Is it possible to just be an unlucky person?

[Phone Booth]

To answer your question, no, luck has no memory by definition. To say that there are such things as an unlucky person would imply that luck is not based on random chance, but some sort of quality inherent in the person. Then it's no longer luck but your karma - I don't think there's any accepted mechanism by which you can unconsciously influence how cards are shuffled in such a way as to cause you lose money, except by explicit mechanical cheating.

With that said, it's possible that you *have* been unlucky. I don't know my true win/loss-rate but the difference between my "average" 50-hour rate and my actual worst 50-hour live-poker stretch appears to be about 12 buy-ins (where buy-in = 100BB; so for 1/2 game, this would be $2400) and that happened once already over only about 400 hours of play. Hence, even if you were a good player, your downswing (4.5 buy-ins) would not be considered particularly improbable. I lost more than that in a few hours before. With that said, I play just about every hand preflop whereas you sound like a TAG, so it's possible that you should see less variance.

On the other hand, most players dramatically overestimate their skill. Since skill + luck = result and you can't change the result to any meaningful degree (though many lie to themselves), those with decent memory are forced to assume that their luck has been worse than it actually is. The fact that you don't get to see folded hands makes this self-deception much easier. For instance, people remember when their aces are cracked, but not when they hold up, mostly because the hand usually ends more quickly and often without a showdown when nobody can beat unimproved aces. You'd also note that for the same reason, when you're waiting for the train in a subway station with several tracks, your train always comes last - it's because those times your train comes first, you're not thinking about these other people waiting for the other train. Same with buses, taxis, etc. Also when they are several rounds of betting, people tend to remember only when they were ahead, not when they were behind. If you were against one player and were far ahead preflop and behind on the flop, no matter what cards come on the turn and the river, the loser could claim that as a proof that you were unlucky. You yourself even mention:

[ QUOTE ]

Another less interesting one was getting all-in preflop with QQ vs AK for $100 each. Queen in the door, yet a T also on flop, river J gives him the nuts.


[/ QUOTE ]

If all the money went in preflop, exactly how he won is irrelevant. You were a very slight favorite and should expect to lose nearly half the time.

Even during my recent insanely hot stretch (when I made 10 buy-ins above my average rate in less than 40 hours), people hit 4/3/2-outers all the time against me in fairly large pots. If you play poker for 50 hours, you expect to be on the wrong side of bad beats of all kinds even if you're running extremely well. It's difficult to quantify how lucky or unlucky you have been on the balance. I recently had a session where I had Aces twice and lost the maximum amount both times and also lost twice out of the five times I had Kings - I still finished up.

Also, the fact that you say $900 is 9 buy-ins, while describing situations where you had a $300+ stack makes it very possible that you play a +EV game when short-stacked (say, 30-50BB) but not with a 100BB+. The examples you chose also may be a sign of this - good preflop hands holding up is a small part of the total amount of luck involved. Also important are 1) someone else holding a very good hand when you have an even better one and avoiding the reverse and 2) someone else deciding to bluff for whatever reason when you happen to have an unfoldable hand and of course avoiding the reverse.

In short, if you are tight and aggressive preflop and play poorly post-flop, you'd be +EV with a short stack but -EV with a sufficiently large stack. Since you're playing worse, effectively, when stakes are higher, this could very well sum to a -EV overall. Note that you're probably paying the casino and dealers $15 an hour or so and possibly some more to cocktail waitresses, -$900 over 50 hours is basically breaking even with other players. Since you choose to only get involved with big hands that you're willing to go far with, whereas your opponents will give up if they don't hit, you'd feel that you're consistently unlucky in big pots.

[sweeng8]

In a poker sense, then yes, it is possible to be unlucky forever in the strictest sense. Varience that lasts the life of your poker career is almost impossible, but its still possible. I have thought about this before- my worst downswing was about 1 1/2 months playing almost very day. If I was just starting and had that run it would put me of for life. This said, to 'run bad' over a few years is statistically possible but sooo improbable that you probably wont find anyone in the world that plays regularly.

