We three threes

I don't have a whole lot of statistical data on how superstitious poker players are; in fact, the sample size of my empirical data is just one player (myself :-). However, that doesn't stop me from having an opinion. My strong suspicion is that poker players as a class are no less superstitious than the general population, which is saying a good deal.

How else to explain the fact that pocket threes are one of my favorite hands? I've mentioned sine wave hands before, and pocket threes are a perfect example of a sine wave hand. You're not always going to win with them, and you're not always going to lose with them. In fact, if you're like me, your aggregate career delta with them will be constantly oscillating between a profit and a loss. What's to like about a track record like that?

What's to like is the profit potential in a hand such as pocket threes. You're hoping all of the following come true:

1. you hit a set of threes on the flop
2. there are no straight or flush draws
3. you don't run into a bigger set

The first requirement is the hardest to come by; once it's met, the second requirement is easier to come by, and the third is the easiest of all. What this all adds up to is the possibility of making a real killing. As with any set, the strength of your hand is very well disguised.

So why do I like pocket threes over other pocket pairs? They just give me a good feeling; I can't really explain it. Last night, this good feeling was justified; on hand 144, I won a pot worth $106,188 with a set of threes, $53,469 of which was other people's money.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 145 hands and saw flop:
 - 16 out of 19 times while in big blind (84%)
 - 8 out of 20 times while in small blind (40%)
 - 50 out of 106 times in other positions (47%)
 - a total of 74 out of 145 (51%)
 Pots won at showdown - 11 of 19 (57%)
 Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $29,224
cash game no limit hold'em balance: $5,418,015
balance: $7,774,968