Originally Posted by RushMXC
Hmm, it looks like somehow I've upset or offended some people here because I actually induced some name calling. That was unintended. I realize the data here is definitely skewed, but I figured the very definition of a forum is a meeting place to discuss ideas, questions..and I don't think I broke any rules there. Another issue is, I would've posted some hand histories to back this up except I'm from Washington state where I've been banned from the sites where I had this. I can't access it anymore. I agree that this is speculative, but as much as it is, nobody here actually responded to the whole point of the thread by agreeing or disagreeing with the main points of it. All replies are about how I'm a lowly human, not good at perceiving randomness etc. Best I can say is if you're going to run me into the ground make sure you do it properly by expounding on my shortcomings as a human being, because this thread by itself doesn't make me "low".
The larger point they are making is that your own personal experience is not enough to prove anything to them. You say you have seen these trends. However, millions of poker hands, flops, etc. have been objectively quantified and analyzed by people and none of these trends that you speak of have emerged. How is your own personal experience supposed to be weighted against the mountains of evidence against your theories?
Their argument (and I agree with them) is that your own personal experience should be given little to no weight. Because the phenomenon that you say exists doesn't seem to exist, they tried to explain a phenomenon that is all too common on these forums and elsewhere...namely that people tend to "see patterns" that do not exist in reality.
Here are some links to websites with actual data that you can read: