Hubbry Logo
Bad beatBad beatMain
Open search
Bad beat
Community hub
Bad beat
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Bad beat
Bad beat
Bad beat
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In poker, bad beat is a subjective term for a hand in which a player with what appear to be strong cards nevertheless loses. It most often occurs where one player bets the clearly stronger hand and their opponent makes a mathematically poor call that wins with any subsequent dealing to complete the hand.

In pure mathematical terms a one-outer can be considered a pure bad beat, however there is no consensus among poker players as to what else exactly constitutes a bad beat and often players will disagree about whether a particular hand was a bad beat. A few examples are: quads over full house, quads over quads, straight flush over quads, small full house vs. bigger full house or better.

Types of bad beats

[edit]

Virtually any hand that looked like a favorite to win can end up losing as more cards are dealt, but bad beats usually involve one of two not mutually exclusive scenarios:

  • The player who wins on a bad beat is rewarded for a mathematically unsound play. Calling a bet despite having neither the best hand nor the right pot odds or implied odds to call, then winning anyway, is characteristic of this type of bad beat. It can also involve the inferior hand catching running cards when it requires two cards in a row to come from behind to win the pot. For example, catching cards on both the turn and the river in Texas hold 'em that complete a straight or flush.
  • A very strong hand loses to an even stronger one, better known as "cooler". This type of beat occurs with some frequency in movies. In the films The Cincinnati Kid and Casino Royale, The Kid and Le Chiffre, respectively, each lose with a full house to a straight flush. In this situation, it is possible that both players have played their cards well, and avoiding the bad beat could not have been achieved without committing a mistake.

Reacting to bad beats

[edit]

A bad beat can be a profound psychological blow, and can easily lead to a player going on tilt. Professional player Phil Hellmuth, among others, is notorious for his pronounced reactions to bad beats. However, suffering a bad beat means that the losing player was "getting the money in good" and in most instances would win by playing the same hand the same way. Thus, the more stoic poker players accept bad beats as an unpleasant but necessary drawback to a tactic that works the vast majority of the time.

Bad beats online

[edit]

In online poker rooms, bad beats often lead to accusations that the random number generator is "rigged", even though such beats also occur in offline games. Many online poker rooms post statistical data to demonstrate the randomness of the hands generated.[1] In online poker games players have an opportunity to play in "bad beat" tables where the player who has the best losing hand receives an accumulated prize pool. An additional amount of rake is taken from each hand to fund the jackpot. The largest online jackpot to date was €1.25 million, hit in July 2011 with €443,000 going to the loser of the hand.[2]

Players are statistically more likely to experience bad beats online, since playing using a computer allows for more hands played per hour. Also, online players may play multiple cash game tables and/or tournaments at the same time, also increasing the frequency of hands dealt. Also, tells are rendered moot, so players are incapable of reading clues such as body language in aid of deriving the strength of an opponent's hand. Finally, online poker games (especially freeroll tournaments) are far more accessible to the average player who, being average, is less likely to be knowledgeable regarding the techniques of the game, in turn making it more likely they will bet from the gut or intuition rather than experience.

Bad beat jackpot

[edit]

A bad beat jackpot is a prize that is paid when a sufficiently strong hand is shown down and loses to an even stronger hand held by another player.[3] Not all poker games offer bad beat jackpots, and those that do have specific requirements for how strong a losing hand must be to qualify for the jackpot. For example, the losing hand may be required to be four-of-a-kind or better. There may be additional requirements as well. For example, in Texas hold 'em there is usually a requirement that both hole cards play in both the losing and winning hands, or that where a full house is the minimum (usually aces full of jacks or higher), both hole cards must be used to make the three-of-a-kind in the full house.

Bad beat jackpots are usually progressive, often with a small rake being taken out of each pot to fund the jackpot (in addition to the regular rake). When a jackpot is won, it is usually split among all players sitting at the table at the time of the bad beat with the losing hand getting the largest share, followed by the winning hand, and all the other players dividing the remainder. Generally, only the best losing hand is eligible to win the largest share, even if another hand would also qualify.

Specific rules, collections, payout percentages, and amounts vary greatly from one casino or cardroom to the next, and are sometimes changed.

