Life is Loco... - Page 2

On July 25 2010 18:31 Baal wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:27 Bejamin1 wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:16 Baal wrote: you only look like a dumbass defending your friend Benjamin its clear he is a clown with no gasp of what a real bad run is, just stop Baal you're really good at hurling insults without addressing any of my points. Go ahead Baal I'm waiting for you to say something relevant. If a player has won 40k but should have won 110k is that player not running bad? What is your justification for saying otherwise? On the contrary, it is you who isnt getting the point but whatever, keep defending his pathetic behavior and lose the respect of the actual poker players on this forum.

Baal once again you fail to respond to any of my arguments in his defense. Make a comment that actually defends your position with facts or leave.

i agree with you bejamin, there are a ton of winning players that do run bad.

Theres never an instance where it makes sense to argue with someone as narrow minded and retarded as Baal. Dont even bother Bejamin, it's the same as talking to a brick wall(which coincidently is the same as loco). Apparently this idiot thinks im a "clown" after reading one biased blog post. Very clear that he's learned everything there is to know about me.

Anyway, enough of the sarcasm. Baal and Loco are seriously exactly the same on these forums. Trying to argue with them is impossible and ultimately pointless. I dont care what either of them think about me because they have no clue about who i am and what poker means to me.

I appreciate your defense on my behalf though. And again, with reference to my response in locos blog here I am not denying everything loco has written. He is right about a few things. He however has taken it much too far and i think he should seriously be ashamed of himself for bringing in that much sarcasm and bias into the equation. All he really did was just show everyone how much of a prick/judgemental asshole he is, so i honestly couldn't care less. He's making a fool of himself just as much as he is trying to make of me despite using alot of bias and basing his post off of alot of shit that happened over a year ago.

Anyway, i appreciate this blog as a defensive response, though ultimately i dont really care what such a narrow minded faggot like loco thinks of me. I've already summed up what i think about this in his blog post on page 3, so im not sure if i really care enough to further "defend" myself from the likes of our friend with 24600 posts or the guy with 16000+ posts anymore. It is what it is so if people want to judge me based on loco's one sided sarcastic and childish post they can be my guest for all i care - i dont care what they or he think of me if they dont know me.

But again, i appreciate your post Bejamin.

this reminds me a blog post that internetpokers wrote a few months ago about running bad

LP is better than reality shows nowadays

@ Strato

I would summarize your feelings:
1. A player who is winning good money should not be upset about poker.
2. The player should see the big picture about how much poker has given them and how lucky they are to have it in their life.

These are not terrible things to say. However it is lame that a bunch of people want to gang up on someone simply because they feel negative emotions when they run badly at this game. I don't know anyone who hasn't been there. I don't know anyone who hasn't felt legitimately angry after a week of sessions in a row where they get killed by luck and are well below EV.

What pisses me off is that I can guarantee just about everyone on LP has some negative feelings when they run bad. Just because they don't express them doesn't mean Newblish is stupid because he expresses his. If that's what he needs to do to get the emotions out of his system then more power to him.

On July 25 2010 18:41 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:32 MiPwnYa wrote: Being upset when you run bad is just a retarded behavior, feeling great when you run good also is something one has to get rid of if one wants to make a living off poker without constantly riding an emotional rollercoaster. The question is not even to know whether Newblish runs bad or not, hes just whining in a pretty childish manner, thats just a very immature/retarded approach for a game like poker where you cant predict when youre gonna get rewarded for playing well. Except that being upset is an emotion not a behavior. I think most everyone has some degree of negative feelings when they run bad. Anyone who says they don't is just lying. Nobody is immune to feeling lousy when things aren't going the way they're supposed to for long stretches of time. When the guys from 2 months 2 million invented the tilt room and had fun smashing fruit and crap everyone on LP was saying "OMG AMAZING I WISH I HAD ONE" Some people go to the gym and work out to relieve stress from their job etc. Poker is a stressful job period and it wears people down. If releasing his anger in hand histories and blogs helps him come back with a refreshed state of mind then more power to him. This whole thing is nothing more than a bunch of people ganging up and making fun of someone for posting whiny comments. I would also add that although with much less frequency you yourself have made similar comments on hands. We all have.

Yea I certainly have, I dont see how posting such hands/comments can make one feel better tho (claiming that the game is unfair etc might actually make one feel more frustrated/upset) and doing it on a daily basis is certainly childish. Tryin to get rid of those negative feelings is a crucial thing and I dont think whining about how unlucky you are does you any good. I do however think its a natural way to react, but not a good one. On a side note,I hope Newbish never plays PLO

On July 25 2010 18:46 Exhilarate wrote: i agree with you bejamin, there are a ton of winning players that do run bad.

surprise surprise

i do think crying is retarded
but why make a thread on this poor guy when there are so many others???????? pick them too

On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad .

This is an extremely biased worldview that you hold. It's an extremely narrow perspective.

Lets say you're a HU player so you play less hands than most 6M or FR grinders. Lets say you play 300k hands per year. Lets say on average you play a hand worth more than 50bb's of your stack about 3 times in every hundred hands.

That would give us exactly 9000 situations where the player is involved in a hand where more than 50bb's have been put into the pot. Mathematically speaking that is a very small sample size. It is very much possible to "run bad" in those 9000 simulations.

In a world where people play 1,000,000 simulations over time the luck will likely even out for almost everybody. Even then some people will be a standard deviation or two away from where they should be. However the fact of the matter is that people don't actually play 1,000,000 All-Ins a year. In fact most people don't play that many all-ins in their entire career. If you only play 250k all-ins in your entire career your luck can easily be way off where it should be. This is just pure math. Not speculation based on a worldview.

On July 25 2010 18:55 Bejamin1 wrote: @ Strato I would summarize your feelings: 1. A player who is winning good money should not be upset about poker. 2. The player should see the big picture about how much poker has given them and how lucky they are to have it in their life. These are not terrible things to say. However it is lame that a bunch of people want to gang up on someone simply because they feel negative emotions when they run badly at this game. I don't know anyone who hasn't been there. I don't know anyone who hasn't felt legitimately angry after a week of sessions in a row where they get killed by luck and are well below EV. What pisses me off is that I can guarantee just about everyone on LP has some negative feelings when they run bad. Just because they don't express them doesn't mean Newblish is stupid because he expresses his. If that's what he needs to do to get the emotions out of his system then more power to him.

Oh, come on man. Don't do that shit to me. I've done it because he has an extreme cause of delusion. I don't have the time nor the willpower to go and try to teach a lesson to everyone who expresses anger on a poker forum. I've picked him for a good reason, so I could drive a point to everyone. No matter how "violent" that post was, it should be a blessing in disguise, because it should allow him to re-evaluate his beliefs, and others who were guilty of a similar behavior.

Most of us don't repress our negative emotions, we simply don't experience them for that long because we offer ourselves some nice reality checks on a regular basis. Newblish is so disconnected with reality that he cannot do this. I figured the best way to help him was by doing what I did. Was it the best I could do to help him? Certainly not, and I'm guilty of being annoyed at his behavior and expressing it there. Doesn't make it any less true, or valuable for him to hear. A close friend isn't ever going to tell him what I did, I'm brutally honest and my friends have come to appreciate that trait in me. Baal is the same, and the people who are hating on us for that are just being idiots.

On July 25 2010 19:03 TimDawg wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:46 Exhilarate wrote: i agree with you bejamin, there are a ton of winning players that do run bad. surprise surprise

rofl those were my exact thoughts hahaha

On July 25 2010 19:07 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad . This is an extremely biased worldview that you hold. It's an extremely narrow perspective. Lets say you're a HU player so you play less hands than most 6M or FR grinders. Lets say you play 300k hands per year. Lets say on average you play a hand worth more than 50bb's of your stack about 3 times in every hundred hands. That would give us exactly 9000 situations where the player is involved in a hand where more than 50bb's have been put into the pot. Mathematically speaking that is a very small sample size. It is very much possible to "run bad" in those 9000 simulations. In a world where people play 1,000,000 simulations over time the luck will likely even out for almost everybody. Even then some people will be a standard deviation or two away from where they should be. However the fact of the matter is that people don't actually play 1,000,000 All-Ins a year. In fact most people don't play that many all-ins in their entire career. If you only play 250k all-ins in your entire career your luck can easily be way off where it should be. This is just pure math. Not speculation based on a worldview.

This is annoying. You can't make a claim like saying it's a narrow perspective and not back it up with counter-arguments. Not only that, but you've missed the whole point about how this all relates to emotion. In whatever case, like I said, when we make the interpretation that someone is running bad (he's not, the deviation was there from the beginning and he's only running as it is possible to run) , either way, being constantly negative or upset about it doesn't change anything, nor does blaming it on sites being rigged or any fucking thing else that's external. IT SIMPLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. Address the main issue the next time you post, please.

On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad. Nothing should be surprising out of life. Everything that happens to a person has been a possibility. It's been nature doing its own thing, in other words it is equity (sounds familiar?), and it's only ever bizarre to be surprised or upset about it. But I know this isn't exactly commonly accepted, and we can't really run away from the concepts of luck, no matter how little logical sense they actually really make if the world is deterministic (which I maintain). Nature is indifferent, so should you be. This, of course, isn't to be applied when it comes to Man's evil toward Man, as there is plenty to rebel against in this case, but only in that natural laws govern everything that we know. So, using our interpretation that there is such a thing as running bad (again, I think there is only 'running' in actuality...), it doesn't justify complaining about it, because it accomplishes nothing. It's illogical to be upset with something you have no control over. If I lose electricity in my house today because of a big thunderstorm, is it logical for me to cry out loud and scream about how unfair this all is? It makes no sense at all, it was a possibility to begin with, now I have to deal with it as best as I can. The same is true for any situation, the same is true for poker. If Newblish is angry, let him be angry at himself, for he has nothing else to be angry about. In this way he can learn something. Once you blame external events, you lose your chance at growth. NOTHING easy ever has much new substance or growth. He can curse at the world all he wants, the world doesn't care, and he's not doing himself or anybody a favor. A player "should" never win a certain amount, since there was always the possibility of him not winning it if he didn't have a 100% chance of winning. Equity stabilizes itself, life wouldn't exist otherwise. We choose to interpret that he "should" or "deserved" to have had that sum. And when we believe this ourselves (delude ourselves) we cause ourselves much unneeded grief. I don't know why you tell me I'm biased, it's obvious that there was something personal. You're biased yourself, so why use it against me? You are his friend. He's probably very upset right now and you're stepping up for him, so no matter how spot-on I might be, being his friend you are most likely going to refuse to really hear what I have to say. My goal was to upset him, and anybody who has that mentality, a mentality that I once had myself and I sure wish someone would've slapped me in the face back then, too. Understandably, when you've been spoon-fed all your life, you don't grow up as fast as you should. I don't know who you're trying to convince by telling us you've seen him play and everything and we have no idea. His graphs show exactly what they show. Let the people be judges... I for one think he has nothing to complain about.

You're basically claiming the the expression of anger can never be a good thing because it is not productive. I think it's good to release anger and stress rather that bottling it up inside and pretending it doesn't exist. Most people feel negative emotions when things aren't going well. I hold the opinion that expressing these emotions and moving on is better than simply ignoring them.

On July 25 2010 19:07 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:55 Bejamin1 wrote: @ Strato I would summarize your feelings: 1. A player who is winning good money should not be upset about poker. 2. The player should see the big picture about how much poker has given them and how lucky they are to have it in their life. These are not terrible things to say. However it is lame that a bunch of people want to gang up on someone simply because they feel negative emotions when they run badly at this game. I don't know anyone who hasn't been there. I don't know anyone who hasn't felt legitimately angry after a week of sessions in a row where they get killed by luck and are well below EV. What pisses me off is that I can guarantee just about everyone on LP has some negative feelings when they run bad. Just because they don't express them doesn't mean Newblish is stupid because he expresses his. If that's what he needs to do to get the emotions out of his system then more power to him. Oh, come on man. Don't do that shit to me. I've done it because he has an extreme cause of delusion. I don't have the time nor the willpower to go and try to teach a lesson to everyone who expresses anger on a poker forum. I've picked him for a good reason, so I could drive a point to everyone. No matter how "violent" that post was, it should be a blessing in disguise, because it should allow him to re-evaluate his beliefs, and others who were guilty of a similar behavior. Most of us don't repress our negative emotions, we simply don't experience them for that long because we offer ourselves some nice reality checks on a regular basis. Newblish is so disconnected with reality that he cannot do this. I figured the best way to help him was by doing what I did. Was it the best I could do to help him? Certainly not, and I'm guilty of being annoyed at his behavior and expressing it there. Doesn't make it any less true, or valuable for him to hear. A close friend isn't ever going to tell him what I did, I'm brutally honest and my friends have come to appreciate that trait in me. Baal is the same, and the people who are hating on us for that are just being idiots.

