mystpoker.com: December 2006

mystpoker.com



Thursday, December 14, 2006

"Luck"

It seems every person I talk to who is a losing player has the same complaint: "I have no luck", or "I have the worst luck man".

I was reading a thread on PocketFives and I came across this post.

Do you guys all really think "luck" exists?

Seriously?

All "luck" means is how variance has hit you in a particular hand. If you are a 95% favourite going to the river and your opponent hits his two-outer... does that mean you have bad luck? Of course not. If you play that same hand thousands of times, you'll win 95% of them. You got hit with one of the 5% this time. There is no such thing as luck. Everybody over the long haul will win and lose while ahead equal amounts, and win and lose while behind equal amounts. AA vs. KK preflop seems like such a big favorite... but it loses once in FIVE times! That is not a small amount if you are a regular online player seeing hundreds if not thousands of hands a day. People are not lucky or unlucky.

Luck = no.

Skill and probability = absolutely.

Luck, like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, doesn't exist.

Here is a definition of "Luck" from Wikipedia.

Luck as a fallacy

A rationalist approach to luck includes the application of the rules of probability, and an avoidance of unscientific beliefs. The rationalist feels the belief in luck is a result of poor reasoning or wishful thinking. To a rationalist, a believer in luck commits the post hoc logical fallacy, which argues that because something is sequentially connected, it is connected otherwise, as well:

A happens (luck-attracting event or action) and then B happens;
Therefore, A caused B.

In this particular perspective, probability is only affected by confirmed causal connections. A brick falling on a person walking below, therefore, is not a function of that person's luck, but is instead the result of a collection of understood, (or explainable) occurrences. Statistically, every person walking under the building was just as likely to have the brick fall on them.

The gambler's fallacy and inverse gambler's fallacy both explain some reasoning problems in common beliefs in luck. They involve denying the unpredictability of random events: "I haven't rolled a six all week, so I'll definitely roll one tonight".

Luck is merely an expression noting an extended period of noted outcomes, completely consistent with random walk probability theory. Wishing one "good luck" will not cause such an extended period, but it expresses positive feelings toward the one - not necessarily wholly undesirable.

Sunday, December 10, 2006

Monster

Well, I just had the best 4 days of my poker career. I won't divulge any numbers, but let's just say I can comfortably retire tomorrow. ;)

I have pretty much crushed every opponent I've played at $50/$100 NL and $100/$200 NL on the Tain network. There's only one or two players who will still play against me, I'm going to have to change my screen name soon.

Here is the biggest pot:

#Game No : 195629147
***** Hand History for Game 195629147 *****
<< [table size: 6]
$100.00/$200.00 NL Texas Hold'em - Mon, Dec 04, 08:57:16 2006
Table Tiger Shark (Real Money)
Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 2
Seat 3: suteja ($48976.00)
Seat 4: _myst_ ($88938.76)
_myst_ posts small blind [$100.00]
suteja posts big blind [$200.00]
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to _myst_ [ Ac Qc ]
_myst_ raises [$500.00]
suteja raises [$2200.00]
_myst_ calls [$1800.00]
** Dealing Flop ** [ Jc Qd 4c ]
suteja bets [$4300.00]
_myst_ raises [$12200.00]
suteja is all-In [$42276.00]
_myst_ calls [$34376.00]
suteja shows [ Qs Js ] Two Pair, Queens and Jacks
** Dealing Turn ** [ 8c ]
** Dealing River ** [ Th ]
suteja shows [ Qs Js ] Two Pair, Queens and Jacks
_myst_ shows [ Ac Qc ] a Flush
_myst_ wins $97951.00 from main pot