Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickyd123
I've noticed something about how there software operates and I was wondering if anyone else had noticed it, and how the combated.
Here we go. I'll have to tell you a little about the way I play for this to make sense. I don't need any critiques. I play for fun. I'm not looking to go pro or win the world series of poker. This is how I play and over the years I've noticed strange things happening often. One happened again yesterday. so I thought I would see if anyone has had similar experiences.
When I pick an online money game to play, I always come in for the minimum. I like to see a lot of flops with basically anything that will reach for a straight or one high card. Any two suited, so I like to see a lot of flops, but only if I can see them cheap. Someone raises pre-flop and I don't have a strong hand I fold. I'm starting with very few chips, so I can't take much pressure.
Here's my issue. If I'm at a table with a lot of pre-flop raisers, I like to sit in the weeds and wait until I get a really strong hand. Let them do there normal pre-flop raise. Let some thy to assert himself, then go all in.
The thing is if he has one card in the deck that can beat me, he will get it 75% of the time or better.
Now here's the other thing. If there isn't a lot of pre-flop action, then if I flop something. Evan a little something. I become the aggressor, and when that person has been hiding in the weeds for me jumps out and has a hand that should clean my clock about 80% of the time, I draw the miracle card that breaks him. Now, I'm just going to avoid tables with aggressive pre-flop raisers. These online games don't favor tight players. That's my opinion. What's yours?
I"m not sure that this is doing on the Magazine Forum, but I'll answer it anyway.
There are two possible problems with the sentence that I bolded.
1. You could be guilty of observer bias. It's common for us to remember our bad beats more often then we remember when we sucked out on someone else. It's hard to believe that you have really lost to a one-outer 75% of the time.
2. If this really happened, it could have something to do with your sample size. If you played 100 hands and lost to a one-outer 3 times out of 4, that's unusual, but I wouldn't conclude from that that something is wrong with the site.
You should know that there are people on this site who refuse to evaluate other players until they have a fairly large sample size, usually a minimum of 10,000 hands. Even very good players can have downswings that go that long.
It's called statistical variance, the variance can be good or bad, and it happens to everyone. His first year on the World Poker Tour, Johnathan Little was down about $50,000. His second year, he finished up over a million.
If you, or a group of players, can get together a sample size of many thousands of hands where players routinely lose to 1-outers, that's worth looking at, and there are players on this site who will do that for you. If these suckouts are happening over a very small sample size, to put it bluntly, it doesn't mean anything, and it will be considered just one more bad beat story.