Why do you presume to know so much about him? Your generalizing about his beliefs based on a few blog posts and hand history comments. That's a huge leap in any situation.

On July 25 2010 19:13 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad. Nothing should be surprising out of life. Everything that happens to a person has been a possibility. It's been nature doing its own thing, in other words it is equity (sounds familiar?), and it's only ever bizarre to be surprised or upset about it. But I know this isn't exactly commonly accepted, and we can't really run away from the concepts of luck, no matter how little logical sense they actually really make if the world is deterministic (which I maintain). Nature is indifferent, so should you be. This, of course, isn't to be applied when it comes to Man's evil toward Man, as there is plenty to rebel against in this case, but only in that natural laws govern everything that we know. So, using our interpretation that there is such a thing as running bad (again, I think there is only 'running' in actuality...), it doesn't justify complaining about it, because it accomplishes nothing. It's illogical to be upset with something you have no control over. If I lose electricity in my house today because of a big thunderstorm, is it logical for me to cry out loud and scream about how unfair this all is? It makes no sense at all, it was a possibility to begin with, now I have to deal with it as best as I can. The same is true for any situation, the same is true for poker. If Newblish is angry, let him be angry at himself, for he has nothing else to be angry about. In this way he can learn something. Once you blame external events, you lose your chance at growth. NOTHING easy ever has much new substance or growth. He can curse at the world all he wants, the world doesn't care, and he's not doing himself or anybody a favor. A player "should" never win a certain amount, since there was always the possibility of him not winning it if he didn't have a 100% chance of winning. Equity stabilizes itself, life wouldn't exist otherwise. We choose to interpret that he "should" or "deserved" to have had that sum. And when we believe this ourselves (delude ourselves) we cause ourselves much unneeded grief. I don't know why you tell me I'm biased, it's obvious that there was something personal. You're biased yourself, so why use it against me? You are his friend. He's probably very upset right now and you're stepping up for him, so no matter how spot-on I might be, being his friend you are most likely going to refuse to really hear what I have to say. My goal was to upset him, and anybody who has that mentality, a mentality that I once had myself and I sure wish someone would've slapped me in the face back then, too. Understandably, when you've been spoon-fed all your life, you don't grow up as fast as you should. I don't know who you're trying to convince by telling us you've seen him play and everything and we have no idea. His graphs show exactly what they show. Let the people be judges... I for one think he has nothing to complain about. You're basically claiming the the expression of anger can never be a good thing because it is not productive. I think it's good to release anger and stress rather that bottling it up inside and pretending it doesn't exist. Most people feel negative emotions when things aren't going well. I hold the opinion that expressing these emotions and moving on is better than simply ignoring them.

This is a very common misconception about my worldview. I do not repress negative emotions, I guess the best way to put it is that I "reason them out". I use my reasoning abilities to reduce them to a minimum. Anger is a natural reaction, but it should stay just a reaction and not something that eats you from the inside. It can only stay a reaction if you have the right kind of thinking. While it might feel good to release the anger, if you don't learn anything from it then there's nothing positive about it, especially not considering the fact that you can hurt others in the process. If you're composed when facing a situation, you're much more likely to make the best decision than if you're angry.

On July 25 2010 19:12 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:07 Bejamin1 wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad . This is an extremely biased worldview that you hold. It's an extremely narrow perspective. Lets say you're a HU player so you play less hands than most 6M or FR grinders. Lets say you play 300k hands per year. Lets say on average you play a hand worth more than 50bb's of your stack about 3 times in every hundred hands. That would give us exactly 9000 situations where the player is involved in a hand where more than 50bb's have been put into the pot. Mathematically speaking that is a very small sample size. It is very much possible to "run bad" in those 9000 simulations. In a world where people play 1,000,000 simulations over time the luck will likely even out for almost everybody. Even then some people will be a standard deviation or two away from where they should be. However the fact of the matter is that people don't actually play 1,000,000 All-Ins a year. In fact most people don't play that many all-ins in their entire career. If you only play 250k all-ins in your entire career your luck can easily be way off where it should be. This is just pure math. Not speculation based on a worldview. This is annoying. You can't make a claim like saying it's a narrow perspective and not back it up with counter-arguments. Not only that, but you've missed the whole point about how this all relates to emotion. In whatever case, like I said, when we make the interpretation that someone is running bad (he's not, the deviation was there from the beginning and he's only running as it is possible to run) , either way, being constantly negative or upset about it doesn't change anything, nor does blaming it on sites being rigged or any fucking thing else that's external. IT SIMPLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. Address the main issue the next time you post, please.

