I'm Sorry But I Take No Comfort...

[Cue 0]

...in knowing I am pushing All-in witht he best hand when I get sucked out on.I played 5 sit and go's (10 person) yesterday and in 4 of them I lost when my dominant monster hand was busted by a guy calling my all-in with a hope and a prayer.The hands busted were- AA by A/10o (made straight to 10)- AA by 6/6 (hit set)-QQ by Q8s (made flush)- JJ by 10/10People say that you should take comfort that your reads are good and you are pushing with the best hand and to keep at it as it will change. I understand that but it still does not feel any good. It bothers me more when I lose this way then when I push with top two pair only to find the other guy has trips.Mathematically speaking I know it should turn and if all these hands are in the 80% range to win then I should go on a run where my next few hundred hands go un-cracked to get back on average.I simply do not believe that the math will balance out...that I will go several hundred hands un-cracked versus only a few cracked.I think the percentages do not apply to internet poker. The math simple is not there. AA versus anything on the net is 50/50 proposition and if the hand is really dominated A/? then it is 30/70 in favour of the dominated hand to win.

[zimmer4141 0]

You are breaking ground on a new wave of thinking. You are right up there with the great prophets Mohammed, Jesus, and JFarrel20. I am now applying as a position as an underling to you. By filling that position I have to service your homosexual needs as often as you need, bathe you everyday, take all your calls, and your AA always beats my 23o. Together, we will conquer the poker world!

[Mercury69 3]

The math will never balance if you never figure in all the hands that YOU suck out on. Rest assured that, provided the decisions are sound, the odds will flatten. the variance is in your reads, your plays, etc. But, that being said, I have a tendency to agree with you, although I know I am perfectly aware of the vagaries of this game.

[wilheldp 0]

I think the percentages do not apply to internet poker. The math simple is not there. AA versus anything on the net is 50/50 proposition and if the hand is really dominated A/? then it is 30/70 in favour of the dominated hand to win.

You had me until right there. I have taken several bad beats in a row, and you do start to question whether or not they will average out with those hands holding up their fair percentage of the time. Hell, you may even suck out with a few dominated hands to bring the world back into perfect harmony.But to insinuate that the percentages that have been extensively proven with millions of trials simply don't apply to online poker is plain stupid. Do you have Poker Tracker with at least 100,000 hands to show that AA is 50% to win against Ax? If you do, then you could make a more compelling case. But basing your assumption on a few bad sessions where you had some statistically anomalous beats will get you flamed here...guaranteed.

[Cue 0]

The math will never balance if you never figure in all the hands that YOU suck out on. Rest assured that, provided the decisions are sound, the odds will flatten. the variance is in your reads, your plays, etc. But, that being said, I have a tendency to agree with you, although I know I am perfectly aware of the vagaries of this game.

The hands I suck out on are very few and far between. I know many players that play a more aggressive style do not believe that because they push more often and therefore get into situations where they do suck out on others pretty regularly but that is not my game.I play 90% cash games (in Casino) and 10% on net and my game is tight/aggressive.

You had me until right there. I have taken several bad beats in a row, and you do start to question whether or not they will average out with those hands holding up their fair percentage of the time. Hell, you may even suck out with a few dominated hands to bring the world back into perfect harmony.But to insinuate that the percentages that have been extensively proven with millions of trials simply don't apply to online poker is plain stupid. Do you have Poker Tracker with at least 100,000 hands to show that AA is 50% to win against Ax? If you do, then you could make a more compelling case. But basing your assumption on a few bad sessions where you had some statistically anomalous beats will get you flamed here...guaranteed.

You say the percentages have been extensively proven. Please provide the proof so I can review it.

[mrdannyg 274]

...in knowing the nuclear test worked perfectly (or something like that).damn, thought this was a futurama thread.

[Rated-R 0]

I too am on a bad run lately when I have been getting my chips in the middle with the best hand...I just figure it will eventually even out and that the stars are not lined up for me right now. I have had my last several AA cracked by **** but that is poker and at the time puts me in a state of rage and makes me hate this game...but I keep coming back!

The hands I suck out on are very few and far between. I know many players that play a more aggressive style do not believe that because they push more often and therefore get into situations where they do suck out on others pretty regularly but that is not my game.I play 90% cash games (in Casino) and 10% on net and my game is tight/aggressive.You say the percentages have been extensively proven. Please provide the proof so I can review it.

I play the same style so I definitely feel you there!!!!!!!!!!!

[RhinestoneCowboy 2]

You say the percentages have been extensively proven. Please provide the proof so I can review it.

You can prove it yourself. Take a deck of cards. Give yourself 2 aces and make a dummy hand with Ax. Shuffle and deal the flop, turn and river and note the winning hand. Repeat 100 times and count how many times the aces hold up.If you say this isn't a realistic test, than you are attacking the randomness of online poker. If that is the case, I agree 100%, poker is broccoli, and my tin foil hat is getting a little tight.

