirely impossible repeats itself infinitely many times in infinity. This has some very weird consequences which defy logic. For example if we assume that space and matter are infinite, then exact copies of yourself, planet earth and even this galaxy should repeat itself infinitely many times!

The thing is, nothing is infinite. Infinity is just a mathematical concept and has no application in the real world.

It's like quantum mechanics, which says if you tap your finger on your desk an infinite number of times eventually your finger will go through the desk. Yes that is true, but it is not an application of the truth, it is the application of a concept which is simply the means to finding the truth. But infinity itself is not the truth, merely a means to an end. Just a mathematical concept which creates beauty from chaos.

I really need some sleep. I have exams in three days.

Could you give me an upper limit for the mass of the universe (including the non observable) and the reasoning behind setting that upper bound! As far as I know this is not a settled issue even though there are certain models which do estimate it.

Anyhow about infinities...

There are infinite (cardinal) numbers of various "sizes."

For example the infinite number of primes is indeed the same as the infinite number of integers. Both the set of primes and the set of integers are countable, which is the smallest infinity of them all.

There is an arithmetic also for transfinite numbers. For example, if A is the number of primes, then

A+A = A

k*A = A for every positive number k

A*A = A

A^p = A for every positive power p

These first four "rules" are not as strange as they look. Find another usual (everyday) number that satisfies those rules! (There is only one.) Then you also have

2^A = 10^A = A^A > A,

but that's another story...

I could be completely wrong, but it sounds like you may be slow-playing too much just from a quick glance at your first post. I made this mistake a lot when I first started (and still make it occasionally, but now I recognize what I've done wrong when it happens), but eventually learned that unless you flop a full house (usually), quads, or a straight flush, the potential risks of slow-playing often outweigh the potential rewards. When you make hands, quickly start to extract value and don't invite any risk of being outdrawn.

You guys... i'm a month off graduating my masters in phyiscs, wish i still had this enthusiasm for numbers, all i can do now is particle and nuclear physics, everything else seems too mathematical to bother with.

In response to the original post, stick at it, if you have been on a cold run (and these can last up to 1000 hands in my experience) and you are making good plays you'll start winning and you'll forget you were ever in this place.

And i strongly reccomend posting some hand histories, you'll be surprised what others think of decisions which seem absolutely correct in your mind.

one more thing...

If you get 'lucky' you only need to tap your finger once against the desk for it to quantum tunnel right through it. Just because its improbable does not mean its 'not an application of the truth' or not real.

From Heisenbergs equations we see that the chances of it happening are extremely small as the probability decreases exponentially with both barrier thickness and the mass of the quantum tunneling object. Thus this phenomena is only observed in scales of ~10^-28kg --~10^-12m.

I'm going through the same thing as well. It seems that whenever I catch cards, I get 0 callers. And when I get callers, they river me. I used to slowplay my hands but even if I become aggressive, I get called and get rivered.

I think if you just ignore the whole "luck" scenario, you should do fine. I'm assuming that you probably go on tilt after one of those hands where you get rivered, right? I think that's a bad idea to go on tilt and blame everything on luck.

Just like me, have hope that someday your losing streak will end, and you will eventually succeed.

You said, you lose money faster than you make any. Then, why don't you try this? Stop right after you make some money?

If you can get rid of temptation to make even more money, then you won't end up losing more than you made, correct?

Put your luck to the Test !!

try playing really tight...(only play 3 top categories on the handcharts on this site)

play for scrap cash (like micro limits longhand)...

don't accept more loss then say 5€ per played session...

put a time limit on your play, play for exactly 1h or something, and always end up leaving the table under the gun...

don't post blinds ahead of your turn when entering a table...

If you do this and make a lot of money you are lucky, and if you lose with this in the long run, you really need to improve your game and play as tight as I said...

KK beats AA one time in five or so. Not more, not less.

Deal with it, or move on to chess if you really think you're unlucky. If you're getting your money in with the best of it, eventually you will make money.

try some limit holdem, bad beats only cost a few bucks instead of your whole stack.

bad beats are way more prevalent in limit holdem where it is almost impossible to protect your hand.

to whoever suggested that anything is possible in an infinite universe, that is a load of bull. just because something is "infinite" (meaning endless) does not mean that it includes everything. for example the range of even numbers is "infinite" but it will never include any odd numbers no matter how far you go. the universe may or may not be infinite, but if it is, that has nothing to do with whether there is a clone of me in some parallel universe doing almost exactly what i'm doing right now.

