"I was card dead"

[Chipless Wonder]

I often hear people say they went out of a tournament because they 'were card dead'. Is this a valid excuse?

What do you think?

[CW Buckeye]

I think so.

Just like there are good runs of cards, there are bad runs. If you are looking at J4 off all night, what can you really do with that? Sure, you can steal a pot here or there, but in the end, you won't get very far with it.

I think different playing styles are affected by it more than others.

In the end, you have to have some winning cards in order to win a tournament.

[wreaks]

I agree that it is a valid excuse. Poker is a game of skill, but luck and cards still have something to do with it.

[JTDiggity]

Definitely valid. Granted, poker is not all about the cards, but you definitely need to have some hands to do some damage. To be honest, I would rather see J4 or K2 all night then get hands like AQ, J10, KQ, and see tons of draws that never develop. Those types of hands put me out of a tourney quicker than 83 off. When I am getting rags all night, I can just keep folding until I need to pick a spot. But getting those drawing hands or second best nights will drive you absolutely insane, and empty your pockets.

[topcat824]

I definitely feel it is valid. David Apostolico, an author I respect, frequently writes in Cardplayer that he hates to hear people use that excuse - thinks it's worse that hearing bad beat rants. On this point I totally disagree with him. As Chad said, sure you can steal some blinds and small pots every now and then w/nothing, but unless you get incredibally lucky, sooner or later you have to have a quality hand. I do think sometimes I overuse it as an excuse when I probably could have made some moves and had better results, but I have also had sessions where I truly had nothing, and then when I did try to make a move w/rags, ran into big hands.

[charlton49]

Took me a while to get this post, but if you ask me...

I think it's valid to a degree, but I think that people tend to overemphasize the importance of getting cards and, by doing so, fall into the self-fulfilling prophecy of, "I can't win without cards." IMO, it's far worse to be coolered by a deck all night while getting cards, than it is to not get cards for the majority of the night.

Although it would be very unlikely to win a game without getting any hands all night, I think people tend to overuse the excuse.

two cents complete...

[Goldnutz69]

I deffinatly think that not getting cards is a valid excuse deppending on the game/situation. I really think this can go both ways though. If I'm in what I consider to be a soft game, with weak players, I feel there is no excuse for loseing period.But, if your in a tough game, cards become way more important. In a tougher game it way more likely to be facing a raise when it's your turn to act, as oppossed to a weak game where most players come in limping.Players who limp a lot are way easier to beat with no cards than someone who will push in on you at anytime, with any draw. I do totally believe that the cards you get don't really matter, so this topic is a very debateable one for me. I geuss one great example of cards not mattering would be Annette15

[Chipless Wonder]

Good input so far people.

I think early in a tournament, this is a poor excuse, but late in the game being card-dead can be everything.

Early in a tournament if you're forced to fold 25 hands in row because you have nothing, you're then in a perfect position to raise or re-raise with nothing at all. If your opponents are even the slightest bit observant, they'll have to give you credit for a monster.

I'll use this tact sometimes myself. If I'm completely card dead for say the first hour, I'll get it in my head that I'm going to represent a certain hand at a certain time. For example, I might tell myself that the next time both of my cards add up to less than ten, I really have pocket kings. And the next time I look down and see 7-2, I play the hand exactly like I would play pocket kings. In a sense, I'm 'convinced' that I have the kings, so it's not that difficult to convey this to my opponents. After all, I haven't played a hand in an hour, and now I'm coming out swinging. I must have a huge hand!

Late in a tournament, you have to get cards. Sure, you can push your whole stack in with Q-7 offsuit a couple of times and everyone will likely fold, but sooner or later you'll get called, and be sent home.

[ohpokergal]

To be honest, I would rather see J4 or K2 all night then get hands like AQ, J10, KQ, and see tons of draws that never develop. Those types of hands put me out of a tourney quicker than 83 off.

The advantage to getting J4 and K2 all night is that the decisions are easy. I agree there's difficulty in getting those somewhat playable hands like AQ, KQ, etc. early in the tourney then playing every one. The trick (I think, but "physician, heal thyself") is to really concentrate on position and table image early on.

The big trap to being "card dead" is that all of a sudden a suited QJ or middle pair looks like pocket As, and you play it that way, desperate for action.

Or apparently in Scott's case deluded yourself into believing that 7, 2 off is really a pair of cowboys!!

[wreaks]

Here's the chicken-and-egg question: if you're supposed to fold KK preflop, but you pretend that your 72o is KK, how do you play that...?