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

Books

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Bad beat

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In poker, a bad beat is a situation in which a player with a statistically strong hand loses to an opponent's weaker hand due to an unlikely and improbable , often on the turn or . This outcome highlights the role of variance and luck in the game, where even heavy favorites—such as pocket aces against a low suited connector—can be overcome by runner-runner community cards forming a straight or flush. The term is subjective and commonly applied in Texas Hold'em, though it can occur in other variants; it underscores that poker success relies not only on skill but also on enduring short-term misfortunes. Bad beats are a frequent topic in poker discussions, particularly in live and settings, where faster play in digital formats can make them seem more prevalent. To provide financial consolation, many casinos and poker rooms offer bad beat jackpots, progressive pools funded by a small rake from each pot in eligible games. Qualification typically requires a premium hand, such as quad eights or better in , or aces full of tens or higher in live settings, to lose against an even stronger hand like a higher set of quads or a , with the hand typically played to showdown. Payouts are divided, often with 50% going to the loser, 25% to the winner, and the remainder split among other active players at the table; notable examples include a $1,068,590 jackpot awarded at Motor City Casino in 2018. These jackpots, with exceeding 2 million to one, add excitement but are rare, and some platforms have phased them out in favor of other promotions. Beyond mechanics, bad beats pose significant psychological challenges, often triggering tilt—an emotional state of frustration and impaired judgment that can lead to poor decisions and further losses. Professional players emphasize strategies like hand analysis, practices such as , and focusing on long-term results to cope, recognizing that enduring bad beats is essential for sustained profitability. links frequent exposure to such events with potential pathological risks among professionals, though skilled handling mitigates this. Outside poker, the term "bad beat" has been adopted in to describe heartbreaking last-second losses on seemingly secure wagers, but its origins and primary usage remain rooted in card games.

Fundamentals

Definition

A bad beat in poker refers to a situation in which a player holding a statistically strong hand, such as a high pair or better, loses to an opponent's inferior starting hand that improbably improves to win, often through a dramatic on the river or final cards, defying expected probabilities. This outcome highlights the role of variance in poker, where even hands with significant pre-flop or pre-river advantages can succumb to unlikely card combinations. Central to a bad beat is the requirement that the losing player was a substantial favorite entering the critical phase of the hand, with the defeat stemming from an improbable development, such as an opponent hitting a one-outer—the sole remaining card that could improve their hand to win—emphasizing the rarity and frustration of the event. Without this high degree of favoritism, the loss is generally viewed as a standard or variance rather than a true bad beat. Bad beats are most commonly discussed in the context of variants like Texas Hold'em, where shared board cards can unpredictably elevate weaker holdings, though the concept applies across other forms such as Omaha. The evaluation of a "strong hand" in these scenarios relies on , which compare the current pot size to the cost of a call; a favorable strong hand provides sufficient implied odds to justify commitment despite the inherent risks of draws. This framework underscores why bad beats sting particularly in pots built on sound mathematical decisions. The phrase "bad beat" emerged as poker slang in the 1980s, likely adapted from broader gambling lexicon used by horse-race bettors and sports wagerers to describe statistically improbable defeats.

Historical Origins

The term "bad beat" in poker, denoting a statistically unlikely loss despite holding a strong hand, first gained notable traction in the late 1970s within the U.S. poker community. Its early usage appears in Doyle Brunson's seminal book Super/System, published in 1978, where Brunson employs the phrase to describe devastating personal setbacks, likening a near-fatal health scare to the "ultimate bad beat" in the game's context of improbable defeats. This reference underscores the term's roots in the emotional frustration of favored outcomes turning sour, aligning with the era's growing poker literature that emphasized psychological resilience amid variance. The concept's cultural spread accelerated during the 1980s poker boom, driven by the expansion of tournaments like the and increased media exposure, which popularized poker beyond underground circles. Books, player anecdotes, and environments amplified the term, transforming it from niche into a staple of poker discourse that captured the game's inherent luck-skill tension. The association with bad beat jackpots, which emerged as a promotional feature in poker rooms during this period, further embedded the term in organized play, though specifics vary by venue. Pre-poker notions of improbable defeats in trace to and card games, echoed in modern betting slang for shocking upsets. By the 1990s, the term had become standardized in poker discussions and rules.

