Dissalusioned with poker

[tipstar]

Ive only been playing poker about 3 weeks,I read a book memorised the outs and I've listened to what the so called experts have said to me while Ive been removing them of their money Usualy threats or U were lucky or u shouldnt play cards that way. One even said he was going to fly up to "punterslounge" to do me in because I dont play properly :lol That was for $40 (The same guy left with zip after I' d finished with him ") I mean £20 for fcks sake !!!!!!!!!!! ( I wish he would I realy do Komp could video the massacre lol ) Im shit at the game :o I admit it but I keep beating so called experts who end up with nothing while I am winning???? Am I super lucky? I dont think so :o So I came to the conclusion that 99% of all poker talk is bullshit To prove my point (and Jay will be my witness) I entered a comp on PP tonight and let my 8 yr old lad play it with no help from me , Jay watched as my lad played the hands and Knocked them out one by one as they complimented him on his good decisions and nice plays, I even typed up once he knew f all about poker they thought I was joking.(Jay found it highly amusing) He went on to win it and won $25 and I was well proud of him It just goes to show who's right a $25 expert who's read a book on poker or an 8 year old kid No doubt Ill get the experts on saying Ill play him for a milllion quid blah blah and It was a one off (that just happened at that moment in time ) If he played 20 comps he wouldnt win them , Ill play him anytime you want But I dont care Tipstar jnr No 1 top dog poker under 9's league (better than them Yankie bastards)

[GETT1NLOTS]

Re: Dissalusioned with poker Tipstar - now were you a little drunk when you posted this? :lol On a serious note - why the title "Disillusioned with Poker" if you are always winning? This seems like the title of a thread that someone would post if they were on a losing run - not a winning run? Or did you mean "Disillusioned with Poker Theory"? If so, let me deal with the points you make.

No doubt Ill get the experts on saying Ill play him for a million quid blah blah

Firstly - poker theory / science is not a load of old bollox Tipstar. Here is an example why. Say you are holding J,10 and the flop comes A, K, 3. Someone raises £10 and the pot stands at £20 as a result. You have to call £10 to get a pot of £30 (which includes the £10 you just put in - so a 2/1 bet). Now the only card that can save you (assuming the raiser has an Ace or a King) is the Queen - giving you the straight. Now you know the two cards in your hand and you know the three cards on the flop - so you know 5 cards - and none are the queen so you rightly calculate that out of 47 cards left in the pack the 4 queens remain. Your odds of hitting the Queen are 43 / 4 (about 11/1). Now if you take an 11/1 chance to get a 2/1 pay off you are a mug. You might hit the middle pin and consider yourself a good player and that all poker theory is a load of old bollox as a result - but you would be wrong. You would have just been a very lucky (and silly) player. Betting in poker is like punting on a sports book. You need to play when there is value to be had. Now there is no argument with regards to the very simple example I have laid out above. They are statistical facts. All poker theory is based on the above and you need to calculate when to bet or not accordingly. The only factor that you can add to the above is how good you are at reading other peoples play. Given the above example you might make the bet if you consider the player to be bluffing. Now if you call thinking that the opponent has trash and that at worst you have a straight draw and two over cards, then this is fair enough. However you would need to have pretty solid grounds to make such a call and if an opponent was this bad I would wait for a better chance to catch him later on personally. As for your kid winning a one table tourney? Well I have no reason to disbelieve you (drunken posting or not ;) :tongue2 ) but all I have to say is the following. a) He was lucky b) He was playing people who were awful (they were yanks after all :lol) c) He understands 'chance' / odds better than you think d) He reads peoples play better than you imagine. e) A combination of all of the above. Whilst I know your thread was light hearted I thought I would post up the answer for any new players or lurkers who might be reading. :ok