I'm sorry I guess I assumed you would see my counter-point pretty clearly. You bluntly state that running bad does not exist. That's a narrow worldview if I've ever seen one. If you believe than running bad doesn't exist you're obviously going to disagree with anyone who says they run bad.

On July 25 2010 19:20 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:07 Loco wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:55 Bejamin1 wrote: @ Strato I would summarize your feelings: 1. A player who is winning good money should not be upset about poker. 2. The player should see the big picture about how much poker has given them and how lucky they are to have it in their life. These are not terrible things to say. However it is lame that a bunch of people want to gang up on someone simply because they feel negative emotions when they run badly at this game. I don't know anyone who hasn't been there. I don't know anyone who hasn't felt legitimately angry after a week of sessions in a row where they get killed by luck and are well below EV. What pisses me off is that I can guarantee just about everyone on LP has some negative feelings when they run bad. Just because they don't express them doesn't mean Newblish is stupid because he expresses his. If that's what he needs to do to get the emotions out of his system then more power to him. Oh, come on man. Don't do that shit to me. I've done it because he has an extreme cause of delusion. I don't have the time nor the willpower to go and try to teach a lesson to everyone who expresses anger on a poker forum. I've picked him for a good reason, so I could drive a point to everyone. No matter how "violent" that post was, it should be a blessing in disguise, because it should allow him to re-evaluate his beliefs, and others who were guilty of a similar behavior. Most of us don't repress our negative emotions, we simply don't experience them for that long because we offer ourselves some nice reality checks on a regular basis. Newblish is so disconnected with reality that he cannot do this. I figured the best way to help him was by doing what I did. Was it the best I could do to help him? Certainly not, and I'm guilty of being annoyed at his behavior and expressing it there. Doesn't make it any less true, or valuable for him to hear. A close friend isn't ever going to tell him what I did, I'm brutally honest and my friends have come to appreciate that trait in me. Baal is the same, and the people who are hating on us for that are just being idiots. Why do you presume to know so much about him? Your generalizing about his beliefs based on a few blog posts and hand history comments. That's a huge leap in any situation.

Behavior tells us everything we need to know about someone. What, should I take his word when he's telling me who he is? That fool doesn't know anything about himself.

On July 25 2010 19:21 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:13 Bejamin1 wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad. Nothing should be surprising out of life. Everything that happens to a person has been a possibility. It's been nature doing its own thing, in other words it is equity (sounds familiar?), and it's only ever bizarre to be surprised or upset about it. But I know this isn't exactly commonly accepted, and we can't really run away from the concepts of luck, no matter how little logical sense they actually really make if the world is deterministic (which I maintain). Nature is indifferent, so should you be. This, of course, isn't to be applied when it comes to Man's evil toward Man, as there is plenty to rebel against in this case, but only in that natural laws govern everything that we know. So, using our interpretation that there is such a thing as running bad (again, I think there is only 'running' in actuality...), it doesn't justify complaining about it, because it accomplishes nothing. It's illogical to be upset with something you have no control over. If I lose electricity in my house today because of a big thunderstorm, is it logical for me to cry out loud and scream about how unfair this all is? It makes no sense at all, it was a possibility to begin with, now I have to deal with it as best as I can. The same is true for any situation, the same is true for poker. If Newblish is angry, let him be angry at himself, for he has nothing else to be angry about. In this way he can learn something. Once you blame external events, you lose your chance at growth. NOTHING easy ever has much new substance or growth. He can curse at the world all he wants, the world doesn't care, and he's not doing himself or anybody a favor. A player "should" never win a certain amount, since there was always the possibility of him not winning it if he didn't have a 100% chance of winning. Equity stabilizes itself, life wouldn't exist otherwise. We choose to interpret that he "should" or "deserved" to have had that sum. And when we believe this ourselves (delude ourselves) we cause ourselves much unneeded grief. I don't know why you tell me I'm biased, it's obvious that there was something personal. You're biased yourself, so why use it against me? You are his friend. He's probably very upset right now and you're stepping up for him, so no matter how spot-on I might be, being his friend you are most likely going to refuse to really hear what I have to say. My goal was to upset him, and anybody who has that mentality, a mentality that I once had myself and I sure wish someone would've slapped me in the face back then, too. Understandably, when you've been spoon-fed all your life, you don't grow up as fast as you should. I don't know who you're trying to convince by telling us you've seen him play and everything and we have no idea. His graphs show exactly what they show. Let the people be judges... I for one think he has nothing to complain about. You're basically claiming the the expression of anger can never be a good thing because it is not productive. I think it's good to release anger and stress rather that bottling it up inside and pretending it doesn't exist. Most people feel negative emotions when things aren't going well. I hold the opinion that expressing these emotions and moving on is better than simply ignoring them. This is a very common misconception about my worldview. I do not repress negative emotions, I guess the best way to put it is that I "reason them out". I use my reasoning abilities to reduce them to a minimum. Anger is a natural reaction, but it should stay just a reaction and not something that eats you from the inside. It can only stay a reaction if you have the right kind of thinking. While it might feel good to release the anger, if you don't learn anything from it then there's nothing positive about it, especially not considering the fact that you can hurt others in the process. If you're composed when facing a situation, you're much more likely to make the best decision than if you're angry.