Types and Examples

Common Types

Bad beats in poker often fall into distinct categories based on the mechanics of the hand and the improbability of the losing outcome, typically involving scenarios where the favored player holds significant equity, often over 80-90%, yet loses to a highly unlikely draw or cooler. One common type is the runner-runner draw, where an opponent requires two consecutive specific cards to complete a superior hand, such as a straight or flush, turning the river against a heavy favorite. For instance, a player with pocket aces might dominate pre-flop with roughly 82% equity against a suited connector, but lose if the board delivers runner-runner cards for an opponent to hit a flush, a scenario with less than 5% probability from the flop. These beats emphasize the variance in community card games like Texas Hold'em, where shared board cards amplify the risk of improbable completions. Another frequent category is set over set, occurring when one player's flopped trips are outranked by an opponent's higher set, a rare confrontation that happens in approximately 1 in 217 instances where both players flop sets. This often involves pocket pairs like 88 versus JJ on a J-8-x flop, where the lower set holds about 90% equity post-flop but loses if no board improvement occurs, representing a classic cooler with minimal draw elements. Such hands underscore the hidden strength of paired cards in Hold'em, where pre-flop equity can exceed 80% but final outcomes hinge on exact matches. A third type involves an overpair being overtaken by two-pair or better formed primarily on the board, such as pocket kings holding as an overpair until the turn and pair lower cards to give an opponent two-pair. Here, the overpair might enter the flop with 85-95% equity against , yet succumb to a board-textured completion with under 10% from the turn. Examples include quads beaten by a or a full house losing to four-of-a-kind, where the loser's hand equity drops below 20% on the final despite earlier dominance. These categories vary across poker variants due to differing card structures. In seven-card stud, absent community cards, bad beats rely on concealed draws, such as an opponent filling a hidden flush or straight using down cards, with probabilities for qualifying hands like aces-full beaten by higher full houses calculated at around 0.00001452 for specific thresholds. In draw poker variants like 2-7 Triple Draw, bad beats manifest during draw phases, where a player with a strong low hand (e.g., 99.84% equity) loses after an opponent draws to an improved low, focusing on sequential discards and replacements rather than board developments. At their core, bad beats highlight low-probability outcomes, such as the ~4.3% chance of hitting one of nine outs on the river or less than 5% for runner-runner specifics, contrasting with more common draws like a flush completing from the turn at ~19%. These scenarios, often under 5% equity for the winning draw, define the term by their statistical improbability against a strong starting position.

Notable Real-World and Fictional Examples

One of the most infamous bad beats in (WSOP) history occurred during the 2008 Main Event on Day 7, when Motoyuki Mabuchi held quad aces but was beaten by Justin Phillips' after the river card completed the straight flush draw. This hand, with odds estimated at over 72 million to one against the , eliminated Mabuchi just shy of the money bubble and highlighted the variance in high-stakes tournaments. Another notable casino bad beat took place in 2018 at in , where a player with quad eights lost to another player's quad nines, only for a third player's to win the pot and trigger a $263,486 jackpot payout shared among participants. The hand exemplified the rare "bad beat on a bad beat" scenario, where the losing quads qualified for the jackpot despite being outdrawn twice. In the 2012 WSOP Europe Main Event, Vanessa Selbst's pocket aces were cracked by Gaelle Thomas's rivered , eliminating her from contention and altering the event's dynamics as Selbst was a heavy favorite entering the hand. This beat not only ended Selbst's deep run but also shifted prize distribution. For a recent example, during Day 5 of the 2023 WSOP Main Event, Bill Klein's set of kings lost to Ryan Brown's runner-runner , busting Klein from the tournament and emphasizing the role of improbable draws in large-field events with $12.1 million first prize at stake. In the 2025 North American Poker Tour (NAPT) Main Event, Jeremy Ausmus' cracked an opponent's quad aces on Day 1, emphasizing tournament variance without a bad beat jackpot. In fiction, the 1965 film features a climactic five-card stud hand where the protagonist, known as "The Kid" (played by ), holds aces full of tens but loses to Lancey Howard's () diamond , dramatizing the heartbreak of an underdog victory with odds exceeding 45 million to 1. This scene, drawn from Richard Jessup's novel, has sparked decades of debate among poker enthusiasts for its improbable odds and psychological tension. The 2006 film Casino Royale depicts () suffering a river card loss early in the high-stakes Texas Hold'em tournament against (), where Bond's strong hand is outdrawn by a completing card that improves Le Chiffre's draw, underscoring the unpredictability of poker in the narrative. This moment sets up Bond's later redemption but illustrates a classic bad beat through cinematic exaggeration of odds and stakes. In online multi-table tournaments (MTTs), a 2023 PokerStars event saw a player with a eliminated by an opponent's on the river during a crucial bubble stage, resulting in a low-probability outdraw (approximately 1 in 650,000) that reshuffled the final standings and prize pool exceeding $1 million.

