Hi whats the meaning of this: basically i know ive been playing the best most fundamentally sound poker of my young career...yet i havent necessarily got much to show for it

its basically just a general feeling and it has only been relevant for a couple of days...i just feel as though i have had some sort of breakthrough

It sounds like you've been putting in a lot of hard work but not seeing the results we expect.

Even when we're making all the right decisions, variance can work against us in the short term.

What's important is that you're continuing to learn and grow as a player.

Stay patient, and the results will come.

Yes .. It's very hard for some to accept the fact that each Player in a poker hand can play 'correctly' .. and yet only one gets the pot (most of the time).

If you play online, there's plenty of stats to work through that provide your 'trends'.

One thing I experienced is that the easier it is to 'let go' of a hand the better you will/should start to feel about your game. "Yep, played that one right." "Yep, I was right about his range." "So glad I didn't chase PF OOP with K8s"

The more you play the more you recognize the 'why' in poker. The more you recognize the 'why' the less fear you will have when making 'the right' decision for the spot. GL

One of the reasons poker is so hard to master is that the results you get provide zero feedback in terms of how well you played. I’m not trying to say a game like chess is easy or anything, but at least if you get crushed in a game of chess you know you played badly and need to work on your game. If you win you know you played well, or at least better than your opponent.

Such is not the case with poker. You can and will have stretches, even long ones, where you play perfectly good poker and get completely crushed. Conversely, getting good results also does not necessarily mean you are playing well. Only in the very long term, probably 100K hands or more, are results really reflective of how well you played.

Interesting hand from Hustler .. Luda v Mike the Mouth .. I missed the PF action but both Flopped sets on 268.

Luda bet his set on the Flop .. Mike basically min-raised and Luda called .. Jack on the Turn
Mike bets out less than 1/2 pot with about 2x that behind .. Luda folds after a very long tank.

Who played the hand well? Well, you can argue it both ways IMO.

If you believe MM, he stated after the hand that he thought Luda had a double gutter, OESD or just trash. So he min-raised Flop and bet Turn as 'protection' or value trying to charge Luda for his draws.

What he didn't do was give Luda credit for a strong hand .. which he most certainly would go bet, bet, bet with based on his history. MM circumvented that by raising the Flop and betting the Turn. Good play or bad?

Luda ended up tank folding the Turn with an extremely strong hand for his very wide range. But can we also 'fault' him for not giving MM credit for putting him on his normal range of hands and just protection betting a lessor holding?

Who played it right? Based on each person's thought process at the time you'd suggest that Luda played it 'more' right than MM did. But that very well could be just results orientated. If either, not even both, Player has different thoughts then the hand would've played much different and you'd still have to give them 'credit' for a reasonable read on their opponent. GL