Accepting Loss At The Poker Table.

[Spademan 94]

...why can't people if they don't like a thread or post, just go on to the next topic, or, better yet, forum?

God, you are such a loser.I'm sure you think you're above it all, really intelligent and progressive.It seems you think you are really nice and broad-minded.What is the point of a forum where people don't disagree, where nothing is challenged?The very idea you put forth here is absurd at its very foundation, hindering change, with strikes down both growth and strength.You aren't 1/3rd as brilliant as you suppose you are.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

God, you are such a loser.I'm sure you think you're above it all, really intelligent and progressive.It seems you think you are really nice and broad-minded.What is the point of a forum where people don't disagree, where nothing is challenged?The very idea you put forth here is absurd at its very foundation, hindering change, with strikes down both growth and strength.You aren't 1/3rd as brilliant as you suppose you are.

Yeah. There ya go, Trolling explained as a progressive, additive part of debate. What a jopke.Seriously, go look at your last 50 or so posts. You've turned into a negative zero-cotent posting machine.

[Spademan 94]

Yeah. There ya go, Trolling explained as a progressive, additive part of debate. What a jopke.Seriously, go look at your last 50 or so posts. You've turned into a negative zero-cotent posting machine.

Powerful stuff, if a bit nonsensical.Tell me, what about the OP stands out to you?What are the lessons it teaches?I'm not even going to flame you here, which would be really, really easy.Point them out to me.

[pokerplayer24 0]

Ridiculously flawed argument btw.Basically saying that variance doesnt exist in poker and its all based on how you game select and playing good.Sure its possible to practice amazing game selection and have less variance and a higher winrate but ultimately you'll be making less $ because you will be unable to put in nearly as many hands. Overall I think this shows the big difference between online and live. Live with the games being far softer and a def edge being gained by being able to pick up physical tells you'll be playing in games where your edge is far greater so when you have a losing session you can often times point to making a mistake in a key hand. Meanwhile online where the games are far more competitive you'll be faced with a smaller winrate, larger swings and a lot more losing sessions.Id say a better argument here would be that playing your best at all times, not tilting and minimizing your losses when running bad will greatly improve your winrate. As will quitting when ur not playing optimally or knowing when to walk away from a big losing session. So i think its important to be true to yourself when you've had a winning or losing session. For instance sometimes ill have a session where I won 6 buy ins but I know that I didnt play that well and could have possibly won 10 if I had played better. Thus the reason for a winning session like this is that I ran hot. At the same time often times you'll have one of those sessions where you play great and just end up losing 3-4 buyins anyway. In this case I think its important to realize that statistically these swings will happen instead of looking to nitpick situations where you lost $ but potentially played well.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Powerful stuff, if a bit nonsensical.Tell me, what about the OP stands out to you?What are the lessons it teaches?I'm not even going to flame you here, which would be really, really easy.Point them out to me.

...and I'd do this why? To encourage a flame war witn an ass hole for you to sit back and take pot shots at me. Go do your own thinking or simply STFU - I really couldn't care less which you pick at this point.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Ridiculously flawed argument btw.Basically saying that variance doesnt exist in poker and its all based on how you game select and playing good.Sure its possible to practice amazing game selection and have less variance and a higher winrate but ultimately you'll be making less $ because you will be unable to put in nearly as many hands. Overall I think this shows the big difference between online and live. Live with the games being far softer and a def edge being gained by being able to pick up physical tells you'll be playing in games where your edge is far greater so when you have a losing session you can often times point to making a mistake in a key hand. Meanwhile online where the games are far more competitive you'll be faced with a smaller winrate, larger swings and a lot more losing sessions.Id say a better argument here would be that playing your best at all times, not tilting and minimizing your losses when running bad will greatly improve your winrate. As will quitting when ur not playing optimally or knowing when to walk away from a big losing session. So i think its important to be true to yourself when you've had a winning or losing session. For instance sometimes ill have a session where I won 6 buy ins but I know that I didnt play that well and could have possibly won 10 if I had played better. Thus the reason for a winning session like this is that I ran hot. At the same time often times you'll have one of those sessions where you play great and just end up losing 3-4 buyins anyway. In this case I think its important to realize that statistically these swings will happen instead of looking to nitpick situations where you lost $ but potentially played well.