ChezJ

Originally Posted by ChezJ

to whoever suggested that anything is possible in an infinite universe, that is a load of bull. just because something is "infinite" (meaning endless) does not mean that it includes everything. for example the range of even numbers is "infinite" but it will never include any odd numbers no matter how far you go. the universe may or may not be infinite, but if it is, that has nothing to do with whether there is a clone of me in some parallel universe doing almost exactly what i'm doing right now.

ChezJ

The most eloquent way I ever heard this put forth was in an explanation of a theoritical encryption mechanism based on quantum theory. It was the point in the explanation where the author had to convey that a set could have an infinte number of members yet still not include all possible members. The quote was:

There are an infinte number of real numbers between 1 and 2; but none of them are the number 6.

Originally Posted by Pyroxene

There are an infinte number of real numbers between 1 and 2; but none of them are the number 6.

I love this precise type of shit -- why did I major in psychology instead of math or phsyics!?

Originally Posted by ChezJ

to whoever suggested that anything is possible in an infinite universe, that is a load of bull. just because something is "infinite" (meaning endless) does not mean that it includes everything. for example the range of even numbers is "infinite" but it will never include any odd numbers no matter how far you go. the universe may or may not be infinite, but if it is, that has nothing to do with whether there is a clone of me in some parallel universe doing almost exactly what i'm doing right now.

ChezJ

Hey dickhead! Before making such patronizing comments, at least get a fucking clue about the concepts involved..

I didn't say that anything is possible in an infinite universe, instead that anything with a finite probability would repeat itself infinitely. A big differense!

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...A5809EC5880000

the full article:

http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/multiverse.pdf

Originally Posted by Element187

try some limit holdem, bad beats only cost a few bucks instead of your whole stack.

Do not switch to limit hold em for these reasons. Only switch to it if you want to. Playing good poker is playing good poker whether its limit or no-limit - dont switch because youre scared to get sucked out.

Besides, if you think you have bad beats too often in NL dont even fool yourself thinking youre not gonna have ten times as many bad beats playing limit.

Just to make you feel better, I have had two $1000 swings this year (it's only April.

Set over set. Overpair to underpair. FH v. FH. Flopped nut flush busted repeatedly. It's part of the game.

if you guys havent watched it yet, you must check out waking life http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...97502?v=glance

Hoaznod you havn't been playing for long, it takes experience to gain knowledge and better your game, keep playing and studying and your bankroll will eventually be on the rise.

Belive me in a years time you'll look back at how you play now and realise you know so much more and have such a better game.

Also, be sure to keep to bankroll managment.

{This post has been removed}

i'll try and post some hand histories but i've uninstalled PP multiple times because i got so angry and i think it takes the hand histories away...and i mostly played on FTP for my 4 months of playing and they suck and don't keep hand histories...but i'll find some and post them...

this one isn't really that bad but it's the first one i found...this dude was lucky as hell and had a huge stack at the table to prove it...

#Game No : 1912466867
***** Hand History for Game 1912466867 *****
$50 NL Hold'em - Monday, April 18, 02:31:58 EDT 2005
Table Table 37380 (Real Money)
Seat 6 is the button
Total number of players : 8
Seat 4: wabtec ( $258.86 )
Seat 5: bestbakoboy ( $51.42 )
Seat 7: jserio52 ( $159.32 )
Seat 9: Kurtovski ( $47.25 )
Seat 10: Pmack963 ( $25.93 )
Seat 8: p2x0s13 ( $28.51 )
Seat 3: beweird ( $65.8 )
Seat 6: badmfjoea ( $16.03 )
jserio52 posts small blind [$0.25].
p2x0s13 posts big blind [$0.5].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to p2x0s13 [ Kh Qd ]
Kurtovski folds.
Pmack963 calls [$0.5].
beweird calls [$0.5].
wabtec calls [$0.5].
bestbakoboy folds.
badmfjoea folds.
jserio52 folds.
p2x0s13 raises [$1.5].
Pmack963 folds.
beweird folds.
wabtec calls [$1.5].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 9c, Jd, Qc ]
p2x0s13 bets [$4].
wabtec calls [$4].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 2c ]
p2x0s13 checks.
wabtec bets [$5].
p2x0s13 is all-In [$22.51]
wabtec calls [$17.51].
** Dealing River ** [ Ac ]
wabtec shows [ Ts, Jc ] a flush, ace high.
p2x0s13 doesn't show [ Kh, Qd ] a pair of queens.
wabtec wins $55.37 from the main pot with a flush, ace high.

