+1

Big pot hands do not increase overall rake. More all-ins do not increase overall rake. Money moving quickly in big chunks between players reduces rake. Detailed reasons why are in past threads but a couple of big ones are, hitting the caps reduces rake, and busting players reduces rake (because the winner got it before the house got much of it).

Theoretically rake could be maximized by making everyone break even all the time, with money changing hands as slowly as possible and getting churned slowly into rake.

sir u r missing the point not us.

First off variance takes thousand upon thousands of hands to work out.

I had over 60,000 snags over at ft so i think i understand this a little.

2nd u make the point that lock might be rigging it to make more in rake, which someone has already pointed out also makes no sense.

On lock at merge I played about 70 snags a day. One month my stats all in pre with AA and KK were about 62 percent win. The next month not much better. Last month I was at about 80 percent win, and now Lock changes, obv rigged.

People make good points. I withdraw my argument.

its not rigged but what makes it a whole tougher is the structure in these tourneys its redic

Blom must have made a Merge and Lock accr while in US... though a lot of these big winners are from Singapore

I quit poker forever now11111

I also "don't want to be that guy".

BUT... I'm seeing an enormous amout of quads in single table SNG's.

I've only been playing here about 10 days, part-time. I'm not yet using a tracker or saving HH's, so sorry I can't post them. I would estimate that I've seen 4 of a kind 15-20 times in a hundred SNG's. I've also seen other situations that have me wondering.

Does anyone have a signifigant sample size of play on the new Revolution Lock that they can compare to Stars, specifically in regards to the appearance of quads? (4 of a kind)

Seriously, I would love to be a Lock fanboy, but the deal seems off, and I was a fulltime winning player on Stars. If they can't get a handle on their software after 14 days, why should we believe the RNG is working properly?

CAN SOMEONE WITH A LARGE SAMPLE SIZE PLEASE COMPARE AGAINST OTHER SITES?

Thank-you.

That isn't a remarkable amount. If random hands go to the river then quads will show up once every 595 hands (per player) on average. Considerably more often than that in real play with real hands since unpaired hands are folded way more often than paired hands. At a 9-player table with 20% showdowns I think you would see a quads somewhere around every 200 deals or so on average.

lock are decent, but this gave me a good chuckle.

not that unusual tbh, although stakes are higher you usually see for this kinda thing. think about with HU PLO the amount of variance and 5K hands is a tiny sample so this is totally possible. all that said i still hate Lock poker and can't wait to get me money off there :/

/thread

highly doubt its rigged, and this is coming from someone whos running 7 buy ins under EV in 19k hands

Umm... no. You're focusing on a hand's rank without considering it's actual equity. Look up equities with sets vs trips. Trips are highly vulnerable, not as well disguised, and tend to be action killers unless villain makes a boat to crush you. They should be regarded as entirely different hands.

Its definately f-ed up...I'll get no hands forever, then get all the good hands Im supposed to get statistically back to back...happens alot, I cant be the only one..
But I figure were all under same flawed RNG, so, f-it, I play, I play

Oh my god, 7 buy-ins? How can you go on living with this injustice having occured?

Had qq vs qq last month playing live poker. Made me lol. To all those saying online is rigged. If it was other people would discover it by now. Try playing live cash full time. I had several days in two months flopping at least 4th or 5th nuts and losing the hand. Last time I played live, I flopped the nuts three times and lost each time. Made me quit live. If that was online others would say rigged. It's the way poker goes sometimes

+1 to this. its all just confirmation bias w/ online poker. honestly the craziest **** i've ever seen has been live. Saw AA vs KK vs QQ 9-handed just the other day. Q on the flop. dirty!

I've seen a lot of bad beats, and I'm running about 14bi under EV, but that's just the game. It pisses me off more to take the beats in an MTT (as just happened) due to time spent playing, but again, it's the game.

I think a lot of people feel online poker is rigged because of excessive bad beats, but think about how many hands you see in an hour online vs. live. You're going to see A LOT more bad beats in a shorter amount of time. In turn, this makes people feel it's rigged.

No, probably not money laundering. Although wrongg seems to suck at high stakes plo though. He should probably find a new hobby.

GimmeDAT reminds me of isildur back in the FTP days. Seriously. Maybe it's Blom playing while he's in the states for the wsop?

it's only rigged for ******s, so if it's rigged for you .....

This. First live tournament I ever played while on vacation, after playing online for a couple years (with no live cardrooms anywhere near where I live), I was in top 3 in chips nearing the bubble. Got moved to a new table to the left of chip leader, and 2 or 3 hands in I got dealt AA. Chip leader to my right opens, I 3bet, SS to my left shoves over, chip leader snap calls, and of course I shove over. Chip leader snaps again, turns over JJ and the SS turns over KK and proceeds to cuss up a storm. Of course, J in the door to bust us both. I've had probably thousands of similar or worse beats online (and really, AA losing 3-way isn't so much a beat as a cooler), and I don't remember any of them as vividly as I remember that one, lol.

Hi everyone,

I was just wondering what people's thoughts were on Lock being somewhat rigged. I have noticed that when I deposit, I run really well for about a week and take a huge dive right after. Set over set, runner runner straights, etc.

So, is it possible that Lock intentionally delivers knockout blows to certain players bankrolls because they know they will deposit again? I know I sound paranoid but I have noticed this huge trend after numerous deposits.

Thanks

Honestly? I noticed a very similar trend for myself. However: it's almost impossible to prove, and i doubt it's very easy to even write code for their poker client / algorithms to do this.

It's probably just coincidence, i honestly don't believe anything like this can be possible unless i see very strong proof, anything else and i'll say "human psychology" (yes, also for myself seeing a similar trend). Sure, you can't deny it if you indeed run bad/good at certain moments, but you could see so many corelations in all things in life if you try to see them - it doesn't make them true, though

It just seems that way to me. It is almost like they are rewarding me for depositing so they will give me AA in crucial parts of a tournament or hit sets constantly in cash games. But the winning streak quickly comes to a hault just days after and I suffer bad beat after bad beat and lose my roll so I deposit again. Same thing happens again. I know it is tough to prove, but if they wanted to keep deposits coming in, this is the way to do it.

Correct. Best thing to do is withdraw all your cash and email their support asking them to ensure their software is independently tested and verified as random. (Mickey Mouse tests from companies in the pockets of poker firms don't count). Nothing will change otherwise.