By Steve Brecher
When I play poker online at Full Tilt Poker, there are three subjects that I never address in the chat of poker; politics, religion, and allusions to the fact that online poker is rigged. The main reason is that most players who bring this opinion are not very open minded when it comes to discuss with them; These are most of the time of the discussions which lead nowhere.
Outside of the table, I have heard some comments on improbable facts relatively poker. Although this is not the elements of strategies or specific game tactics, I would like to tell you about the good side of the 'bad beats', in the mature way to see them.
First, see a typical badbeat a smaller pocket that wins against a larger pocket, suppose KK flying AA. When these hands are of the same color, the lower hand odds of winning are 18%. The chances it has to win twice in a row are about 3%. In a session of poker, losing twice with a bigger pair may sound strange to some players.
Consider another situation involving a chance. When you roll two dice, the odds to 1-1 (snake eyes) are about 3% - the same percentage of losing twice with a big pocket against a smaller pocket.
Imagine that there are 600 tables of craps with 9 players on each of them (a total of 5400 players) and that these tables are in working capital for a three-hour session. How many players will see 1-1 being launched? Statistics are not important. The important thing is to know that it will happen a number of times.
Moreover, do you think that some players will see a player perform 1-1 several times in one evening? Say 3 or 4 times (the equivalent of 6 or 7 'bad beats' Poker)? And if those players related these facts on a poker forum, it is likely that some people may think that the dice were rigged.
Back to poker. Recently I played a hand of No-Limit Hold ' Em on Full Tilt Poker. A player on the number 4 in open button front seat - raise the flop. All of the following players slept and I decided to caller. I did a semi-bluff check - raise on the flop, continued with a semi-bluff on the turn, me fis raiser all-in and decided to caller. I was my draw on the river. After the hand my opponent tells me in the chat:
Opponent: you are horrible steve
Opponent: WTF? Why you are calle ca?
Opponent: it's horrible that this site reward this kind of call
(Confidence to my opponent: I know that these comments were made on the spur of the moment after a big loss and that it does not necessarily reflect your point of view of real.)
A little look at my call on the turn. I had Ad Td; my opponent had Kd Kc. The board was Qd 9 d 7 h Jc.
With what my opponent held, I had 16 outs to win the pot on the River, giving me to 1.75 against 1 underdog. Obviously, it could have been worse if I had faced a hand like K - T (a straight) hand against which I would have been to 3 against 1 underdog. After my last and the all in my opponent, I got sides of 3.7 to 1 for caller, so the call was correct here. But in the eyes of my opponent or at least an observer I made a bad call since I had only 36% of the odds of winning the hand, reason for which my opponent says victim of a badbeat.
The moral of this story: "when a lady (events have a low probability of reach) arrive, sometimes a more thorough review of the hand can change your first impression and let you the mind more clear and quiet."
Steve Brecher
When I play poker online at Full Tilt Poker, there are three subjects that I never address in the chat of poker; politics, religion, and allusions to the fact that online poker is rigged. The main reason is that most players who bring this opinion are not very open minded when it comes to discuss with them; These are most of the time of the discussions which lead nowhere.Outside of the table, I have heard some comments on improbable facts relatively poker. Although this is not the elements of strategies or specific game tactics, I would like to tell you about the good side of the 'bad beats', in the mature way to see them.
First, see a typical badbeat a smaller pocket that wins against a larger pocket, suppose KK flying AA. When these hands are of the same color, the lower hand odds of winning are 18%. The chances it has to win twice in a row are about 3%. In a session of poker, losing twice with a bigger pair may sound strange to some players.
Consider another situation involving a chance. When you roll two dice, the odds to 1-1 (snake eyes) are about 3% - the same percentage of losing twice with a big pocket against a smaller pocket.
Imagine that there are 600 tables of craps with 9 players on each of them (a total of 5400 players) and that these tables are in working capital for a three-hour session. How many players will see 1-1 being launched? Statistics are not important. The important thing is to know that it will happen a number of times.
Moreover, do you think that some players will see a player perform 1-1 several times in one evening? Say 3 or 4 times (the equivalent of 6 or 7 'bad beats' Poker)? And if those players related these facts on a poker forum, it is likely that some people may think that the dice were rigged.
Back to poker. Recently I played a hand of No-Limit Hold ' Em on Full Tilt Poker. A player on the number 4 in open button front seat - raise the flop. All of the following players slept and I decided to caller. I did a semi-bluff check - raise on the flop, continued with a semi-bluff on the turn, me fis raiser all-in and decided to caller. I was my draw on the river. After the hand my opponent tells me in the chat:
Opponent: you are horrible steve
Opponent: WTF? Why you are calle ca?
Opponent: it's horrible that this site reward this kind of call
(Confidence to my opponent: I know that these comments were made on the spur of the moment after a big loss and that it does not necessarily reflect your point of view of real.)
A little look at my call on the turn. I had Ad Td; my opponent had Kd Kc. The board was Qd 9 d 7 h Jc.
With what my opponent held, I had 16 outs to win the pot on the River, giving me to 1.75 against 1 underdog. Obviously, it could have been worse if I had faced a hand like K - T (a straight) hand against which I would have been to 3 against 1 underdog. After my last and the all in my opponent, I got sides of 3.7 to 1 for caller, so the call was correct here. But in the eyes of my opponent or at least an observer I made a bad call since I had only 36% of the odds of winning the hand, reason for which my opponent says victim of a badbeat.
The moral of this story: "when a lady (events have a low probability of reach) arrive, sometimes a more thorough review of the hand can change your first impression and let you the mind more clear and quiet."
Steve Brecher