granted 22.50 isn't much to his 280 dollar stack...and i know he had the open ended straight draw which is suspected...did he not believe i had the flush because of my obvious check raise ploy? the pot wasnt very big so he wasn't committed...and if i already had a flush anything he would draw was pointless...and if i had top pair but with a higher club his flush draw would of been pointless...or i could of already had the straight since i bet pot after flop...meh i dunno...

i just think he had too much money and left it to luck and got lucky...did i do anything wrong?

i played for like two hours and this was my best hand so maybe i played a little over my head...

#Game No : 1902601936
***** Hand History for Game 1902601936 *****
$50 NL Hold'em - Saturday, April 16, 04:29:05 EDT 2005
Table Table 36791 (Real Money)
Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 4: tizoc3154 ( $49.5 )
Seat 7: Magnificence ( $59.04 )
Seat 8: StevieCB ( $67.3 )
Seat 9: Gflax ( $59.4 )
Seat 5: p2x0s13 ( $26.05 )
Seat 2: Adambombtnt ( $45.9 )
Seat 1: JumpyJJ ( $105.35 )
Seat 10: Poseiden21 ( $50.15 )
Seat 6: PolicemanRay ( $15.85 )
Poseiden21 posts small blind [$0.25].
JumpyJJ posts big blind [$0.5].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to p2x0s13 [ Td 9d ]
Adambombtnt calls [$0.5].
tizoc3154 folds.
p2x0s13 raises [$1].
PolicemanRay calls [$1].
Magnificence folds.
StevieCB folds.
Gflax folds.
Poseiden21 calls [$0.75].
JumpyJJ calls [$0.5].
Adambombtnt calls [$0.5].
** Dealing Flop ** [ Qc, 8s, Js ]
Poseiden21 checks.
JumpyJJ bets [$2].
Adambombtnt folds.
p2x0s13 raises [$4].
PolicemanRay calls [$4].
Poseiden21 folds.
JumpyJJ calls [$2].
** Dealing Turn ** [ Kc ]
JumpyJJ bets [$5].
p2x0s13 raises [$10].
PolicemanRay is all-In [$10.85]
JumpyJJ raises [$10.85].
p2x0s13 is all-In [$11.05]
Fatcobra6969 has joined the table.
JumpyJJ calls [$5.2].
** Dealing River ** [ Ts ]
JumpyJJ shows [ Th, Ah ] a straight, ten to ace.
p2x0s13 doesn't show [ Td, 9d ] a straight, nine to king.
PolicemanRay shows [ 7s, 5s ] a flush, jack high.
JumpyJJ wins $19.85 from side pot #1 with a straight, ten to ace.
PolicemanRay wins $47.1 from the main pot with a flush, jack high.

i thought he might of hit the straight on the turn...but this was a dude who was playing everything...and knew police was on a flush draw so that's why i raised after turn but i got lucked out too...

any bad plays? raise more after flop? although i think both of them would of called anyways...

i knew what he had...exactly...but i really hoped he was just trying to scare me...the dude was a flaming calling and drawing station...here is one of the first hands where i just sat down and i didn't know what kind of player he was...he's WillyHo9

