I will repeat, in case you missed it, that hands involving betting action that reach showdown are much much more likely to have equities that run close - that is to say if a player did not ‘have an interest in the hand’ they would have folded before showdown.
You can’t just ignore all hands that don’t reach showdown, you have a fundamental bias in your sample.
I’m sorry if this comes across as arrogant or patronising but it really is a simple concept that you should spend some time on if you’re not understanding.
Quite clearly a game where you can use any 2 cards from 4 will generate many more possible equity shifts when bets are called. The game does this naturally, it doesn’t need a site to generate specific runouts.
In a freeroll you’ll likely see more showdowns because people are happy to throw their chips in, I’m not sure that showing a hand where A7 loses to T4 helps your case in any way.
I will repeat, in case you missed it, that hands involving betting action that reach showdown are much much more likely to have equities that run close - that is to say if a player did not ‘have an interest in the hand’ they would have folded before showdown.
You can’t just ignore all hands that don’t reach showdown, you have a fundamental bias in your sample.
I’m sorry if this comes across as arrogant or patronising but it really is a simple concept that you should spend some time on if you’re not understanding.
Quite clearly a game where you can use any 2 cards from 4 will generate many more possible equity shifts when bets are called. The game does this naturally, it doesn’t need a site to generate specific runouts.
In a freeroll you’ll likely see more showdowns because people are happy to throw their chips in, I’m not sure that showing a hand where A7 loses to T4 helps your case in any way.
Im quite happy for a 10 or a 4 to hit, the odds are not that great. Once again, you choose to ignore THE MANNER of the wins and not just that 10 4 beats A7... this was just the way i got eliminated, a call that is never going to lose there, id already put my laptop to the side... would i prepare to leave a real table on seeing what i was up against? Nooooo....the other 3 hands in 19, people can indeed just throw their chips in, but boy, what excitement they got from that in these hands! No pairs here, just pure massive flops, massive swings.
Im guessing if you were at the WSOP and these 3 hands came up in the first 19, u wudnt feel this was anything unusual. It would be. It would be on Youtube.
Several players who backed the magic decks to the hilt over the last 2yrs or so, have appeared to have left the site.
Could you explain why a player choosing a site where he feels the games are 'soft', no longer plays there?
There is clearly one reason: he is not making money... in soft games.... over a long period of time....
Please feel free to offer another explanation, allbeit there is only ever one reason a winning player leaves a soft game.... if he knows the game is soft, he will stick around in the short term knowing he will win eventually..... but what if he feels its not going to change?
hands involving betting action that reach showdown are much much more likely to have equities that run close - that is to say if a player did not ‘have an interest in the hand’ they would have folded before showdown.
Many call with 'extremely little interest' in the hand within the context of the game they are playing. Its these hands that are noticeable, not the close run flops.
If you would like to re-post ones from the SPT, where they are truly amazing hands, i would be up for seeing them. Ive yet to see a single one. Never mind 3 in the opening 13 hands (you see more hands online... hmmm 13)
88 v 66 and a 6 hitting river, or AK v AJ with a jack hitting, is a standard and not amazing hand before you reach for those two..... If we can see any that are on a par with the 3 i posted, feel free... but you wont find any...
AK v AJ where a king flops with 2 low cards.... and the AJ ending up winning, if you can find any of them from the SPT, id love to see just a single one... in fact if its all the same thing online and off, you should be able to post several.
in fact if its all the same thing online and off, you should be able to post several.
This critical thinking malarky is difficult isn't it? You know, and I know, that there's an availability bias here. Not only do you play many more hands online in an evening than you do live, but every hand is logged and available to you to bring out at will. Live poker isn't live chess, the moves aren't recorded and entered into a database, we're relying on someone taking a photo and making it available.
@bbMike having shared tables with you plenty on the site and seen you post sensibly on these forums in the past I always thought you seemed a fairly intelligent person. I'm surprised to see you wasting your time with on this buffoonery.
@bbMike having shared tables with you plenty on the site and seen you post sensibly on these forums in the past I always thought you seemed a fairly intelligent person. I'm surprised to see you wasting your time with on this buffoonery.
You’re right of course @gregkdy82. I guess I’m over optimistic in expecting to make any headway with people who seem to prefer to live in denial by changing the goalposts every time a contradiction is illuminated, rather than to open their eyes and remove themselves from the misery.
After the last bout of ‘you never see this’, ‘here it is’, ‘no not that’ etc I won’t be bothering to entertain any more buffoonery.
hands involving betting action that reach showdown are much much more likely to have equities that run close - that is to say if a player did not ‘have an interest in the hand’ they would have folded before showdown.
It’s quite important.
Theres no future in highlighting this to him, as Greg has rightly pointed out its a waste of your time.
I think if hands 'never' won, this would be a silly claim and certainly one ive 'never' said... i think i have plainly said they lose more often than odds dictate. Keep it real. Clearly id make no profit at all, if all hands lost.
I would though say, it is highly, highly unusual to see 3 hands like this hold online in a short space of time... but you will notice though all in preflop, The AA made a straight and another hand made a full house! Brilliant fun!
And despite the claims of 'confirmation bias' and 'changing the story', we were talking about the many hands posted from SPT Glasgow this yr, whereas you have managed to find one from Manchester from a year of your choice.
Comments
You can’t just ignore all hands that don’t reach showdown, you have a fundamental bias in your sample.
I’m sorry if this comes across as arrogant or patronising but it really is a simple concept that you should spend some time on if you’re not understanding.
Quite clearly a game where you can use any 2 cards from 4 will generate many more possible equity shifts when bets are called. The game does this naturally, it doesn’t need a site to generate specific runouts.
In a freeroll you’ll likely see more showdowns because people are happy to throw their chips in, I’m not sure that showing a hand where A7 loses to T4 helps your case in any way.
Im guessing if you were at the WSOP and these 3 hands came up in the first 19, u wudnt feel this was anything unusual. It would be. It would be on Youtube.
Could you explain why a player choosing a site where he feels the games are 'soft', no longer plays there?
There is clearly one reason: he is not making money... in soft games.... over a long period of time....
Please feel free to offer another explanation, allbeit there is only ever one reason a winning player leaves a soft game.... if he knows the game is soft, he will stick around in the short term knowing he will win eventually..... but what if he feels its not going to change?
The shoplifters.
The Browsers.
The Buyers.
The O.A.P. Security Guard.
I just want to check that you understand this bit and its impact on your observations. It’s quite important.
If you would like to re-post ones from the SPT, where they are truly amazing hands, i would be up for seeing them. Ive yet to see a single one. Never mind 3 in the opening 13 hands (you see more hands online... hmmm 13)
88 v 66 and a 6 hitting river, or AK v AJ with a jack hitting, is a standard and not amazing hand before you reach for those two..... If we can see any that are on a par with the 3 i posted, feel free... but you wont find any...
AK v AJ where a king flops with 2 low cards.... and the AJ ending up winning, if you can find any of them from the SPT, id love to see just a single one... in fact if its all the same thing online and off, you should be able to post several.
After the last bout of ‘you never see this’, ‘here it is’, ‘no not that’ etc I won’t be bothering to entertain any more buffoonery.
I would though say, it is highly, highly unusual to see 3 hands like this hold online in a short space of time... but you will notice though all in preflop, The AA made a straight and another hand made a full house! Brilliant fun!
And despite the claims of 'confirmation bias' and 'changing the story', we were talking about the many hands posted from SPT Glasgow this yr, whereas you have managed to find one from Manchester from a year of your choice.
You may make 'headway' if you kept it real.