You clearly believe that there is a better way to deal with anger than simply releasing it. That's fine but it doesn't work for everybody. Some people like to hit the weights and expand that frustration into something positive (fitness) and some people like to remind themselves how irrational anger is and how unproductive it is and use that to diffuse and release their emotions.

What I'm saying is that neither way is better than the other. Saying someone is childish or stupid because of how they express their anger isn't anything more than you being a prick. If you had a younger sister who was really pissed off and upset about her boyfriend breaking up with her would you tell her why it's irrational to care about someone who treated them like shit/didn't care enough to be with them or would you just let them work through the emotions and get over it aka a good cry and a girly movie with girlfriends?

You don't like that Newblish deals with his anger in a different way than you do. That's fine but frankly keep it to yourself? Not everybody is you man.

On July 25 2010 19:24 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:20 Bejamin1 wrote:   On July 25 2010 19:07 Loco wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:55 Bejamin1 wrote: @ Strato I would summarize your feelings: 1. A player who is winning good money should not be upset about poker. 2. The player should see the big picture about how much poker has given them and how lucky they are to have it in their life. These are not terrible things to say. However it is lame that a bunch of people want to gang up on someone simply because they feel negative emotions when they run badly at this game. I don't know anyone who hasn't been there. I don't know anyone who hasn't felt legitimately angry after a week of sessions in a row where they get killed by luck and are well below EV. What pisses me off is that I can guarantee just about everyone on LP has some negative feelings when they run bad. Just because they don't express them doesn't mean Newblish is stupid because he expresses his. If that's what he needs to do to get the emotions out of his system then more power to him. Oh, come on man. Don't do that shit to me. I've done it because he has an extreme cause of delusion. I don't have the time nor the willpower to go and try to teach a lesson to everyone who expresses anger on a poker forum. I've picked him for a good reason, so I could drive a point to everyone. No matter how "violent" that post was, it should be a blessing in disguise, because it should allow him to re-evaluate his beliefs, and others who were guilty of a similar behavior. Most of us don't repress our negative emotions, we simply don't experience them for that long because we offer ourselves some nice reality checks on a regular basis. Newblish is so disconnected with reality that he cannot do this. I figured the best way to help him was by doing what I did. Was it the best I could do to help him? Certainly not, and I'm guilty of being annoyed at his behavior and expressing it there. Doesn't make it any less true, or valuable for him to hear. A close friend isn't ever going to tell him what I did, I'm brutally honest and my friends have come to appreciate that trait in me. Baal is the same, and the people who are hating on us for that are just being idiots. Why do you presume to know so much about him? Your generalizing about his beliefs based on a few blog posts and hand history comments. That's a huge leap in any situation. Behavior tells us everything we need to know about someone. What, should I take his word when he's telling me who he is? That fool doesn't know anything about himself.

Again that's a pretty narrow worldview. I would argue the reasons WHY people behave a certain way is just as important as the behavior itself. Especially when it comes to understanding people and using empathy.

Why do you assume that someones behavior on an internet forum is similar to their real life attitude? You only see a sliver of who people are in anonymous conversations over the internet. Pretending that you can somehow extrapolate that sliver into an entire human being and understand them is bullshit.