It's Not Easy Being Ahead

Have you ever been dealt KK in No Limit Hold'em and thought to yourself "How much am I going to lose on this hand?"

If you're like me, you think it every time. In this post, I fully intend to provide some insight on how to handle the inevitable in poker, the "bad beat"

Now, while everyone has their own definition of "bad beat" I think it is generally agreed upon when you have the best hand when all the money is in OR you're giving an opponent incorrect odds to make a hand when they do it anyway.

Here's a true story of what just happened at a side table. I'm playing .5/.10 during FTP's "Happy Hour" when I get 10-J of spades from the BB. Two other players besides myself, and I check my option. I flop a flush. The SB comes out for .10 into a .30 pot. I reraise to .50 and the other player in the hand calls. The SB folds. Now the turn brings the most irrelevant card, a red Jack. I raise it up to $1.35, which is a little more than what's shown in the pot ($1.35 total if you include rake). I get called AGAIN. At this point, I totally put him on the A of spades and probably not even a pair otherwise. The turn comes...4 of spades. Since it's a cap game i'm left to bet just about $1, which I push in immediately. He calls and shows the Ace of spades and a 4 of diamonds, for the nut flush. I reflect back on my play. Could I have done ANYTHING differently? Maybe I should've just capped it off after the flop, to which there's a damn good chance the A-rag also follows along. It's fairly obvious to me that .5/.10 is just a joke, as well as the $2.25 sit n gos which I just enjoy from time to time. So yeah, as far as an update in my personal poker life, i'm going to move up stakes and play better players; my bankroll is suffering at lower stakes currently (which doesn't make much sense in theory)

Anyway, i'd say that 9 out of 10 showdowns, I'll have the best hand; it's very rare that I run into a better hand, and if I do, the other guy played it correctly. You flop a set and I have two pair, congrats for having a better hand to begin with, and it held up and than some. I can walk away upset at myself for making a bad play while that guy is paid off for making a great play and also catching me on a hand. You also tend to forget these types of beats very easily. I once jokingly told one of my pals that he should've folded QQ preflop to predict a bad beat. He did lose the hand to a pair of aces his opponent caught. If you could predict bad beats, you'd be an unstoppable force. You could get away from KK if you knew you'd lose to A2. The conclusion I've came to for me personally is this: The more bad beats you get, the better player you are. On the contrary, if you're behind most of the time, you draw out more, and you're a worse player. More to the point, you're not a successful player. In a game where luck IS involved and is a huge factor, you're just likely to lose. As a poker player, the absolute MOST you can do at any given table is put yourself into a position where you're likely to win and you've been a favorite since the dealer dealt the hand. From there, it's the part that is confusing: Avoiding getting unlucky. I say confusing because (especially in a tournament) for how long do you have to avoid bad luck? If you are in a showdown in a tournament 6 times and have the best hand all 6, maybe you lose once or twice still. You're a favorite, sure, but that only gets you so far. After a bad beat where you feel you've completely played the hand well, got your money in with the best and still lost, you must look at your loss as more of a gain. I feel that the more often you put yourself into winning positions, the more often, (and the more money) you'll win. I also usually don't like to buy into people who say that the "other guy had a reason to be in the pot." Sometimes that is very true, but if you have AK and they call with AQ, you should win around 70% of the time, and when you don't you get frustrated. The worst thing you can do is question your play. When that guy beat me with an A of spades, I was so sure he had that, and I made it as impossible for him to call, considering pot odds. At the same time, I flopped a J high flush and wanted some incentive, why not make money if a guy is going to call on his 7 outer all the way to the river? When reflecting back on that hand now, I think an all in after the flop would've still led to a call; he just wasn't mucking that A high flush draw. In retrospect, I should've folded my flopped flush. When going to the river, my opponent was 14% to hit his river spade for a winning flush. Does this REALLY mean that the next 8 or 9 times out of 10 when I flop a flush, the other guy won't make his higher flush with one spade?? Statistically speaking, that's exactly what SHOULD happen. From a personal perspective, I don't feel like I've been given my due in the poker world; I truly feel like i'm destined for very big wins and cashes in the near future, and it's simply because I have the best hand every time, and if you don't believe me I'd be more than happy to have some observers come watch. What I must remember from now on is this:

1. The more you draw out, the worse of a player you are. If you find yourself behind in a decent amount of hands, you're a bad player.
2. The more you get sucked out on, the better of a player you are.

