[hachkc]

While playing in the CT tourney last night and some NLHE cash games during and afterwards I noticied several odd occurences.

1. QQ was a big money loser - I saw at least 3 hands at my first table in the CT tourney where pocket ladies were getting killed. In all 3 cases, they appear to have been played correctly (good preflop raise or reraise). In 2 cases, they ended up going HU with KK (one of them against me). The third case some one called with a strong Kx and flopped a K. I lost with QQ in a cash game later when someone goes all-in on the flop with 55 to a board of J43 and catches runner, runner A2 to win. I just found it odd that QQ (3rd strongest hand) couldn't seem to hold up to showdown at all last night.

2. Runner, Runner beats - I'm not one to normally complain about bad beats but I lost more pots in cash games last night to runner, runner beats than I thought was statistically possible. A few were horrible flop calls but some of them were good flop calls to my bets that just panned out.

3. Hat's off to the CT tourney players. I'm not much of a tourney player but I've been focusing on my NLHE tourney skills lately and for my last 25 SNG ($5 & $10 and STT & MTT) I showing an ROI of +39%. If I get rid of the CT tourneys in there, then it jumps to over +60%. I thinks that pretty good but for the last quarter of CT tournies, I sucked out 1 win but have hardly finished in the top half any other time.

[DataComJoe]

For me, the worst part of the QQ fiasco was I had them both times againt the KK. Now that's a tough night although I managed last a while. Got busted out in 15th place.

-Joe

[R Deckard]

Originally Posted by hachkc

While playing in the CT tourney last night and some NLHE cash games during and afterwards I noticied several odd occurences.

hachkc,
If this was a just a vent/rant, then it's all good. You're a solid player and I'm sure you will see better times in the near future.

Buuut, if you seriously think there is something not right with the universe, then read on, my fellow CT'er, for some more of my pseudo-philosophical ramblings (i.e. more of my venting/ranting) about this chaotic universe we exist in. . .

1. QQ was a big money loser - I saw at least 3 hands at my first table in the CT tourney where pocket ladies were getting killed. In all 3 cases, they appear to have been played correctly (good preflop raise or reraise). In 2 cases, they ended up going HU with KK (one of them against me). The third case some one called with a strong Kx and flopped a K. I lost with QQ in a cash game later when someone goes all-in on the flop with 55 to a board of J43 and catches runner, runner A2 to win. I just found it odd that QQ (3rd strongest hand) couldn't seem to hold up to showdown at all last night.

Nothing odd about this at all. Even ten nights of QQ losses, let alone a single night, is not enough samples of QQ hands to draw any statistically meaningful conclusions. It's normal to see "clumping" in a random distribution. But it violates our sense of what is right, or "oughtness", also known as justice.

2. Runner, Runner beats - I'm not one to normally complain about bad beats but I lost more pots in cash games last night to runner, runner beats than I thought was statistically possible. A few were horrible flop calls but some of them were good flop calls to my bets that just panned out.

Statistics, by definition, deals only with what is possible, not with the impossible. If something can be described by statistics, then it is possible. Certainly a consecutive string of 10, 20, or more runner-runner beats is well within the realm of possibility. But it again violates our sense of justice when it happens.

Also as human beings, we take notice of low-probability random events and then often attempt to attribute some "meaning", i.e. causal factor, to it. But this is just our pattern-recognition software operating--part of the DNA that has kept us alive as a species for millenia against physically stronger creatures.

Summary point 1: Randomly-distributed does not mean evenly-distributed.
Summary point 2: The universe is not just.
Summary point 3: The ability to ask "why" and discover the answer is what has allowed us to dominate the other animals on this planet. But finding causes where none exist is not a requirement of survival, and thus produces cognitive problems when we try to. Yet we still strive to find cause in every event, because for most things, there is a real cause. But for the random events, we sometimes create the answer when none exists. One such creation is the concept we call "luck".

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by R Deckard

hachkc,
Buuut, if you seriously think there is something not right with the universe, then read on, my fellow CT'er, for some more of my pseudo-philosophical ramblings (i.e. more of my venting/ranting) about this chaotic universe we exist in. . .

Trust me this isn't going to become one of those "Online Poker is Rigged" posts. As I stated, these are just general ramblings. For whatever reasons, it just stood out as odd to me that I saw so many pocket ladies crash and burn in a fairly short timeframe. There were probably several QQ hands that didn't lose but never made it to showdown. As for the runner, runner beats, they suck but its part of online life; suck it up and move on.

[DDD424]

From just 3 days of playing on pokerstars, I've experienced more suckouts in the short handed NL (0.50-1 blinds) than I do in a normal week on UB. I don't really like the P* software either, better just stick to UB for me (other than the chiptalk tournies of course).

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by DDD424

From just 3 days of playing on pokerstars, I've experienced more suckouts in the short handed NL (0.50-1 blinds) than I do in a normal week on UB. I don't really like the P* software either, better just stick to UB for me (other than the chiptalk tournies of course).

My experience is mostly just the opposite though I played mostly LO8 and PLO8 there and not very much NLHE. As for the software, I like the P* interface look better but I hate how slow P* is at dealing especially in all-in situations; generally the UB software is "quicker".

[JM]

I have the same experience DDD. I find that I get hit with more suckouts on P* than anywhere else I play and I hate the software as well. I won't put any more money in there, I'm liking full tilt probably the best right now.

Originally Posted by DDD424

From just 3 days of playing on pokerstars, I've experienced more suckouts in the short handed NL (0.50-1 blinds) than I do in a normal week on UB. I don't really like the P* software either, better just stick to UB for me (other than the chiptalk tournies of course).

[Ramstone]

Originally Posted by hachkc

My experience is mostly just the opposite though I played mostly LO8 and PLO8 there and not very much NLHE. As for the software, I like the P* interface look better but I hate how slow P* is at dealing especially in all-in situations; generally the UB software is "quicker".

Indeed, the Pokerstars dealers are slow-rolling bastards. Party and bodog are too fast. Most fo the others seem to get it right.

[Sniper2075]

I have to disagree on the pocket ladies. I went out in the tourney with pocket rockets against pocket ladies that made a set of the flop.

I might say I played the hand bad but still. Anyway just wanted to let you know that pocket queens did win an all-in early in the tourney I think I was third to last or something horrible.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by Sniper2075

I have to disagree on the pocket ladies. I went out in the tourney with pocket rockets against pocket ladies that made a set of the flop.

I might say I played the hand bad but still. Anyway just wanted to let you know that pocket queens did win an all-in early in the tourney I think I was third to last or something horrible.

See the Universe is balancing itself out, sorry it came at your expense though.