Originally Posted by ChuckTs
ok, try playing 500 or 1000 MTTs, then see if your results are the same. I'm sorry ronaldadio, but your sample size is still too small.
I couldn't have said it better than Chuck. But, I will expand on it a bit.
35 MTT is not even close to a proper number of tournaments to base any kind of theory about luck being 99% of poker.
Poker theory is based on millions of hands. Your 35 MTTs are a drop in the bucket. Certainly a bad streak. But, that's all just a bad streak.
I sat down at a ring game and I saw this one guy drag pot after pot playing absolute trash. He took me for a good chunk of my money at that table when he outdrew me 5 times in a row. I still have yet to get all my money back.
He took a lot from the rest of the table as well. But, he pushed his luck and ended up giving it all back and more. Why? Because he had no idea what he was doing. He was likely the worst player at the table. He was just getting incredibly luck. Then when his luck ran out he kept playing those bad hands and paid for it dearly. Lost all his winnings and every penny he should up to the table with.
Luck in poker is an anomaly. It will happen. Bad players will have these kind of streaks. But, they will not win in the long run because they are bad players.
Good players will get caught in the bad players crosshairs from time to time. And marginally decent ones like myself will suffer their luck as well. But, in the long run good players will win over them. Not with luck. But, with skill.
Think about the and the hare. The hare had any easy win. All he had to do was waltz to the finish line. But, instead he decided to take a nap. So, the ended up winning.
So we can say the hare the equivilant to the bad player. And the nap is equivilent to playing bad hands.