These two perspectives are 100% factual and make perfect sense. It's like stating that you see more bad beats online because you see more hands. Players who put themselves in positions to draw out will do it more often than a solid player who likes to stay ahead.

One thing that I must stress before capping this post off is this: When you're losing, you should not play higher to try and make up for lost ground. You are instead putting more money at risk to potentially lose. The chances that you're not going to be playing with a clear mind are also good. I would recommend taking a break. Anywhere from just a night to maybe a couple weeks, whatever is necessary. I hate when people say "play lower limits" when you're losing. Personally, I play lower and lose the majority of the time running into idiots. But, isn't that the price you pay for being really good? Like, really, really good?


Here's the FTP Hand History on me losing with the J high flush


Full Tilt Poker Game #6950701598: Table Legalla (6 max) - $0.05/$0.10 - $3 Cap No Limit Hold'em - FLOP *** [2s 8s 6s]timoria has 15 seconds left to acttimoria bets $0.10HellfyreMS foldsAron Norem raises to $0.50WimBe calls $0.50timoria folds*** TURN *** [2s 8s 6s] [Jd]Aron Norem bets $1.35WimBe calls $1.35*** RIVER *** [2s 8s 6s Jd] [4s]Aron Norem bets $1.05, and is cappedWimBe calls $1.05, and is capped*** SHOW DOWN ***Aron Norem shows [Js Ts] a flush, Jack highWimBe shows [As 5c] a flush, Ace highWimBe wins the pot ($5.70) with a flush, Ace high*** SUMMARY ***Total pot $6.30 Rake $0.60Board: [2s 8s 6s Jd 4s]Seat 1: Aron Norem showed [Js Ts] and lost with a flush, Jack highSeat 2: I_am_Gooood1 didn't bet (folded)Seat 3: lulusgirl didn't bet (folded)Seat 4: WimBe (button) showed [As 5c] and won ($5.70) with a flush, Ace highSeat 5: timoria (small blind) folded on the FlopSeat 6: HellfyreMS (big blind) folded on the Flop

Rigged???

Alright, hear me out. The goal here is NOT to claim that online poker being rigged is a foregone conclusion; I myself don't even believe this, but I have stumbled across some claims that are worth listening to. For anyone to rule out immediately that online poker is not rigged is someone who is in denial or just thinking logically. Here is something I read online that is an email response from a PokerStars representative.




I have taken the liberty of reviewing your previous correspondence with our staff, so I understand that we have already discussed this matter on numerous occasions. Normally we would just close your emails on this subject without reply, but I would like to try and explain something to you. I hope you will therefore read the following and understand why it is impossible for us to run a rigged site.
All the commonly held ‘rigged’ theories are certainly possible, and make for a very interesting and advanced conspiracy theory, but they all suffer from the same problem - a fundamental logical flaw. This is because, unlike all other conspiracies, the evidence needed to prove them is freely available - let me explain:
The value of you proving this conspiracy theory is huge. There was one instance, in the early days of online poker, where the top site at the time had a shuffle algorithm that was not random - It was cracked by Cigital, one of the companies we commissioned to review our RNG and procedures. The site fixed the problem, but they never truly recovered and are now not even one of the top 20 sites. Everyone who has followed in their footsteps learned a valuable lesson indeed.
If you proved the PokerStars shuffle was not random it would be worth at least tens of millions of pounds (the value that another site would likely pay to eliminate us as a competitor), and to us it is worth more since you would have the evidence to end the company and the careers of everyone working here.
All you would need is a sufficient sample of hands and you could easily statistically prove the shuffle was not random. Given the amount you play you almost certainly have a sufficient sample yourself. You can even use PokerStat or PokerTracker to do the analysis for you.
Now we do freely give out complete hand history records to any player who asks for them, so we are in effect willing to give out the information you need to prove these conspiracies and destroy this company. To put that in poker terms, if we are involved in a conspiracy, then we are making the biggest bluff you have ever seen, since we are gambling hundreds of millions on the fact you wouldn’t do anything with the histories we would happily give you. In fact we even programmed the PokerStars client to store your hands to your hard drive if you want, so there can be no possibility of us fixing the histories either.
If it is a bluff, then it can’t be a smart decision from any perspective can it?.
So I ask you this. We have some exceptional poker players in this company, but do you think we make this bluff every day, or are we holding the absolute nuts as we *know* you would only be able to prove the shuffle is fair?
What I have given above is also the most basic form of this argument. I haven’t even detailed the fact that my colleagues and I have access to all the hands ever played on the site and could obtain a huge sample of hands within minutes. We have the same potential payoff to proving a conspiracy as you do.
In summary, the conspiracy theories are believable because you want to believe that the bad beats you suffer have a reason behind them. It’s easier to accept that than the fact that in a random game anything can happen. It’s also much easier to accept than the reality that if you play perfect poker all your beats will, by definition, be bad beats - which is a sobering truth.
So - a final question - you are happy to make these accusations via email, but do you want your entire hand history collection to finally prove we are cheating you and make your millions?
Regards,
Philip APokerStars Support Team