#Game No : 1906472984
***** Hand History for Game 1906472984 *****
$50 NL Hold'em - Saturday, April 16, 23:43:25 EDT 2005
Table Table 36854 (Real Money)
Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 3: mmksjp1013 ( $38.23 )
Seat 4: WillyHo9 ( $68.59 )
Seat 5: smarte02 ( $43.07 )
Seat 8: salmon75 ( $40.55 )
Seat 9: skoosh ( $44.25 )
Seat 10: flatrate ( $122.94 )
Seat 7: p2x0s13 ( $41.8 )
Seat 2: Lanoix ( $44.62 )
Seat 1: bennyben04 ( $23.33 )
Seat 6: bizkit112 ( $52.55 )
WillyHo9 posts small blind [$0.25].
smarte02 posts big blind [$0.5].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to p2x0s13 [ Ad Td ]
bizkit112 raises [$1].
p2x0s13 calls [$1].
salmon75 folds.
skoosh folds.
flatrate folds.
bennyben04 calls [$1].
Lanoix folds.
mmksjp1013 folds.
WillyHo9 calls [$0.75].
smarte02 calls [$0.5].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 6s, As, 8c ]
WillyHo9 checks.
smarte02 checks.
bizkit112 checks.
p2x0s13 bets [$3].
bennyben04 folds.
WillyHo9 calls [$3].
smarte02 calls [$3].
bizkit112 folds.
** Dealing Turn ** [ Kc ]
WillyHo9 checks.
smarte02 checks.
p2x0s13 checks.
** Dealing River ** [ 3c ]
WillyHo9 bets [$6].
smarte02 calls [$6].
p2x0s13 folds.
WillyHo9 shows [ 9c, 7d ] high card ace.
smarte02 shows [ Ks, Qs ] a pair of kings.
smarte02 wins $24.7 from the main pot with a pair of kings.
Game #1906479797 starts.

this was just one of the hands where he just called and called to fish...so i thought..maybe he was still on a flush draw...but i even called out what he had...

#Game No : 1906507924
***** Hand History for Game 1906507924 *****
$50 NL Hold'em - Saturday, April 16, 23:50:20 EDT 2005
Table Table 36854 (Real Money)
Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 3: mmksjp1013 ( $35.73 )
Seat 4: WillyHo9 ( $65.09 )
Seat 5: smarte02 ( $57.12 )
Seat 8: salmon75 ( $39.3 )
Seat 9: skoosh ( $42.75 )
Seat 10: flatrate ( $121.94 )
Seat 7: p2x0s13 ( $36.55 )
Seat 2: Lanoix ( $44.12 )
Seat 1: bennyben04 ( $30.98 )
Seat 6: bizkit112 ( $43.8 )
flatrate posts small blind [$0.25].
bennyben04 posts big blind [$0.5].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to p2x0s13 [ Ts As ]
Lanoix raises [$1].
mmksjp1013 folds.
WillyHo9 calls [$1].
smarte02 folds.
bizkit112 folds.
p2x0s13 calls [$1].
salmon75 folds.
skoosh folds.
flatrate folds.
bennyben04 calls [$0.5].
** Dealing Flop ** [ Th, 5c, Ad ]
bennyben04 checks.
Lanoix checks.
WillyHo9 checks.
p2x0s13 bets [$2.5].
bennyben04 calls [$2.5].
Lanoix calls [$2.5].
WillyHo9 calls [$2.5].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 8h ]
bennyben04 checks.
Lanoix checks.
WillyHo9 checks.
p2x0s13 bets [$8].
bennyben04 folds.
Lanoix calls [$8].
WillyHo9 is all-In [$61.59]
p2x0s13: pick up a set..
p2x0s13: whatever maybe i'll get lucky
p2x0s13 is all-In [$25.05]
Lanoix folds.
** Dealing River ** [ Kc ]
p2x0s13 shows [ Ts, As ] two pairs, aces and tens.
WillyHo9 shows [ 8d, 8s ] three of a kind, eights.
WillyHo9 wins $28.54 from side pot #1 with three of a kind, eights.
WillyHo9 wins $85.35 from the main pot with three of a kind, eights.

my mistake for calling the huge bet that screams set right?...

oh and these are all hands in the past two days where i got a good hand but got outdrawn...maybe i should raise more after flop

Originally Posted by hoaznod

i just think he had too much money and left it to luck and got lucky...did i do anything wrong?

I hope you dont always play this aggressive with one pair...

Generally I think its a good idea to keep the pots small unless you have a good read on the guy.

second hand: I'm losing a stack that size there too.

KQo hand: bad luck can be called in this one...I'll grant that. I don't like the check/push as you don't have enough for repping it to scare him (not to mention that you led out on the flop, meaning he's less likely to think you were drawing) and he has a metric ton of outs. I'd vote raise or check/call.