On a side note, and it has been mentioned previously, on a larger scale, losing repeatedly at poker even though you are going in ahead does not mean you are born unlucky, or somehow naturally unlucky. Being born in the 3rd world in some war torn country with no food is born unlucky, so although I appreciate your question, you need to keep ideas of being 'lucky' and 'unlucky' as very relative terms. The fact we can discuss these terms in poker terms suggests most of us are very lucky

[Goater]

[ QUOTE ]
you need to keep ideas of being 'lucky' and 'unlucky' as very relative terms. The fact we can discuss these terms in poker terms suggests most of us are very lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

best point made yet. perspective....

[Henry17]

[ QUOTE ]
On a side note, and it has been mentioned previously, on a larger scale, losing repeatedly at poker even though you are going in ahead does not mean you are born unlucky, or somehow naturally unlucky. Being born in the 3rd world in some war torn country with no food is born unlucky, so although I appreciate your question, you need to keep ideas of being 'lucky' and 'unlucky' as very relative terms. The fact we can discuss these terms in poker terms suggests most of us are very lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confusing worse off with unlucky. They are not the same thing.

[sweeng8]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On a side note, and it has been mentioned previously, on a larger scale, losing repeatedly at poker even though you are going in ahead does not mean you are born unlucky, or somehow naturally unlucky. Being born in the 3rd world in some war torn country with no food is born unlucky, so although I appreciate your question, you need to keep ideas of being 'lucky' and 'unlucky' as very relative terms. The fact we can discuss these terms in poker terms suggests most of us are very lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confusing worse off with unlucky. They are not the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]


They are the same thing if you are talking about luck in a devine sense- that is to say, if you believe god (or who or whatever) created some people who are 'naturally unlucky'. If you are talking about luck in the varience sense then of course its differet, but if the discussion is on being 'naturally' lucky or unlucky it has obvious either theological or perhaps biological connotations. In that sense, I would argue that to be 'naturally' unlucky would surely encompass what you were born into, what oppurtunities you have, etc.

[BarryLyndon]

luck is a function of competition. Everyone wants basically the same thing, and there is a competitive pool for that. If there wasn't scarcity and everyone could just have what they want, then nobody would complain about being unlucky.

Luck is a function of what you want, and people compete for what you want. If you gf has a large rack and a nice face and you are playing poker and tennis with your friends, chances are you are doing pretty well in the luck department. If you want more but can't get it, you have to re-evaluate your life and/or not equate getting what you want directly with luck and lean how to reach a peace between what you have and what you want.

Barry

[Russ M.]

<---- This is not my GF btw. If it was, I would never impose to make a post like this one.

[BarryLyndon]

1. Luck is the residue of a well laid plan. That's all that luck is - residue. If you plan well and you try to make good decisions, a lot of times, you control outcomes to a substantial degree.

2. Luck in life is, in large part, a matter of perspective. For instance, if that girl in the photo is your gf, please stfu and share your opinions on how unlucky you are to walls, your dog (he probably won't even listen), or aliens. What, aliens don't exist on this planet? If that's your gf, then they do for you, because apparently you like to entertain things that are a figment of your imagination.

3. If not "2," then realize that luck is all relative and a matter of perspective. You are "unlucky" at poker, but probably not as unlucky as the guy who wasted his 4K bankroll at 10/20NL last night. Or maybe I consider myself unlucky for going on a solid 50 hour slight downswing whereas I feel like I wasted 2 days of my life, but someone else would love to be in my spot because I actually have a BR and I have a pretty good idea wtf I'm doing.

It's all relative. You play poker and you have friends to play tennis with. That's about "luckier" than a huge chunk of all people.

If you compete well, chances are you marginalize your luck will put you in a certain competitive spectrum. This is where "luck" really comes to play - within that thin percentilie where you lie. But, chances are, there are millions of people who want to be where you lie, so who is to say whether you are really "lucky" or not. Better just concentrate on decisions instead.

Barry