See, now a well though out reply that doesn't agree with the OP that doesn't resort to simple trolldom. I too thought that the OP may have oversimplified the notion that any losing session was somehow the loser's fault. However, I sort of assumed that his point was that in order to improve, honest introspection is required - not just knee-jerk blaming of "variance" or bad luck.I think he is encouraging people of all abilities, but especially novices looking to improve, to perform an honest assessment of their session play. One more thing I think is important that some have sort of touched upon here is the need to analyze your WINNING sessions too. Many people have a great session or positive outcome of a poorly played hand and forget to learn the positives and negatives from winning - not just losing.

[Spademan 94]

...and I'd do this why? To encourage a flame war witn an ass hole for you to sit back and take pot shots at me. Go do your own thinking or simply STFU - I really couldn't care less which you pick at this point.

What?That's awesome.You are making zero sense at this point, already.Ok, so, since you're a dumbass and can't even defend yourself and your statements, I'll help you out.I am supposing that since you think this "R SERIOUS THREAD", that the content is meaningful.Well, it both is and isn't. Sure, it all makes sense and is true, but it's blatantly obvious and rehashed news.So, your seriousness is out of place. You look stupid for this.Now, on to your claim of me "trolling". Let's see, I point out that a guy is lazy and therefore loses a measure of respect from people who can type captital "I", then state that the knowlege gained in the OP is obvious, both of which are true, and you claim "Troll".What is the basis of this claim.Please be ignorant and lazy again and just say "You should know" or something so I don't have to waste more keystrokes embarrassing you.

[Spademan 94]

One more thing I think is important that some have sort of touched upon here is the need to analyze your WINNING sessions too. Many people have a great session or positive outcome of a poorly played hand and forget to learn the positives and negatives from winning - not just losing.

"The ground breaking news that people should examine their game when they lose or win?"My god.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

What?That's awesome.You are making zero sense at this point, already.Ok, so, since you're a dumbass and can't even defend yourself and your statements, I'll help you out.I am supposing that since you think this "R SERIOUS THREAD", that the content is meaningful.Well, it both is and isn't. Sure, it all makes sense and is true, but it's blatantly obvious and rehashed news.So, your seriousness is out of place. You look stupid for this.Now, on to you claim of me "trolling". Let's see, I point out that a guy is lazy and therefore loses a measure of respect from people who can type captital "I", then state that the knowlege gained in the OP is obvious, both of which are true, and you claim "Troll".What is the basis of this claim.Please be ignorant and lazy again and just say "You should know" or something so I don't have to waste more keystrokes embarrassing you.

See. That is the point. You seem to think it is your job to try and "embarrass" other posters.I think you were more bothered that other people actually had a positive reaction to the OP and therefore felt the need to automatically tear down and hijack a positive discussion. That isn't debate, it is destruction for the sake of destruction simply because someone else sees value in it. That isn't encouraging "growth and change" it is simple second grade Nihilism. One step up from breaking windows and spray painting walls simply because someone else finds them worthwhile.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

"The ground breaking news that people should examine their game when they lose or win?"My god.

My God, what is wrong with you? Are you that full of spite? Not every point in a discussion has to be "ground breaking". You must be a blast at parties.

[Spademan 94]

See. That is the point. You seem to think it is your job to try and "embarrass" other posters.I think you were more bothered that other people actually had a positive reaction to the OP and therefore felt the need to automatically tear down and hijack a positive discussion. That isn't debate, it is destruction for the sake of destruction simply because someone else sees value in it. That isn't encouraging "growth and change" it is simple second grade Nihilism. One step up from breaking windows and spray painting walls simply because someone else finds them worthwhile.