Player Reactions

Psychological Effects

Experiencing a bad beat in poker often triggers immediate emotional responses such as , , or disbelief, which can escalate into a state known as tilt—a condition characterized by impaired and irrational play due to emotional distress. This tilt manifests as a loss of emotional regulation, leading players to deviate from optimal strategies, such as chasing losses or making aggressive bets without proper assessment, thereby increasing the risk of further financial setbacks. Professional players, with their extensive experience, tend to exhibit lower susceptibility to tilt per individual hand compared to amateurs, as they better compartmentalize variance and maintain strategic focus, though both groups remain vulnerable under prolonged pressure. Over time, repeated bad beats contribute to heightened stress levels among players, potentially exacerbating underlying tendencies toward addiction by reinforcing cycles of emotional volatility and compulsive behavior. Tilt, often triggered by bad beats, correlates with excessive and has been linked to gambling disorder, with studies showing moderate associations with anxiety (r = 0.40) and depression (r = 0.26) among players as of 2020. Research on activities indicates that such events can elevate levels—the body's primary —prompting physiological responses akin to acute anxiety, which may persist and impair overall mental resilience. These long-term effects are particularly pronounced in individuals prone to pathological , where bad beats amplify cognitive distortions and diminish . Bad beats also disrupt social dynamics at the poker table, fostering tension and interpersonal conflicts. This can lead to a charged atmosphere where players blame external factors, heightening group and occasionally resulting in verbal confrontations that further erode the collaborative or competitive of the game. Studies highlight differences in psychological responses based on and , with players generally suffering more acutely from the emotional fallout of bad beats due to limited mechanisms and higher sensitivity to losses. Both genders elevated stress from such events. Experienced players across demographics report a more detached perspective, viewing bad beats as inherent variance rather than personal failure. Analyses from poker expertise research reinforce that less seasoned individuals ruminate longer on these events, amplifying their psychological toll.

Coping Strategies

Players experiencing bad beats often face immediate emotional distress, such as or tilt, which can impair if not addressed promptly. Short-term techniques provide quick relief to regain composure. Deep breathing exercises, such as taking three to five slow, deep breaths, serve as a simple form of to calm the and reduce immediate stress following a bad beat. Taking a short break from the table—stepping away for a few minutes—allows players to clear their minds and prevent impulsive reactions. Additionally, conducting a brief session review, where players objectively analyze the hand to confirm it was a variance event rather than a mistake, helps reframe the loss as part of poker's inherent . For long-term resilience, players should adopt approaches that build emotional and . Proper bankroll management, such as maintaining at least 30-50 buy-ins for , ensures that individual losses from bad beats do not threaten overall sustainability and reduces the psychological weight of downswings. Mindfulness training tailored to poker, including regular practices, fosters greater emotional regulation and acceptance of uncertainty; resources like guided sessions can be adapted for gamers to process losses without fixation. Professional poker players and coaches emphasize accepting the role of randomness in the game. advises evaluating bad beats objectively to distinguish true variance from errors, stating that elite players must recognize when losses stem from luck rather than skill deficits to maintain mental clarity. He further recommends acknowledging the emotional response without letting it dictate actions, promoting a of detachment from outcomes. Poker coaches play a key role by facilitating post-session debriefs, where they guide players through hand histories to reinforce positive habits and normalize bad beats as unavoidable elements of long-term profitability. In severe cases where bad beats exacerbate gambling-related distress, community resources offer structured support. Poker-specific support networks provide forums for sharing experiences and gaining perspective from peers, helping players normalize setbacks. For those whose reactions indicate deeper issues like compulsive tendencies, organizations such as provide free, peer-led meetings focused on recovery from gambling problems, including emotional management tools applicable to poker setbacks.

