Definition of Luck - Convergence of factors

So, anyone that has read my blog might find it a little strange I complained about luck.  Luck is a fuzzy undefined thing so when a person that prides themself on tactics and pattern recognition uses it, well it sounds like I've gone over to other side and next I'm going to discuss pixies and dark magic like a crazy person.

Well, here's my definition of luck - a convergence of negative factors (or positive factors depending on which side you are on).  So when circumstances are largely in your favour - you are 85% all-in with a 85% hand and on the river you lose - that's what I meant by luck. When some situation goes all your way or all against you at a critical time.

Another example. I'm playing at the $70 Caesar's Palace tournament and I scrape into the money with the final 34 players.  It just so happens that I'm the big blind on the very next hand when I have to put 50% of my chips in.  I am now the shortest stack at the table.  From early position, a player raises big and the next player reraises him.  I look down at A-8o.  Of course I really should call, because at this point I'm not quite pot committed but if I don't call I'm left with very little chips.  My read on the situation is two big hands that want to dance for all the chips.  Since I know I'm less than a 33% favourite to win I fold.

I watch the flop come A - K - 8.  First aggressor had Kings and his neighbor had Aces.  This is what I mean by luck.  If the bet was smaller and I just called I would have been out on that hand regardless. The only winning play was to fold and I made it.  On the very next hand, now with a tiny stack, the button raises minimum and I shove with the best hand K6s versus QJo. I knew he was stealing and I knew I was ahead and really had one play left.  But if I hadn't just been decimated I might have waited for a better situation. But I could see little cards for an hour and I only had one orbit left. Even so, my hand was about a 60% favourite so it was the right play. He was pot committed to call me and that's great because I'm ahead and need the double up. Of course he hit a Jack to win.  That's my luck on that tournament.  If the two hands together didn't happen in that order maybe I go on to win the tournament?  

So when I talk of luck, I'm really talking about the time history around the current situation. If you bluff and get caught one hand then wake up with Aces - that's luck - a convergence of factors that lead to an opportunity to use your bluffing image to your advantage.

I have the worst luck...no kidding

I just lost to a set of Kings, with pocket Aces, in a $215 buy-in on Full Tilt. I did everything right.

Everyone claims they are unlucky. Well how about this?

Pocket Kings moron, name not needed, from early position raises big, I look down at pocket aces and the guy beside me calls so I don't want to play a 3 way pot. Or more.  I am in the middle of the chips stack pack, so I have a bigger than tournament average stack and I don't want to play a higher risk hand when all I want is to take down the pot. I was in middle position so I had 4 people behind me left to act. I was trying to mitigate the risk to my pair. Shutting out players is what you need to do so no one else flops a set and wipes you out.

In addition, if the first aggressor had a big pair I can make my hand look like AK trying to take a small pot. I reraise all in - not 3 or four bet - to make the effect I want.  Why would a big pair go all in? The pattern looks like a big Ace from a big stack trying to take down a small pot.  The guy with pocket kings or queens is salivating at the chance to double up.

Well, guess what, he bit on the bait so bad it hurt him. He had exactly the right hand and he made exactly the wrong play.  He was all in with Kings against Aces. I did everything right.  I blocked out all other players. I suckered him in.  He was drawing dead to 2 Kings. And he hit it on the river. King on the river to make a full house.  Un-effing-believable.

This is why I'm not a rich poker player - because the worst case scenarios always happen to me. Always.  Stupid players walk away with the chips and they had no idea how lucky they were. Or they do and look foolish but who cares then right, they make stupid plays, I make them commit then they walk away with the chips.  It gets really really tiring.  I didn't even mention I had to fold Aces earlier on when the fish on my left flopped a flush.  Twice in one tourney Aces cracked. Twice in 115 hands. That's my luck.

When it comes to skill, I got a set of tens to go all in against my Broadway.  I got a 6 high straight to call a reraise on my Ace high flush.  I can play.

But if you have a big stack call my all-in with 62 suited, you're sure to crack my pocket Eights.


NB:  The player that cracked my aces didn't even make the money.  That hurts even worse!

A Fearsome Player Image

One of the most fearsome player images to hold is the merciless chip leader.  If you have a huge chip lead that means tangling with you could mean game over on any hand.  That is enough to make most people pause before they call your raise.  That doubt can be used to make people lay down good hands close to the money bubble as they would rather try and hang on.

This is a huge advantage to use for your enrichment.  This is when you can raise with garbage and get away with it.

But a truly fearsome reputation is that you have such a huge chip lead AND you will call someone with any hand just to knock them out. If the other opponents watch you call with bad aces, suited connectors, and hit hands to wipe out short stacks, then they know they can't reraise your raise - you're calling. They can't desperation shove your big blind - you're calling.  They take their tournament life in their hands playing against you.

Of course if they have a premium hand they will want you to call.  And they will see you double up players some of the time.  But if you are also wiping players out in rapid succession then that's just too much for people. They will want to give you a wide lane. They will take their chances against other players they think they will have a chance against.

This is the perfect time to raise and take down pots with junk hands.  Keep pushing till they push back.

This is not a bad beat.

Ok I read the byline on this video and it claims

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sbE_-F3k9bA

to be a bad beat story of one AceKing flushing against another AceKing. One had the ace of clubs and the other had the ace of spades. The flop and turn made a flush. One player, Koroknai - a rather odious sneaky player- doubled up.

This is not a bad beat for several reasons. Both players four-bet shoved preflop knowing that they had two high cards in case the other had a pair. They both knew they were doubled suited and that was part of the thought process. They factored in the flush and straight outs into their play. They were 50% - 50 % before the flop. Most times it ends in a tie but even if they played the flop and saw 3 clubs would either lay down the hand?  I doubt it. So even on the turn both would have known they had a flush with the highest cards in the suit. Not knowing how high the flush of Koroknai was on the turn and with so many chips in the middle Ladouceur would not give up at that point.

A good play or bad play is based on how much information is available at the time of the decision.
That's the real factor: how much information was used and when it was applied.
This is not a bad beat.

A bad beat is when someone hangs around for a royal flush when they are drawing to one out. Knowing you are practically drawing dead and still playing and getting rewarded.  That's a bad beat.