No, the point is that you have no idea what you are talking about.It's all out of left field. Nihilism?Vandalism? What the fuck are you talking about? This was my point, you have a little education and you think that makes you clever, or even capable.It does neither. You are so far off mark here it is laughable.I wasn't bothered by anything whatsoever, except that the one dude wrote like he was retarded or lazy.Then, people were getting so serious about this post full of blatantly obvious advice, that I had to mention how blatantly obvious it was.There was no "trolling" involved, and rest assured that "positive" response to something has nothing to do with it.Save your sadly rudimentary, arm chair psychologist/philosopher diagnoses for someone who actually would fall for your pretense.You... are not... that smart.You memorize well though, which is something, I guess.Your practical application of what you learn though?Disappointing.

[Spademan 94]

My God, what is wrong with you? Are you that full of spite? Not every point in a discussion has to be "ground breaking". You must be a blast at parties.

Ah... I see.You're one of those.You think rhetoric and fallacy will suffice.Usually it does.Not here though, I just laugh at you.Most will know you are using hyperbole and missing the point, two common fallacies.So cute you think it's effective.

[TB17 0]

Ridiculously flawed argument btw.Basically saying that variance doesnt exist in poker and its all based on how you game select and playing good.Sure its possible to practice amazing game selection and have less variance and a higher winrate but ultimately you'll be making less $ because you will be unable to put in nearly as many hands. Overall I think this shows the big difference between online and live. Live with the games being far softer and a def edge being gained by being able to pick up physical tells you'll be playing in games where your edge is far greater so when you have a losing session you can often times point to making a mistake in a key hand. Meanwhile online where the games are far more competitive you'll be faced with a smaller winrate, larger swings and a lot more losing sessions.Id say a better argument here would be that playing your best at all times, not tilting and minimizing your losses when running bad will greatly improve your winrate. As will quitting when ur not playing optimally or knowing when to walk away from a big losing session. So i think its important to be true to yourself when you've had a winning or losing session. For instance sometimes ill have a session where I won 6 buy ins but I know that I didnt play that well and could have possibly won 10 if I had played better. Thus the reason for a winning session like this is that I ran hot. At the same time often times you'll have one of those sessions where you play great and just end up losing 3-4 buyins anyway. In this case I think its important to realize that statistically these swings will happen instead of looking to nitpick situations where you lost $ but potentially played well.

Steve isn't saying there isn't variance. He's saying, take responsibility for your losses and learn from them. It's naive to think that you played perfectly every session. It's also naive to think there isn't luck in the game. If you are running bad for an extended period of time, it's time to stop blaming variance for a bit, or at adapt. He's not saying, you should be winning every session, or every month.Also, many of these posts (not yours pp24) are the reason why Steve shouldn't try to help people.

[hockey fan 0]

Is that really one sentence?Also, are you too lazy to press the shift key for "I"?

Funny coming from a guy who makes a paragraph for every sentence.And for what it's worth, sure this is not "ground-breaking" stuff - but heck, if that's all that is worthy of posting this place would get pretty empty. IMO the point IS worth re-hashing. Everyone falls into the "why-me" school of thought once in awhile. Having someone remind you to think through it instead of just throwing up your hands can be useful.

[Spademan 94]

Funny coming from a guy who makes a paragraph for every sentence.And for what it's worth, sure this is not "ground-breaking" stuff - but heck, if that's all that is worthy of posting this place would get pretty empty. IMO the point IS worth re-hashing. Everyone falls into the "why-me" school of thought once in awhile. Having someone remind you to think through it instead of just throwing up your hands can be useful.

Hmm, you quoted a two sentence, short sentence post to make your point.Interesting and silly.As 90% of my posts are short sentences.Really failed on that part.As to the second part, it's half true, and half false.True as to the idea that yes, people apparently need to be told the obvious, but false in how you pretend as if I want it deleted or something.My point isn't to delete it, or even ignore it.If you read and comprehend what is said, rather than make quick, ignorant statements about what is said, you'd notice that my point was that it is nothing special.Not that it has no merit whatsoever.The difference is clear to those who actually think about a thing, or are gifted enough to recognize the meaning of a thing at a glance.

