[Al Mirpuri]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the 21% on 4th street and that is where I am usually at. The Showdown numebrs are very low meaning you either went too far with a lot of hands, you are misreading your opponents hands, or you ran into a string of suckouts. The thing that bothered me is that this was just one session. Perhaps after you hit a certain point you were not playing your best game. You might want to consider setting some loss limits and coming back to the game after the sting where's off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for your reply.

People came and went. I do not tilt. I am too proud of my game. Players who claim to be good but tilt are not good players. Poker is more than technical skills. Mike Caro even thinks tilt the difference in earnings between various players. One of two plus twos authors, either John or Al has talked about micro-tilt when you are subtly affected. That is possible. But I know a suckout when I see one.

I maybe paid off two or three times perhaps 15 big bets but that would only account for $30 when I should not have. However, if you peruse the post again I mention the times I was either outdraw or sucked out on. Two boats lost to quads. One I did not mention was a king flush that lost to a Queen straight-flush.

I played my best game 98% of the time (maybe my best game ain't that good [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]).

There are reasons for leaving a game and Mike Caro has enumerated these but having a stop loss is not one of them. That idea is theoretically flawed. Mason has written about the stop loss idea as well I believe. You should investigate this and discover why for your own benefit.

As for the 'sting', well it stung enough to produce my post but not enough for me to bemoan my fate and rant. At no point, did I call anyone a 'fish' or 'luckbox' or anything like that. I was truly bot-like in my attitude. Perhaps, I am a bot? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Once again, thanks for posting.