This is how pokerstars rewards me for playing a stronger game

I agree. Your only real future with these cards is a flush or a straight - the worst possible flush or nearly the worst possible straight. Even flopping a set leaves you in a vulnerable position.

This is chasing of the worst kind. Don't walk away from this one - run.

Uh..no, not me either. All I care about is the profits.. the worse the competition is the better off I am

if you think about the profit before you think about strategy then you will never get anywhere, ofcourse i care about profits but only in the long run, i want to win with solid game, not by lucking out and running into a few weak players.

I don't know if that's true exactly. If you can keep track of the times you would have wasted money, then you'll see it's not in your best interest. And those times you'd have hit a miracle when the pot is checked to the river... well... you wouldn't have won a lot because they didn't hit anything.

Before I played online I played a tournament according to a comment I read in a Phil Hellmuth book about how playing only the top 10 hands can get you to the final tournament in some amateur tournaments. I played his style as best I could, silently cursing him when I thew "pretty" hands like Q/J into the muck. But 2/3 of the time I missed the flop and would silently thank him for saving me $. And sometimes the hand I wanted to play would have resulted in me going bust. Mid way through the final table someone made a comment about bluffing, and I realized that I had gone all the way through the tournament without bluffing once. Bluffing hadn't even occurred to me. So I started bluffing, which advanced me to third place before finally busting when my 9/9 shove got beat by A/r.

So if you can be fair and keep track of all the times that folding has saved your bum, then keeping track of your hole cards will probably make future folds easier.

Ok, now I'm confused . . . you started this thread complaining how you (incorrectly, imho) played 23s from UTG, then (correctly) folded it on a flop that completely missed you, and then wouldacouldashoulda taken down a big pot when PokerStars would have "rewarded" you with a one-in-a-million straight flush; but you don't care about the profit and want to play a more "solid game"?!? THEN, the thread went into something irrational along the lines of "PokerStars sucks, only bad players win there". . . .

But, the real point I think you are missing is this: there's no such thing as a singular, one-size-fits-all "solid game" . . . what works in one situation may not work at all in another, and what works for one particular player may also not work for another. In fact, all the elite players in today's poker world (especially now with hole-card cams, internet HHs, etc.) almost certainly are in that realm because of their ability to vary their playing styles to adapt to different situations and opponents -- they don't just play one strategy or style, they play a whole bunch of them, and the measure of success is PROFIT. I mean, how else are you going to figure out whether or not your game is actually getting more solid if you are not looking at its profitability? In the end, whether or not someone's game is "solid" can pretty much only be judged by its LONG-TERM profitability; poker is played for money, and if not for that benchmark, what else is there? (Further, one might also look at HOW profitable one's game is . . . one might argue, for example, that a ROI of 1% over, say, 10 years is really rather a waste of time, although it is technically profitable -- but that's beside the point here).

OK now you are confusing me, you obviously missed the point (which is suprising even after my last post adding onto what i said), here it is again for those of you who dont read:

I understand the importance of profit and it really is the only reason im playing poker (90% profit/10%fun). The point is i just do not want to profit from playing a weak game and getting lucky because this is only short-term, i want to make money in the long run and to me this is only done when you play a solid game. I dont plan on playing online forever and i actually want to play in the big tournaments one day, i will never survive there if the best competetion ive had is lucky donks on Pokerstars, this is the reason why i have been experimenting with higher stakes as-of-late.

You make good points in your second paragraph but how is any of that anything to do with getting sucked out/unlucky on Pokerstars (which is what this thread is about)??

Got screwed (unlucky) again:

Table '85981783 2' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: isabel1226 (7570 in chips)
Seat 2: armsrace1 (1890 in chips)
Seat 4: SpadeD0G (10127 in chips)
Seat 6: Spoons04 (3750 in chips)
Seat 8: me (2588 in chips)
Seat 9: Aametsfan (1075 in chips)
isabel1226: posts the ante 25
armsrace1: posts the ante 25
SpadeD0G: posts the ante 25
Spoons04: posts the ante 25
me: posts the ante 25
Aametsfan: posts the ante 25
Spoons04: posts small blind 200
me: posts big blind 400
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to me [Qc Qd]
Aametsfan: folds
isabel1226: folds
armsrace1: folds
SpadeD0G: raises 400 to 800
Spoons04: folds
me : raises 1763 to 2563 and is all-in
SpadeD0G: calls 1763
*** FLOP *** [Jc 9d Qs]
*** TURN *** [Jc 9d Qs] K♦
*** RIVER *** [Jc 9d Qs Kd] [Ts]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
me : shows [Qc Qd] (a straight, Nine to King)
SpadeD0G: shows [Ac 6c] (a straight, Ten to Ace)
SpadeD0G collected 5476 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 5476 | Rake 0
Board [Jc 9d Qs Kd Ts]
Seat 1: isabel1226 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: armsrace1 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: SpadeD0G (button) showed [Ac 6c] and won (5476) with a straight, Ten to Ace
Seat 6: Spoons04 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 8: me (big blind) showed [Qc Qd] and lost with a straight, Nine to King
Seat 9: Aametsfan folded before Flop (didn't bet)

Oy . . . this conversation is going nowhere . . . here you go again with the "solid game" thing and the PokerStars stuff . . . I think I've said all I'm gonna say on the subject, so if you still don't get it, sorry. Anyway, if you are truly concerned with your long-term results, then why do you get all up in arms about short-term results? I'm sure that, if you took some time to analyze your HHs over the last couple of months or so, you would find just as many suck-outs that went in your favor as against, you just probably don't remember them. . . .

