Hindsight 20-20 and all, but dang. What were you thinking?

I'm a sucker for slowplaying those aces. Nothing worse than betting with pocket rockets and everyone folding. Well, ok this is worse.

Calling the first 500 was understandable (if unnecessary). Calling the SECOND push was crazy.

Actually the first call is also bad...calling ~$500 into a ~$700 pot behind 1 bet, 1 raise, and a re-raise with no help coming but the other 2 Aces is wrong...one of those 3 DEFINATELY had the trips.

Very nice dead draw.

Good catch, John. I didn't even notice the action in front of her. He's right; both calls were wrong.

How did you know I went to TGIF? That's insanely creepy. BUT I went with Russians - so much for your little ethnic post-movie activity theory.

Karol, nothing needs to be said. You know what happened and it sucked. When the hand is laid out everyone is a grand master poker player. However when it's game time I see more people talking themselves into calling with much worse than an over pair. You may have played it crappy, but by now you can come to your own conclussions as to why.

Can I add that that was the most improbable hand in the world? Two pairs of pocket Aces and 2 of the same 3 of a kind, where the kickers were one number apart.

My comment isn't on the play, but the site. After seeing that, how can you trust that the site deals fair hands? Its obvious that they're giving people great losing hands to pump up the pot.

All rules of standard play break down in this environment.

delbrians: You can say it but you'd be completely wrong. Those three hands are exactly as likely as any other three random hands.

I don't think it's fair to just the accuracy of a shuffling algorithm from one example hand. Though it seems online at least half of the people blame bad beats on the site (no matter what the site is).