Online Specifics

Differences from Live Games

In online poker, the absence of physical tells and face-to-face interactions fundamentally alters the dynamics of bad beats compared to live games. Players cannot observe opponents' , betting patterns, or emotional cues, which often encourages more aggressive and speculative plays in online settings. This lack of visual feedback can lead to riskier decisions, such as chasing unlikely draws or overvaluing hands, thereby increasing the likelihood of setups that culminate in bad beats when superior hands prevail. The faster pace of exacerbates exposure to bad beats by compressing decision-making timelines and enabling continuous play without the natural breaks inherent in live environments. Live games typically involve deliberate pauses for dealing, shuffling, and social exchanges, fostering more cautious strategies, whereas online platforms allow for rapid hand progression, often at 60-100 hands per hour per table. This accelerated rhythm heightens the emotional intensity of losses, as players encounter more variance in a shorter session without the mitigating effects of in-person camaraderie. Technical elements in introduce unique variables that differ from live play, though software glitches and remain rare due to robust platform safeguards. in online games diminishes immediate social repercussions from bad beats, such as table banter or sympathy, but it can intensify feelings of isolation, leaving players to process defeats in solitude without communal support. In contrast, live settings often provide verbal outlets or shared experiences that buffer psychological impacts. Multi-tabling, a hallmark of , dramatically amplifies the volume of hands played, resulting in significantly more opportunities for bad beats per session than in live games. Online players can simultaneously manage multiple tables, achieving 100 or more hands per hour across sessions, compared to the 25-35 hands per hour typical in live or settings. This heightened throughput not only scales up variance but also normalizes the occurrence of improbable losses, as the sheer quantity of confrontations outpaces the deliberate, lower-volume nature of live poker. In regulated online poker markets like those in (since 2013) and (since 2019), stringent requirements for hand history and enable precise verification of bad beat claims, contrasting with live games where reliance on dealer recollections or video can be less reliable and more prone to .

Prevalence and Statistics

Bad beats in , typically defined as instances where a player loses a hand despite holding 80% or greater equity, occur at the same probabilistic rate per hand as in live games but are experienced more frequently due to the accelerated pace of play. Online platforms deal 60-80 hands per hour in full-ring , compared to approximately 30-40 hands per hour in live settings, resulting in players encountering roughly 2-3 times more potential bad beat scenarios per session. This structural difference amplifies the perception of bad beats online, even though the underlying odds remain unchanged. The triggered a significant surge in activity starting in 2020, contributing to higher overall incidences of bad beats through increased player volume. Global online poker revenues grew at a compound annual rate of 7.13% from 2019 onward, with significant surges in player activity, including up to 255% increases in first-time players on some platforms during the lockdown period, leading to more hands played and thus more reported bad beat events. In multi-table tournaments (MTTs), bad beats contribute to elevated variance, particularly in high-stakes spots like final tables, where the impact on outcomes is magnified by payout structures. While exact frequencies vary by field size and buy-in, poker variance analyses indicate that such events can represent a notable portion of downswings for skilled players, with MTTs exhibiting significantly higher variance than due to all-in confrontations. Recent market data shows continued growth in MTT participation post-2020, with the online poker sector projected to double from $5.3 billion in to $11.4 billion by 2030 (as of ), further elevating exposure to these probabilistic losses.

Bad Beat Jackpots

Mechanics and Eligibility

Bad beat jackpots operate as progressive prize pools in poker rooms, funded by a contribution from the rake collected on each qualifying hand or pot. Typically, this involves deducting a fixed amount, such as $1 from pots reaching $10 or more and an additional $1 for pots over $20, or a small of the rake ranging from 1% to 2.5%, depending on the venue. These funds accumulate until a qualifying bad beat occurs, after which the jackpot resets to a seed amount, often $10,000 to $50,000, with any remainder carried over or reserved for future promotions. The jackpots are exclusively available in specific game formats, most commonly no-limit Texas Hold'em, though some rooms extend eligibility to pot-limit Omaha or other variants, and require a minimum number of players—usually four or five—dealt into the hand at its start. To trigger the jackpot, the event must qualify as a bad beat, where the losing hand is four of a kind or better (such as pocket aces forming quads against pocket kings forming lower quads on a paired board), beaten by an even stronger hand like higher quads or a . Both the losing and winning hands must incorporate both cards, form the best possible five-card combination, and proceed to showdown, with the winner having called an all-in bet before the river to prevent further draws or action. For four-of-a-kind hands, the quads must typically derive from a pocket pair, and full houses cannot rely entirely on three-of-a-kind from the community cards. Eligibility rules vary significantly across casinos to balance excitement and administrative feasibility. In establishments, for example, participating players must have posted their blinds and cannot have a "missed blind" button at their seat to claim any share of the payout, ensuring active involvement in the hand. Tournaments are universally excluded, as jackpots apply only to , and some venues impose additional stipulations like a minimum pot size (e.g., $10) or specific table designations for jackpot play. These variations reflect local regulations and house policies, with stricter criteria in high-traffic areas to manage payout frequency. Bad beat jackpots originated in the 1980s within card rooms, where they were devised as a promotional tool to boost player and in an when poker was gaining but faced from other options.