T9s hand: Fold this preflop in early position. Don't raise with suited connectors until your post flop play is extraordinary. Basically never minraise preflop.

1st ATs hand: The $3 bet was a tad small, but alright. Checking in last position on the turn was aweful. Folding on the river was worse. There's no reason to suspect someone stayed in on that flop with a club draw - only one club was showing!

2nd ATs hand: Given the passivity that WillyHo9 is showing in the two histories I see, I'd be very hesitant to call such a sudden huge bet. "Whatever maybe I'll get lucky" isn't a decent reason. You had 4 outs, so calling out of hope for improvement isn't viable. Betting that big, you basically are counting on him to be bluffing when you call. He's done nothing to demonstrate that this is the case. Calling huge out-of-the-blue bets like this lost me several hundred $$$.

Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp

Originally Posted by Element187

try some limit holdem, bad beats only cost a few bucks instead of your whole stack.

Do not switch to limit hold em for these reasons. Only switch to it if you want to. Playing good poker is playing good poker whether its limit or no-limit - dont switch because youre scared to get sucked out.

Besides, if you think you have bad beats too often in NL dont even fool yourself thinking youre not gonna have ten times as many bad beats playing limit.

i never said limit had less bad beats, i only said they are less severe.

no limit, a bad beatmeans your stack, in limit it only means a few bets.

Yea I understand what you mean, but it reallly doesnt make a difference because although the limit bad beats are just a bit smaller than NL its going to be frustrating how often you run into them, and all those small ones will add up. (especially in low stakes where he would be playing)

Taking a bad beat in NL does suck, but as long as youre playing in your bankroll they are OK because that means youre going to double up your whole stack 3 or 4 other times in the same situation instead of win a couple more bets.

I guess Im getting away from the main point...thats just my preference for NL kicking in.

anyways, considering that the original poster is worried about having bad luck, limit will make it seem like his luck is even worse because we always remember the times we get outdrawn but not the times where our hands held like it should

i think i posted this somewhere else but i thought it was just ridiculous...did i do something wrong here?

#Game No : 1857128169
***** Hand History for Game 1857128169 *****
$50 NL Hold'em - Thursday, April 07, 01:03:53 EDT 2005
Table Table 37611 (Real Money)
Seat 6 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: piccolobluff ( $42.85 )
Seat 2: Lauricidin2 ( $42.1 )
Seat 4: barry1234 ( $19.15 )
Seat 7: Steamer38 ( $43.95 )
Seat 8: jcary02 ( $48.5 )
Seat 9: UFLOPME ( $25.35 )
Seat 10: SCARDHERIZON ( $38.65 )
Seat 6: p2x0s13 ( $16.25 )
Seat 5: turbojet7 ( $30 )
Seat 3: TraderShang ( $49.5 )
Steamer38 posts small blind [$0.25].
jcary02 posts big blind [$0.5].
turbojet7 posts big blind [$0.5].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to p2x0s13 [ Jc Ac ]
UFLOPME calls [$0.5].
SCARDHERIZON raises [$3].
piccolobluff calls [$3].
Lauricidin2 folds.
TraderShang folds.
barry1234 calls [$3].
turbojet7 folds.
p2x0s13 calls [$3].
Steamer38 folds.
jcary02 folds.
UFLOPME calls [$2.5].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 4c, 6h, Js ]
UFLOPME checks.
SCARDHERIZON checks.
piccolobluff checks.
barry1234 bets [$6].
p2x0s13 is all-In [$13.25]
UFLOPME folds.
SCARDHERIZON folds.
piccolobluff calls [$13.25].
barry1234 calls [$7.25].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 5c ]
piccolobluff bets [$3].
barry1234 is all-In [$2.9]
** Dealing River ** [ As ]
piccolobluff shows [ 5d, 5h ] three of a kind, fives.
barry1234 doesn't show [ Ah, Jd ] two pairs, aces and jacks.
p2x0s13 doesn't show [ Jc, Ac ] two pairs, aces and jacks.
piccolobluff wins $0.1 from side pot #2 with three of a kind, fives.
piccolobluff wins $5.6 from side pot #1 with three of a kind, fives.
piccolobluff wins $53.2 from the main pot with three of a kind, fives.

{This post has been removed}