Lifetime luck

[Central Limit]

John Maynard Keynes said "In the long run, we're all dead."
Now, it's easy to dismiss this as a witty one-liner; but it actually has deep ramifications. The long run doesn't matter if it will take ten million years to get here. Many poker players have way, way too much faith in the long run.

[PierceAndPierce]

Comrade, I have been thinking about the same thing for a long period of time as well.

Poker, they say, is about making +EV decisions and you'll come out ahead in the long run. Which begs the question(s),

1) How "long," is the long run?
and
2) How do you know when you're there?

And yes, there's the possibility of people being lucky. And some people are lucky. And some people are unlucky. Which begs the question... why? Which.. .as one poster mentioned, probably comes down to fate / karma / destiny / or whatever.

Some higher power. And I think as poker player, sometimes you wonder...

[morphball]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to here comments only from EXPERTS of poker, and seeing here at least alittle respect from others to my post if they want to say something constructive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a little rude, and I thought only the French were rude. Nonetheless, as I am a modest fellow poker expert (such as yourself) I will debunk your theory, but before I do this, let's have a little fun...

[ QUOTE ]
I am playing only NL. Most of the important tournaments are NL. Somehow i do extremely well in MTTs. Getting to final table 70% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You either lie, cheat or have only played a few MTT's. I think it's the first one, because you don't seem smart enough to cheat, and I can exclude the last one because your whole damn post is a disguised bad beat sob whine story.

As to your theory, it's Russian for "crap". Casinos make money with much smaller edges than what a good poker player can get for himself/herself, either that or Donald Trump and Steven Wynn have been lying to their investors. Given that Casinos make money with smaller edges in less than 50 years, I think a good poker player can make money with bigger edges in say:

5 years to play it safe, but it's much much shorter in real life.

[TopArsenal]

Just came back to 2+2, so late answer.
Your tongue is disgusting - I am not lying nor that STUPID to cheat.You added only one part, here is the second you didnt add
[ QUOTE ]
43 MTTs - final table out of 57. Just 2 hours ago made it to the third place. Which is 58th.


[/ QUOTE ]
Its not much but its not small. Its enough to say that I caught a huge luck streak.
Please close this theme.There is nothing to talk about it more. I understand that my theory seems absurd,but there is a chance it is true consider to the real world...who knows.Only God.

[NicGreek]

Nice posts,

A quickt thought, i think there is a saying that skill and luck go hand in hand.

Since gamblers usually try to put them selfs in a +ev situation they will have "greater" luck than those who dont. I think its more of letting the math of gambling have its course. If you continually put your self in +ev situations you cant avoid becoming a winner.

Thats my 2 cents for whats its worth.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
The long run doesn't matter if it will take ten million years to get here. Many poker players have way, way too much faith in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

A professional poker player could easily do 500K+ hands a year, over 40 years we are talking 20mil. I think thats enough to determine true winrate, I really doubt that someone will be running anything but what their true winrate is.

I think the problem is when people come into the forums and post "You are all fish I'm making 6BB/100 over 9500 hands! What do you mean long run? it took me 4 months to get these hands in!?!?!". They just dont get what the long term is, but I really doubt the long term is longer than 1mil hands.

[crunchh]

one of my first post also

I am not a good poker player so maybe you will discard my answer but even if not a good poker player I am a mathematician of some sort (engineer to be more precise)

first of all on all simulation I have had the chance to see or run the skill factor play an enormous role and it does occur in a reasonalble lenght of time.

a more theorical argument, if as you say there is no skill edge, supposing 95% of the swings for a great player are within 500bb wich means rougtly 250bb standart deviation (SD), let say you are playing 2$ bb and you play every week 200bb (correct me if it is too high), ie around 10000bb a year

still supposing no edge there is 95% chance that you have won or lost between 0 and 5 USD (standart error)

thus since i think there is more than a handfull guys who make more that 5 USD each year at poker table it means statistically that they have an edge and that it pays.

why not that many ppl do earn more than 100k usd a year because to hope earning that you have to play on higher limit and thus there is more good players so you may looser your edge it is called competition...


maybe my demonstration is not worth much but i gave it a try

have a nice day

[rakemeplz]

if anyone's benefitted from lifetime luck it would be you dave.

[bernie82]

You mean mostly 2 table tournaments, right?

[GeniusToad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am playing only NL. Most of the important tournaments are NL. Somehow i do extremely well in MTTs. Getting to final table 70% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

sample size?

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry for the delayed response.

you are "somehow doing extremely well" in these tournaments probably because you are in an upswing. your sample size still isn't big enough to know if you're running lucky or are very skilled compared to your competition. after a few hundred more MTT's, you'll have more solid statistical evidence to come to your own conclusions on luck vs. skill.