[rogerwilco 0]

- AA by A/10o (made straight to 10)- AA by 6/6 (hit set)-QQ by Q8s (made flush)- JJ by 10/10

I haven't even got a hand better than Q8 in my last 5 stts (slight exaggeration), I would be happy to ever get in the position to be able to get sucked out on.

[wilheldp 0]

You say the percentages have been extensively proven. Please provide the proof so I can review it.

Go to Cardplayer.com and navigate to the Hold'em Calculator. Enter AA for your hand and any hand of your choosing for the other hand. Hit "Calculate", and the percentages that show up are based on millions (if not billions) of simulations.If you really want proof, then run the numbers yourself. Once you know the four cards that make up your hand and the hand of your opponent, then there are 48 cards left to make a 5 card board. There are a finite number of possible boards, and they are all equally likely to appear on any given hand. Your hand will hold up a certain number of times, and you will be sucked out on a certain number of times. Divide the number of times you will win by the total number of possible board combinations and you have the likelihood of your hand holding up.Whether the board cards are generated by a random number generator on a computer or a live dealer performing a perfect riffle shuffle 7 times (the generally accepted number for a truly random result), the percentages are exactly the same. There is nothing that you can do to prove otherwise short of providing an exception to the rule in the form of a sufficient number of trials to disprove the theory.

[CBass1724 1]

I still want to see this rule where the best preflop hand should win every time. If that was the case then what is the point of having the flop, turn, and river?

[Cue 0]

You can prove it yourself. Take a deck of cards. Give yourself 2 aces and make a dummy hand with Ax. Shuffle and deal the flop, turn and river and note the winning hand. Repeat 100 times and count how many times the aces hold up.If you say this isn't a realistic test, than you are attacking the randomness of online poker. If that is the case, I agree 100%, poker is broccoli, and my tin foil hat is getting a little tight.

the math of AA beating A/?o is unassailable. It is a simple calculation based on the number of possible outcomes. So since it is 90% to win you can bank on the fact that over time if holidng AA and dealt this hand you will 90 times out of 100. So if you lose your first 2 times with it you are about to go on monster run of winning with it. the more you lose with AA in a heads up situation should translate into an even more monster 'no-loss' run as the odds seek to average out,I do not question the math. I question someone who claims that the math has beend "extensively proven" to bear out in internet poker. They are saying that someone has compiled the data and can show that frequencies of big hands holding up parellels the math.I am asking to see this proof since it has been stated it exists in abundance.

[rogerwilco 0]

So since it is 90% to win you can bank on the fact that over time if holidng AA and dealt this hand you will 90 times out of 100. So if you lose your first 2 times with it you are about to go on monster run of winning with it. the more you lose with AA in a heads up situation should translate into an even more monster 'no-loss' run as the odds seek to average out,

That is nonsense and a completely distorted view of probability - in fact, every single time you have AA against AT your chances to win are exactly the same as the times before.If you toss a coin 50 times and it comes head every time, the 51st time it is still 50/50 which side the coin will land on.It could take a million or a billion of hands to even out the odds...

[Cue 0]

I still want to see this rule where the best preflop hand should win every time. If that was the case then what is the point of having the flop, turn, and river?

I think you are posting this in the wrong thread. AA against A?o should win approximately 90% of the time. That is 90 out of 100 hands dealt. So if you lose 4 with this hand you should win about 36 (edit). This has nothing to do with "every time". IT has nothing to do with the best hand even winning 50% of the time.

[Woodbelly 0]

You know what percentage of internet poker is rigged? Yep, that's right 100%!

[Cue 0]

Go to Cardplayer.com and navigate to the Hold'em Calculator. Enter AA for your hand and any hand of your choosing for the other hand. Hit "Calculate", and the percentages that show up are based on millions (if not billions) of simulations....

No they are not. WTF??The calculations you see on poker calculators are straight math formulas based on probability of card combinations. They have nothing to do with empirical data based on hands played and the results there after.If I tell you to put up 1, 2 or 3 fingers but not show me how many then my chance in guessing (getting it right) is 1 in 3. We do not base that on thousands of guesses. It is based on math. There are 52 cards in the deck and the combinations that will make AA a winner over A?o will come up 90% of the time. The combinations that can come up to make A?o a winner will come up 10% of the times.it is straight math. And it should be true for internet poker for the most part.

[CBass1724 1]

This has nothing to do with "every time". IT has nothing to do with the best hand even winning 50% of the time.

I'm just tired of everybody thinking they should automatically win because they have the best hand preflop. There are 5 cards that can help or hurt your hand and it's all a part of the game.

[wilheldp 0]

I am asking to see this proof since it has been stated it exists in abundance.

Here you go.If you look at the Poker Hand Ranking Chart near the bottom of that page, then read the line immediately underneath the chart, you will see that the rankings were generated from over 115 Million actual hand histories. Do you have that many hand histories to back up your claim of AA just being a 50/50 hand?

