First time poster and very new to poker.

I became very interested in poker after watching numerous poker shows on television. I've read books: Brunson's "Super System" and Gordon's "Little Green Book"; and I am about to read Harrington's books, followed by Sklansky's work. Because I live in a remote area and cannot obtain regular practice, I thought some software might help, so I purchased Poker Academy Pro, and have used it regularly for about 4 months. I've read this website's forum comments on this program, but I found nothing that relates to an ongoing concern that I have.

Question: Can software like this accurately reflect the realities of a poker environment? For example, two months ago I noticed, anecdotally, that the player with the best dealt-hand going all-in would lose a disproportionate number of times. I then started tracking every player's all-in showdowns--300 events in all--and was startled to find that the weaker hand drew out in 246 hands, or 82% of the time. In many instances the eventual winning hands were dominated: frequently lower pairs drawing out on higher pairs.

Some of the game's scenario's are mystifying. In one memorable all-in event, an A-A hand, in position, lost to a J-4 hand--the final result: a pair of aces beaten by a full house--J-J-J-4-4. Why the program chose to put the J-4 player all-in confused me; he was out-of-position and possesed a bankroll of well over 30x the big blind.

I'm using the software as a learning tool--no money lost. But I'm concerned about this one aspect, which seems pivotal in terms of applying good practices. In interviews and books, experts state that the best you can do is get in with the best hand. My experience with Poker Academy Pro belies that notion, however. Any comments would be appreciated.

Lol, that is tremendously inaccurate. A higher pair is a 4-1 favorite over any lower pair. Over the course of 20-30k simulations any decent poker software should reflect that. At least you got to experience what running bad is like though!

Luffy, Thanks for the comment.

Thus far my 4 months experience with the program has encountered so much sucking out on the river, and frequent weak--but ultimately winning--calls out of position (not just in my own hands but in all "tracked" hands) that I am concerned I may learn to compete successfully with the program but not develop sound real-world poker skills.

I'm new at this. I know only what the books state and what I can deduce from televised events: High Stakes Poker, Poker After Dark, World Poker Tour, World Series of Poker et al.
What I have learned from these sources does not jibe with the patterns of play on Poker Academy Pro. The program seems to unduly reward bold, but weak, calls.

I certainly don't want to sound like a whiner. I want to learn from my bad calls. I just want to be sure that they are, in fact, bad. Then again, maybe the Internet and casino scene is just as chaotic as this software represents.

I also use poker academy pro 2,5 , for similar reasons as u do , I live in zimbabwe and don't have too much access to fast internet / real games ...
I mainly play "poker circut" and now "main event" , I set the max players to 6600 in each case, and in "poker circut" I have finished my highest 13th so far out of 6600 ! , but in
"main event" only managed level 9 or so which is 1300th or so out of 6600 ... quite tough...
I don't have too many bad beats actually , for me 90% of the time the best hand wins
depending on the betting of course , if u let the weak hands into the game on the flop and after they (weak hands) can make u pay .....
On that note I would say that in the earlier levels the pc is prone to "letting" my own weaker
hands into the game and allows me to defeat it by getting a straight mostly ......
I also play "govenor of poker" quite a nice game as well , but I felt too weak in heads-up ...
other thoughts on this any1?

btw Forager wot formats do u play in academy ?
On my side I've started playing tighter and tighter , at least in the "main event"

btw forgot to ask forager , was the J4 guy all-in before the flop ?

Ninjax, thanks for responding.
Yes, the J4 guy was all-in before the flop--good-sized bankroll and all.
You sound like a more sophisticated user of this program than I. Occasionally, I play the Main Event, but more often I play the Shooting Stars and the Super Satellite games. The program has revealed many weaknesses in my overall play, mostly the result of tunnel vision on my part, resulting in my not seeing dangerous trends in the communal cards (e.g., my two pairs losing to an opponent's flush that I allowed to materialize on the river). Tunnel vision has tripped me up numerous times in all sorts of ways.
Because of this program I now know how much of a beginner I really am. When I start playing for money, it will be for the smallest stakes I can find--and probably not for a while.

No problem Forager, one other thing I'm trying to do is not to go all-in unless I have the
absolute nuts, I have probably mentioned this elsewhere so I hope repetition is ok ..lol
nut yeah when "they" raise me all-in I get very cautious and have started folding bigger and bigger hands . . i.e QQ or JJ or even KK , don't know if that is always sound strategy , but
I tell myself that as long as I'm still there I still have a chance , and I guess the old rule
of its easier to raise than to call still holds true....
Another thing I've started doing , especially in "main event" (coz its so long) is to try and
study my opponents , for me it seems that certain types play tight while others looser ...
This helps pass the time but more importantly if the tight players raise excessively I fold without much ado ...
just my own experiences anyway ,
Btw the shooting stars and super satellite are 10 handed single tables ?

Just finished qiute a long session (resumed from yesterday) in the "main event" in academy ,
after 21 levels I got knocked out in 88th place after 1235 hands!! lol , 1080 hands yesterday,
The "main event" is easier than poker circut, since if I lost some of my stack I could simply
play the waiting game and recoup the losses when a big hand comes along .....
I lost my way near the trying to "chase ppl off the hand" , I tend to get carried away doing this I guess , since I win quite a few small hands in this fashion i.e say I'm holding KJ suited
I just re-raised by the pot amount and if I get called I can re-raise further ... very risky play
but it works most of the time , however when the amounts get larger I tend to get carried
away using this stratergy and end up folding with a lot in the pot....
I know I generally follow my big bet/all-in stratergy only if I have the absolute nuts , but it
seems this is easly forgotten in the heat of play , for instance in the 1235 hands (above)
I had to keep reminding myself to follow the "big bet/all-in stratergy only if I have the absolute nuts " at least a couple of times per level , even more times as the levels increased ......
I blame the "heat of the battle" entirely ... ha ha ha ha

I should create an acronym for the "big bet/all-in stratergy only if I have the absolute nuts " idea , how about BBAIAN ...? ha ha ha ha