Payout Structures and Examples

Bad beat jackpots in poker are typically distributed according to a standard model where 50% of the accumulated fund goes to the player with the losing qualifying hand, 25% to the player with , and the remaining 25% is split equally among other players seated at the table. To prevent overpayment, payouts are capped at 100% of the current jackpot pool, with any excess contributions often reseeding a new jackpot. Variations in payout structures exist across casinos and online platforms. Some land-based venues, such as FireKeepers Casino, adjust distributions based on jackpot size—for instance, awarding 40% to the loser, 20% to the winner, 20% split among table players, and 20% to all poker room participants once the pool exceeds $100,000—while also seeding initial jackpots with house funds to maintain momentum. Online operators often implement site-wide or network jackpots; for example, distributes 10% to the losing player, 3% to the winner, and shares the rest among all dealt-in players across the platform, fostering broader participation. Notable payouts illustrate the potential scale of these jackpots. In August 2022, Rivers Casino in Pittsburgh awarded a record $1.2 million when a player's four aces (pocket aces in a $1/$3 no-limit hold'em game) were beaten by a straight flush, with the loser receiving $490,708, the winner $368,029, and the remainder split among table players. Another significant hit occurred in 2018 at MotorCity Casino in Detroit, where a $1.068 million jackpot was triggered by quads beaten by higher quads, distributed under the venue's 40/20/40 model. In April 2025, Loto-Québec's poker room paid out $2.5 million—the largest bad beat jackpot in its history—on a $1/$3 no-limit hold'em hand where the losing hand (four of a kind or better) was beaten by a straight flush, with the distribution following provincial rules emphasizing the loser's share. In October 2025, Playground Poker Club in Kahnawake, Quebec, awarded a $1.6 million jackpot when a straight flush was beaten by a higher straight flush in no-limit hold'em. By 2025, average bad beat jackpot sizes have trended upward due to post-pandemic tourism recovery boosting poker room traffic in major markets like and . Emerging trends include blockchain-tracked jackpots in cryptocurrency casinos, such as CoinPoker's platform, which integrates bad beat promotions with decentralized ledgers for transparent, provably fair distributions amid the sector's revenue surge to $81.4 billion in 2024.