[Cue 0]

That is nonsense and a completely distorted view of probability - in fact, every single time you have AA against AT your chances to win are exactly the same as the times before.If you toss a coin 50 times and it comes head every time, the 51st time it is still 50/50 which side the coin will land on.It could take a million or a billion of hands to even out the odds...

You are misapplying the law of very large numbers as most people do.Yes if you have already flipped a coin 50 times then the 51st time the odds of head or tail are even despite what came prior BUT....BUT... the odds at the onset that you will ever flip 50 straight heads or tails are phenomenally against you.Just as the odds at onset that your AA will lose to A?o 2, 3,5 or 50 times in row are phenomenally against you. The odds say it will win X number of times in this sequence of hands.The law you site applies to anyone hand but not a number of hands in sequence. If you are taking 10 hands in sequence where you have AA and someone A?o you should bet all your money that AA will win the majoirty of these showdowns.

[wilheldp 0]

If I tell you to put up 1, 2 or 3 fingers but not show me how many then my chance in guessing (getting it right) is 1 in 3. We do not base that on thousands of guesses. It is based on math. There are 52 cards in the deck and the combinations that will make AA a winner over A?o will come up 90% of the time. The combinations that can come up to make A?o a winner will come up 10% of the times.

You have never taken a statistics course, have you? Somebody already pointed it out, but apparently you have to hear things multiple times before you understand. If you have AA vs. ATo, you have a 90% chance of winning (before the flop). The next time you have AA vs. ATo, you have a 90% chance of winning (before the flop). Every single time you get a hand, you have the same chance of winning with it as the last time you got that hand. If you lose with AA 400 times in a row vs. ATo, you are still only 90% to win with it the next time you get it.In the LONG RUN, i.e. after millions of data points, you will see that you won with AA vs. ATo 90% of the time. Cards have no memory. Statistics have no memory.

Go to Cardplayer.com and navigate to the Hold'em Calculator. Enter AA for your hand and any hand of your choosing for the other hand. Hit "Calculate", and the percentages that show up are based on millions (if not billions) of simulations.

No they are not. WTF??The calculations you see on poker calculators are straight math formulas based on probability of card combinations. They have nothing to do with empirical data based on hands played and the results there after.

OK, go back to the Poker Odds Calculator, click the "Help" button in the upper right hand corner of the screen and read the disclaimer that appears in blue text on the help screen.Here, I'll help you out if you are too lazy to do it...

NOTE: Results may differ if you rerun a calculation using the same hand. This is because the figures are the result of a Monte Carlo simulation (sampling from the deal of a few thousand random hands), not an exhaustive enumeration of every possible flop.

The Cardplayer calculator only uses a few thousand hands. Other simulators that I have seen have chugged through billions of hands. You know what? They all come up with frighteningly similar percentages.

[RhinestoneCowboy 2]

I think you are posting this in the wrong thread. AA against A?o should win approximately 90% of the time. That is 90 out of 100 hands dealt. So if you lose 4 with this hand you should win about 360. This has nothing to do with "every time". IT has nothing to do with the best hand even winning 50% of the time.

No wonder you think its rigged... If you lose 4 times with AA in that situation you should win 36, not 360. You are hoping for a 99% return on something with a 90% chance.

[burgerman 0]

OP is experiencing a statistical deviation from the norm. It is likely that it will correct. However, odds calculators are correct only if you play to INFINITY. That's a long time.Burgerman

[psujohn 0]

The truth is that over any small sample (and even if you play poker for many years AA vs AT is going to be a small sample) the odds DONT even out. Some people are more lucky than others.Consider this. We're going to run AA vs AT 1000 times (a small sample). We expect AA to win 900 times. In the first 100 runs AA loses every time. Will the odds "even out"? Clearly they will not. At this point we'd expect AT to win 190 times and AA to win 810 - a big difference from the initial expected outcome.The odds don't "owe you" if you lose more often than expected. Just as if you win more than expected the deck isn't going to "get you back". If you don't understand that you should quit poker.

[Balloon guy 158]

I for one am very happy to hear this.I have been on a HUGE winning streak where my best hand has held up far more times then it should have.This guy has been taking up my bad luck slack.Thanks dude, wish I wasn't playing play money when it happened so I could split the winnings with you.

[rog 0]

I do not question the math. I question someone who claims that the math has beend "extensively proven" to bear out in internet poker. They are saying that someone has compiled the data and can show that frequencies of big hands holding up parellels the math.I am asking to see this proof since it has been stated it exists in abundance.

It has been extensively proven. I cant find it now, but I did find 2 different statistical analysis in the past of large sets of hand histories where the owner of the hands claimed that online poker was rigged (just like you), but the analysis proved to be completely normal. Yeah, this is hearsay, and you're welcome to believe what you like. When I find it, I'll post.Let me ask you this though. Given that hundreds of thousands of people play online poker, and given that all of their hand histories are available to them, why has nobody produced any data to show that poker is rigged? In fact WTF is wrong with you? If what you say is true, it's a simple matter for you to go through your hand histories and show us how your bad beat rate exceeds statistical norms right? Get cracking or STFU.