Now, let it be known that PokerStars was the second software I ever played on, and the first that I actually played on when taking poker seriously. Phillip A, i'm sure is a great person and terrific at his job...Well, what is Phillip's job? I'll tell you what his job more than likely entails: Phillip sits at a desk for probably 8 hours a day and answers emails and maybe some phone calls. These emails and calls for the most part will pertain to software questions, and probably a handful of times a day, he has to talk to someone who thinks online poker is rigged. Now, how's this for a spin: What if Phillip receives an email and responds, jokingly, saying "You're right, online poker is rigged." I bet Phillip would be fired; instantly. That email would be forwarded more than a dumb chain letter about "who ur gunna mary" (which we've all received at some point) What I don't see is why Phillip responded in such an in-depth nature. More often, you'd get a response saying "We're sorry about your bad luck, poker is a game of chance. We hope you continue playing on our site." Let it be known, again, that I don't think online poker is rigged (as I'm typing this, I got an awful bad beat which i'll paste at the bottom of this post) Here are some reasons I personally can think of for and against online poker being rigged.



FOR

• The chances of there being a software glitch are decent. Even though all online gambling sites have to go through inspections regularly, the inspections may not always detect something that it doesn't know anything about. Think about this: You could have every anti-virus protection and still get a virus, simply because it was undetected by your anti-virus software. A glitch of any kind, you could argue, changes the nature of the game, even if the glitch was irrelevant to the actual cards. The bottom line is this: When there's money involved (and sometimes big money) people want to be 100% certain. If anyone tells you they're 100% certain that online poker isn't rigged, they're ignorant. I'd call this point the "hidden issue" which means the chance that there's something that has gone undetected.


• Greed, plain and simple greed. Online poker is essentially no different than any other business, the goal is to make money while shelling out as little as possible. Think of it as online poker giving out a minimum wage. You get a little once in a while, but they get a lot, and they get a lot every day.


• Convenience. Something that works in favor for and against online poker. It's convenient to play online poker. You can go to a site, download software and be playing long before most people can pack up and drive to a casino. Plus, you can play any game you want at any time. Online poker companies know this very well.


• Other unknown cheating and scams. Every heard of POTRIPPER? Type that into YouTube and you'll see what i'm saying. The concept of collusion in online poker is incredible. If I were a betting man, which I apparently am, I'd tell you right now that you've been an honest victim at least once. Collusion can be anything from pals talking about their hands while at the same table to someone registering under multiple screen names in the same tournament. Again, this is something that the poker company can't keep the best tabs on, but they have been known to catch these types of cheaters from time to time. Personally, I can't think of a single way to stop this before it begins. It's essentially too easy to cheat at online poker. If you have an internet router, you can split the connection between two laptops, or a laptop and a desktop, have two screen names at the SAME table and see the hole cards of two players. Yeah, that's a HUGE advantage, and it's simply too easy to do.


• Online poker could get away with it. Since poker is a game of chance and nothing is set in stone, it could be rigged and there's almost nothing anyone could do about it. Here's a hold'em scenario: You have A4 suited hearts and you limp in from the SB where the BB checks. The flop comes 10-Q-2 ALL HEARTS! You check hoping for a trap and the BB moves all in. You call instantly, seeing his lesser flush, 78 of hearts. As of right now, your A4 suited is a 99.8% favorite. Now to the almost meaningless turn. Uh-oh...a 6 of hearts. Maybe time to think paranoid poker, but you still have a 97.73% chance of winning. We go to the river...and it happens...the 9 of hearts. Your opponent hits a miracle straight flush. You're on the rail and the guy who thought his 8 high flush was the nuts has the chip lead and you're on the rail, probably typing some observer nonsense. Now, how about this to console you after that awful beat: You weren't 100% to win that hand, at any point. This means that a bad beat like this will happen at some point; it's basically bound to happen. Thanks to Cardplayer.com for their calculator on this scenario.