References

  1. https://www.pokernews.com/pokerterms/bad-beat.htm
  2. https://www.poker.org/poker-strategy/poker-for-beginners/what-is-a-bad-beat-in-poker-aaDAA7I0G9Hd/
  3. https://www.pokerstars.com/poker/learn/lesson/bad-beats-and-variance/
  4. https://www.pokerlistings.com/blog/the-truth-about-bad-beat-jackpots
  5. https://www.888poker.com/magazine/poker-bad-beats-handling-tips
  6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262771516_All-in_and_Bad_Beat_Professional_Poker_Players_and_Pathological_Gambling
  7. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/2545239/2022/01/26/bad-beats-sports-betting/
  8. https://www.888poker.com/magazine/poker-terms/bad-beat
  9. https://www.americascardroom.eu/how-to/poker-terms/one-outer/
  10. https://upswingpoker.com/bad-beats-poker/
  11. https://www.pokernews.com/pokerterms/pot-odds.htm
  12. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4106339
  13. https://coinpoker.com/guides/bad-beats/
  14. http://kevingong.com/Math/BadBeats.html
  15. https://www.poker-king.com/answers/set-over-set-odds/
  16. https://www.blackrain79.com/2016/08/set-over-set.html
  17. http://people.math.sfu.ca/~alspach/mag61/
  18. https://www.pgt.com/news/worst-bad-beat-poker-history-99-84-favorite-loses
  19. https://www.tightpoker.com/wsop-bad-beats/
  20. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2025/04/worst-bad-beats-in-wsop-history-48466.htm
  21. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2018/08/bad-beat-on-the-bad-beat-jackpot-straight-flush-quads-31872.htm
  22. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2025/11/insane-poker-hand-at-2025-napt-50014.htm
  23. https://www.pokernews.com/strategy/hand-histories-50-years-of-debate-over-the-last-hand-of-the-23059.htm
  24. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/12/inside-story-james-bond-poker-hand-38385.htm
  25. https://www.888poker.com/magazine/5-brutal-poker-bad-beats
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5387767/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7400001/
  28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23070722/
  29. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8aba/9a2e94abf8b11eb40bf79a3ba92cac5aca4f.pdf
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000632230000888X
  31. https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume3_issue2/JoE_3_2_Palomaki_etal.pdf
  32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301357926_Poker_Players_With_Experience_and_Skill_Are_Not_%27%27Ill%27%27_Exposing_a_Discrepancy_in_Measures_of_Problem_Gambling
  33. https://www.pokernews.com/strategy/how-to-deal-with-bad-beats-from-bad-poker-players-24734.htm
  34. https://danielnegreanu.com/mindfulness-poker/
  35. https://www.888poker.com/magazine/strategy/dealing-with-bad-beats-in-poker
  36. https://pokercoaching.com/blog/bad-beats-in-poker-leave-negative-results-behind/
  37. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/daniel-negreanus-top-tips-for-becoming-a-successful-professional-poker-player
  38. https://www.pokertube.com/article/daniel-negreanu-how-to-deal-with-bad-beats
  39. https://gamblersanonymous.org/
  40. https://www.pokernews.com/strategy/five-reasons-why-online-poker-beats-live-poker-36940.htm
  41. https://www.blackrain79.com/2018/06/pokerstars-rigged.html
  42. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201023005458/en/Global-Online-Gambling-Market-Report-2020-2025---COVID-19-has-Led-to-a-Sudden-Rise-in-Revenues-with-Some-Studies-Reporting-67-Increase---ResearchAndMarkets.com
  43. https://www.igbaffiliate.com/en/articles/seo/the-revival-how-the-face-of-online-poker-has-changed-in-recent-years/
  44. https://bbzpoker.com/the-truth-about-variance-in-mtts-lessons-from-bbzs-toy-game/
  45. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/online-poker-global-industry-report-085200561.html
  46. https://www.hollywoodcasinotoledo.com/-/media/png/east/hollywood-toledo/pdfs/poker-flyers/bad-beat-jackpot-ruleseffective-4202017.pdf
  47. https://www.rakeback.com/promotions/coinpoker-bad-beat-jackpot-promises-to-make-everyone-a-winner/
  48. https://wizardofodds.com/games/texas-hold-em/bad-beat-jackpots/
  49. https://oneidacasinohotel.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/BadBeatRules_SepFY24.pdf
  50. https://www.playground.ca/promotions/poker/bad-beat-jackpot-rules
  51. https://static.boydgaming.net/bluechip/media/downloads/Bad%2520Beat%2520Poker%2520Rules.pdf
  52. https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/introduction-to-poker-in-a-casino-poker-room/
  53. https://www.caesars.com/content/dam/uba/Gaming/Poker/2018/july/badbeat_july.pdf
  54. https://static.boydgaming.net/orleanscasino10/media/downloads/PokerRoomBadBeat-Rules-Jan2014-Revised010714.pdf
  55. https://evenbetgaming.com/blog/articles/maximising-engagement-and-revenue-with-the-bad-beat-jackpot-feature-in-your-poker-room/
  56. https://www.pokernews.com/pokerterms/bad-beat-jackpot.htm
  57. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2022/09/bad-beat-jackpot-poker-41953.htm
  58. https://firekeeperscasino.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/202007-Bad-Beat-Poker-Rules.pdf
  59. https://www.pokerlistings.com/blog/bad-beat-jackpot-a-complete-guide-to-ggpokers-rebirth-of-bad-beats
  60. https://gamingamerica.com/news/5671/rivers-casino-delivers-record-12m-jackpot-at-bad-beat-poker-game
  61. https://www.actionnetwork.com/news/poker-players-cash-in-on-2-5-million-bad-beat-jackpot
  62. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2025/10/playground-poker-bad-beat-jackpot-49860.htm
  63. https://www.btcc.com/en-US/square/WalletinvestorEN/510675
  64. https://www.platinumcryptoacademy.com/cryptocurrency-investment/the-crypto-gambling-boom-why-2025-is-the-year-to-bet-with-blockchain/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.