Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?



Last Active


  • Here are the assumptions: We are comparing apples to apples (among positive EV players) since poker is a negative sum game when you factor in the rake and associated fees.

    Other consideration. Given that so call "winning" players is already a pre-selected sample, meaning if you took a random group of players and pre-selected the ones that continues with the game vs the ones that loss their ass in the beginning and stopped playing altogether, you are left with only the so called "winners". This is the group under observation. Therefore the sample size itself is a nonrandom distribution. Everything I just mentioned here is devoid of exceptional skills.

    Bayes' theorem, for streaks and runs. There are poker players who seems to consistently win, say straight for 15 years, this is similar to outperforming the SP 500 ( actual example; The Value Trust Fund) for 15 years straight, without exceptional skills. Each year the fund has a 50/50 chance of wining or losing, in case of poker, the player at least has to beat the house rake and other associated expenses. (tipping, theft. etc...) The probability of such a streak is very small (1/2)15th or 0.00031 or 0.0031 percent. However once we factor in the pool of players say 1000 players for 5/10 and 10/20 so call "elite commerce pros" the probability of having 1 or more players having a winning streak goes up to 3 percent. The probability of having 1 or more such player(s) having a winning streak over a long period say 40 yrs (career span of some poker players) out of a pool of 1000 players is goes to about 38%.

    Conclusion: Lucky is probability taken personally. The hubris of randomness and lucky mistaken for exceptional skills.
    May 2016
    • TroyTrang
      Justify mathematically!
    • JimHamring
      correct me if I'm wrong but you're saying poker is not beatable and every pro is just running good out of a massive pool where you don't hear about the ones that loses?

      If that was correct, it should be 50/50 wheater I'm winning over my next 200h right? Or actually a lot less due to rake?
  • Bart
    How late are u playing tonight? Was thinking of getting some beers..
    March 2016
  • hey Jim,

    I have been following your blog and wonder were you are staying in LA. I am also planning going but it seems kinda difficult to find a cheap place which is close to both , the commerce and downtown. are you travelling alone?
    January 2016
    • JimHamring
      Hi, I actually live in Hollywood which isn't very close to the casino, but it's a nice area when you don't play poker. LA accommodation is pretty expensive no matter were you go as far as I can tell.

      The commerce/bike are both located in areas were you don't really want to live so I'd say downtown is as close as you're gonna get if you want to stay in a somewhat nice neighborhood.

      Yeah I went here by myself so what I did was just looking through air bnb and then bite the bullet of paying a high price. But luckily the games make up for it in the end. LA it's just impossible to avoid travel time back and forth unless you literally stay at the casino hotel
    • maphacks
      okay thanks. we are still looking for a place. are you still here in mai/june? we could go play some golf then :)