AGAINST

• Reputation. Online poker can so easily run a legitimate business and still make money, good money. The risk/reward for knowingly cheating isn't good odds, even for a poker company.


• Past experiences. Absolutepoker has come under scrutiny for POTRIPPER, a player who could see the hole cards of every player at the table. This is something that Absolute Poker claims they knew nothing about (which I believe) while some people think AP did know. After this, Absolute Poker took a huge hit to it's site. At one point it was maybe top 5 in poker software.


• Conspiracies are sure to exist. As soon as the concept of online poker (and poker in general) really took off, theories of conspiracy were sure to follow. If people log in and already have a closed mind about a scam possibility, online poker has already lost.


• Business suicide. If it was found out that online poker was, without a shadow of a doubt, rigged in ANY way, the company would go under, and almost instantly. It would be like a Great Depression but in a cyber poker sense. People would be withdrawing their hundreds and thousands while the company would also be facing thousands of lawsuits for wrongdoing. Many people would be out of a job and even professional endorsers for the site would lose respect (which may be unfair).

Generally speaking, I think that the majority of people who play online don't think it's rigged. If you truly think it's rigged, you should cash out immediately. If you think online poker is rigged, you'll sit at every table with a bad attitude and take every loss personally. Thinking online poker is rigged will make a fair amount of players become worse players. Which is why tomorrow, or technically later on today, I will make a post that shares my ideals on online poker and how to handle happenings, this includes winning and losing. Now here's the b/s hand that I just was in.

I don't know how well you can see it but i have AQ and the other guy has 6-9. Blinds are at 30/60 and i come out under the gun betting for 180. The button calls and the blinds fold. Flop comes Q-9-3. At this point, the pot is 450 and I bet out 200. Button goes over the top and I call. At this point, i'm thinking at best he has a set of 9s. I thought JQ was more likely. Instead, he shows 6-9 for middle pair. The guy turns a 6 and the rest is history. What was he doing in the hand? What was the incentive for him to come in with 6-9 offsuit? The guy hadn't struck me as a bad player, he hadn't played barely ANY hands. My honest opinion is this: I think he's a pervert who saw 6-9 and had a grin on his face, thinking "Ooooh la la i've got to play this hand." So he did, and i'm on the rail. What can I do right there? Next time, maybe i'll muck AQ...or you'll see this at my table:

Aron Norem (observer): RIGGED

First things first

I've entered the blogosphere! For those that actually come here, you're welcome to leave comments and use the chatbox. I suppose the reason for even starting this blog is simply because I need a place to vent frustrations, but also, most of my pals that I play with live thought it would be a good idea for me to start a blog and share some advice. I play on Full Tilt Poker under the name Aron Norem. I've played for real money for about 6 months and have so far made over 100% profit...yes impressive, but it should be higher, much higher. If you look at Officialpokerrankings.com and type in my name, the results are solid, but don't do me justice. The bad beats I have taken online (especially recently) have been so off-the-wall. The last two that really stick in my mind are QQ losing to 10-10(guy doesn't hit a ten, but actually runner hearts for a flush) and then I had 10-10 against 4-2 off (the guy calls 100 preflop with 10/20 blinds) flop brings A-3-6 and turn has a 10. At that point, I go all in and he calls, rivers a 5 (4 outer, we've all heard and had worse) But I don't want to make this a bad beat blog AT ALL! No one likes bad beat stories and no one cares about them unless they happen to you personally. This blog is, however, insight to my mind and how I play. As for my poker winnings, you can check out www.officialpokerrankings.com which is a terrific way to keep up with personal statistics, as well as check out some other players at your table; truly a great tool. In real life, i've played in only two casino tournaments, where in my first one, i took second and made $499 with a $35 buy in. The same buy in for the second tournament, i took 6th. Enough to make the final table, but just shy of cashing. I'm not trying to be arrogant, but for the most part, my online success and certainly live success is far better than most. In fact, I hope that I receive comments from players that can boast solid play and huge results; that's what we're all playing this game for! If you see me at the table, don't hesitate to exchange pleasantries! I'm all for table talk and in fact, almost dislike the lack of chatter at online tables. I know it isn't the same through a chat box, but table talk can certainly make a better game overall.