[Painter567 0]

Gee. And some more positive addition in the spirit to which you've led us to be accustomed.Didn't yo at one point actually post relatively well thought out stuff, now even your Troll posts are of the "you're just dumb" variety.What is it with Trolls these days?...why can't people if they don't like a thread or post, just go on to the next topic, or, better yet, forum?

Bwahahahahaa!

[Balloon guy 158]

Sometimes when I am golfing, I will swing really smooth and easy and let the club do the work. Often I hit really good long drives.And I always say: "Someone should write that down because that would make a good tip."Fundamentals are never out of style.

[David_Nicoson 1]

Sometimes when I am golfing, I will swing really smooth and easy and let the club do the work. Often I hit really good long drives.And I always say: "Someone should write that down because that would make a good tip."Fundamentals are never out of style.

There's a certain limit to that, though, right?"Try to hit the ball with the club."

[Spademan 94]

There's a certain limit to that, though, right?"Try to hit the ball with the club."

You're both right.

[Spademan 94]

Bwahahahahaa!

And yes, that's funny. Heh.Btw, I readily admit when I am ignorant of something, and have no clue what your avatar is.Enlighten me?

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Bwahahahahaa!

....and, yes, I am aware that the "Irony" alert meter is pegged as a result of this post.

I was definitely the Pot calling the Spademan Black in that post.

[Balloon guy 158]

There's a certain limit to that, though, right?"Try to hit the ball with the club."

What I read in Steve's post was more :Win or lose, it's your fault. If you don't see why, look closer.If you invest your time away from the table trying to find flaws in your game choice, play, and attitude; it will pay off. Don't be lazy and assume that you are above this simple fact.How many of us think that since we are x level players, we can ignore foundational truths?Is it groundbreaking? NoIs it often overlooked by players? yesDid he write this at 4 AM and could that have something to do with his mindset when he wrote it? Maybe.Am I just using this post to make a joke about golf that I think is funny? Maybe.Should I be working on a proposal that's been sitting on my desk for 3 days? You bet.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

Spademan, you started all this with your post complaining of the way a poster didn't capitalize where he should and his use of grammar.Classic trolling move designed to pick an e-fight for the sake of picking an e-fight.I like you and think you should be bigger then resorting to those tactics. In this thread it looks to me like you're just trying to pick fights and you're coming across as an ass for the most part.

[Balloon guy 158]

Nevermind, funnier in my head

[Spademan 94]

Spademan, you started all this with your post complaining of the way a poster didn't capitalize where he should and his use of grammar.Classic trolling move designed to pick an e-fight for the sake of picking an e-fight.I like you and think you should be bigger then resorting to those tactics. In this thread it looks to me like you're just trying to pick fights and you're coming across as an ass for the most part.

Apparently it came across that way more than usual.Why?Because of the status of the original poster, that must become clear to you now that it is pointed out.I am *always* an ass here, always.But it is always about a real issue, something that rightfully can be subjected to asshole-ishness.Just like always, I noticed a post that pissed me off due to it being real, not a troll account, but a real person typing "i" to refer to himself.I naturally responded as I do.I get this criticism here because of who posted the thread, and how 'serious' it should be.Now we find the rub. I don't think this is a serious topic at all.If some newb came here and posted, "look u guys, u could be much better at poker if u just tilted less and LOOKED AT THE WAY YOU PLAYED duh itz so easy to get better when u stop being stupid and just looked at ur game instead of "luck" or something... duh", he'd be flamed to all hell.Why, because it's obvious and he's a newb who types as if he spent a day or two in public school.All of it is true, but all of it is remarkably apparent.So... not taking this as some sort of holy thread, I pointed out some dude being too lazy to move his pinky finger a couple centimeters to the south of the A key to capitalize his I.Now you, among others, make the mistake of acting as if this thread were something holy.It isn't.Some people are going to understand what I'm saying and find humor and/or truth in it, some are going to just find humor in it, and a minority are going to be offended or think I'm a big meany.As always.