By the way, in the latest hand you posted here the villain's call was actually correct, so it's not really a suck-out; he was about a 2.2-1 underdog PF and he was getting almost 2.5-1 odds to make the call, PLUS, he's got you covered several times over, so really an easy call for him there. Yes, the odds say that your big pair will win in this situation 2 out of 3 times, but, hey, you're also going to lose 1 out of 3, so here you go.

Thats the thing, it seems like even long-term wise im still getting donkd much too often, im (hoping) that it is way too early to see if this is true, so far my plan is to keep playing as i am and compare the ratio of getting sucked out to winning (when i have the advantage) and see if this comes close to the actual odds of the hands im holding, i think its still far too early to do this but its definetly "on the cards" for the future (pun intended).

Yes i agree last HH was correct call by villian, note i didnt say it was a "suck out" situation reversed i probably wouldn't have made the same call (i was playing TAG) so i would have put myself on AJ-AQ-AK-AA-KK heck even A10 would be better (A rag are you kidding me?) but i suppose he had the stack to roll the dice so props for that, its definetly far from a bad-beat (compared to what i have had before).

Thanks for your input bull, it really is much appreciated (every reply is), the information you provided is valuable so please dont get the wrong idea, you are probably much more experienced then me so i have the "sponge effect" (soak up much info as i can) many thanks

I don't understand the thread or question if there is one. You folded the worst hand you could have had at the moment. Just because something happens that will occur once every 2500 hands, that doesnt mean you should play your crap the next time.

Well, I didn't intend this so much as a blanket statement. For example, in a tourney someone shoves, you fold your XX hand that you were going to raise with. Someone calls and you find your hand was well ahead of what the player shoved with. Keep that in mind for future play. But don't agonize over having folded your 54 because you would have hit a straight this time.

I'm suggesting for someone who has a chasing issue that they've got to detach themselves a little more from their cards. Just let 'em go.

Tracking the results is not a bad idea, but when you look a the amount of time/effort that would go into that, combined with variance during the most crucial period (the short period right after starting), I think it's more beneficial just to look past them in the short term.


And playing aggressively with position, with a chip stack, against weak players or with any two cards is not the same as chasing draws which is the what the OP is trying to stop.

Already have started to see better results by not chasing (unless the pot odds are super juicy or i can play like i have a big hand and get respected), i find that with the decent players if you semi-bluff (when really you are chasing which i have stopped doing unless i sense weakness) it works well because i have the option of a c bet that usually gets them out (maybe it was them that was chasing??). I have definetly started looking past the short-term, i can also take bad beats much better then before (coming back from super short stack to place in the money helped my confidence).

Thanks for all the replies, this is by far the best place for advice!!!

No problem . . . forgive me if I seem to get a little harsh or impatient at times, it's never personal; ultimately, a good discussion only works if there are different view points and philosophies, so naturally some disagreement is unavoidable, but that's what makes it all fun and worthwhile, right?!! I definitely always learn something new myself whenever I try to answer a question, rebuttal, or criticism (of my own play, comments, etc.); after all, there is no single "correct" way to play poker, no matter how "standard" a situation may look at first glance.

As to your short-term/long-term thoughts above, I would say that you'd need at least a few thousand hands at any particular game/limit combination to get useful information for statistical analysis, but a sample size of 10,000+ is ideal; if you only have, say, a few hundred hands' worth, your data may give you some clues and indicators into possible leaks, etc. but will in no way accurately show your profitability, because the chance factor is just much too great in a sample of that size.

You have a lot about bad beats in texas holdem poker play. What exactly is a bad beat? Well, in short, it's having the dominant hand only to lose on the turn or river when a card hits that gives your opponents the winning hand. Bad beats drive texas holdem poker players crazy. Which is why what I'm about to say may surprise you. Bad beats are a good thing. Now how can that possibly be?

Using software to generate your own binaural beats should be simple.

Omaha Poker Strategy - OmahaPoker.com

"Binaural"??? What in the hizzie is that?? Anyway, I wouldn't call bad beats "good" -- in fact, they suck, but they are a natural and necessary part of the game of poker, you're right about that. Having said that, I think the term "bad beat" is also grossly overused by players who often don't understand that, just because they are ahead PF or on the flop, their hand isn't necessarily the favorite to win.

HUH?

WOW,.. I want to be on your table!!!,... just not when you actually hit one of your rn'r rn'rs,.. lol.
O - D - D- S-,.. the probability that you will hit your hand (see 'pot odds', and 'implied odds').
In a nutshell,.. the 2 - 4 rule,.. on the flop, calculate the number of outs that'll give you the winning hand (the hand you figure to be the winning hand that is), multiply x 4,.... on the turn,... multiply by 2. Not exact but close enough.

