This part of the article i found interesting
"Most players complain endlessly about their bad luck, cry about their rotten cards, agonize over the endless hours missing countless flops and getting sucked out on by bozos calling on a wing and a prayer.
You have to get over this if you have any hope of becoming a legit, long-term winner in this game."
Seriously though the article is a load of smoke and mirrors. Spends alot of time basically explaining that for someone to run good there has to be someone who runs bad. In essence what he is saying is that for someone to win another must lose, which isnt some ground breaking theory. Obviously you can replace win/lose with run good/run bad or be lucky/be unlucky and you have what his whole article is about.
To finish he correctly states that luck or running bad isnt a constant and can change from hand to hand or session to session. That makes the whole "some players really run worse than other" redundant. Obviously the guy who loses a hand runs worse in that hand than the guy who won the hand. Not once does he say that those who run worse are destined to run worse for eternity, infact he states the opposite saying it "has no memory" so can basically change at will.
Results 21 to 22 of 22
-
11-24-2012, 02:56 AM #21
-
11-24-2012, 03:18 AM #22
Thank you for posting the article. I found it an interesting read and am glad you have shared it with your fellow poker players