[quote=rick15;790286] Bad beats are a good thing.

the only way I'd consider a 'bad beat' to be a good thing, is that it quite possibly shows that you might be the better player (at least you're getting your chips in with the better hands).
I'd love to remind you about them being 'good' when you get hit for a month straight, repeatedly going out of game (sng or Mtt) as a 4:1 fav preflop, or an 87% fav. on the flop. A good thing then,... I think not. So many poor players online that it certainly does seem to happen quite often. The donk might come ahead of you at that moment, but of course they're going to be way behind with their own stats. (bankroll, etc.). Doesn't seem to take the sting out of it though when you find yourself running into this stuff over and over and overa again. April was a month from Hell for me, repeatedly getting donked out of tourneys by complete morons. Not always the case, March was the complete opposite with an sng roi of +250% at my regular buy-in level. Speaking of sngs, I find the most amount of badbeats in these games,... even (especially even) in earlier going (a few levels into game is much more understandable, say if the guy is relatively short stacked or something, with him NEEDING to do what he's got to do,.. but in early going from a donk gettin' involved in way too many hands, hit rn'r rn'r, etc.,... yah,.. it blows big time!... 'Good',.. I think not,..maybe I should send you 'my' hand histories from a month ago, LOL).

I agree that bad beats are essentially a good thing.. because it means your opponents are making mistakes. If your opponent is shoving with a hand that's a 4:1 underdog to yours, then that's good. It's how you make money, from your opponents making big mistakes, and you should try to keep quiet even when they do hit.. even though it is the most frustrating feeling in the world (especially when they rape you of your money with a horrendous beat then leave the table so you cant get it back!!)

I think some people just use the term 'bad beat' too loosely. To me, a bad beat is when you've got someone dominated (at least 4:1 fav), all their chips are in the middle, then they hit a draw that beats you.. like when you're holding pocket K's vs pocket 9's and your opponent hits a 9 on the river to make a set at 22:1 odds. I think too many people lose a few coin flips.. or a couple of 70/30 hands in a row and think they're being hard done by.. when in reality that sort of thing is gonna happen fairly often.

If you bothered to read the hand properly you would see that i folded, i am well aware that it was a good fold and have no intention of calling in similar situation next time. I cannot understand how the hand posted (assuming you read it properly) makes my game look exploitable (based purely on the hand posted) enough for you to say something like "i want to be on your table", weak would be playing that hand and if you would in that scenario, i too would want to be on the same table.

wow i just got raped tag team style:

PokerStars Game #*********: ******, $5.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2008/05/20 - 09:07:40 (ET)
Table '********' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: dannyboy022 (1860 in chips)
Seat 2: me (1535 in chips)
Seat 3: akay33 (4100 in chips)
Seat 4: Poorbird (1440 in chips)
Seat 5: T.L.Walker (920 in chips)
Seat 7: Tobi118 (1155 in chips)
Seat 9: starlion27 (1750 in chips)
me: posts small blind 50
akay33: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to me [Kh Ac]
Poorbird: folds
T.L.Walker: raises 300 to 400
Tobi118: folds
starlion27: folds
dannyboy022: calls 400
me: raises 1135 to 1535 and is all-in
akay33: folds
T.L.Walker: calls 520 and is all-in
dannyboy022: calls 1135
*** FLOP *** [9h Qh 7s]
*** TURN *** [9h Qh 7s] Q♦
*** RIVER *** [9h Qh 7s Qd] 8♠
*** SHOW DOWN ***
me: shows [Kh Ac] (a pair of Queens)
dannyboy022: shows [6h 7h] (two pair, Queens and Sevens)
dannyboy022 collected 1230 from side pot
T.L.Walker: shows [Jh As] (a pair of Queens)
dannyboy022 collected 2860 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4090 Main pot 2860. Side pot 1230. | Rake 0
Board [9h Qh 7s Qd 8s]
Seat 1: dannyboy022 (button) showed [6h 7h] and won (4090) with two pair, Queens and Sevens
Seat 2: me (small blind) showed [Kh Ac] and lost with a pair of Queens
Seat 3: akay33 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: Poorbird folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: T.L.Walker showed [Jh As] and lost with a pair of Queens
Seat 7: Tobi118 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: starlion27 folded before Flop (didn't bet)

my ass hurts

YOU played it right! If you WEREN'T a good player, you would have gotten that straight flush! I've had a bunch of 'em, including the BIG ONE to the Ace in spades on the very 1st Wed 8:00pm CC freeroll at Ultimatebet 3 weeks ago! On the very 1st HAND, no less! On the FLOP! 10-Ks dealt to me (tried to slow play it) then A-Q-J, all spades flopped, tried slow-playin' again, won of course-but nobody would bet w/me 'cuz the 4s came up on the turn! 4 spades showing and no one had a spade down! Wound up gettin' 235 chips all tole!!! So, you PLAYED it like you were supposed to, but unfortunatly it came out wrong!

Ya never know what ya got 'till the dealins' done